Thursday, April 30, 2020

The Official Style of Chiara Quaranta


“Official Style” Critique:  Chiara Quaranta



            Chiara Quaranta is a doctorate student of Film Studies at the University of Edinburgh, under the supervision of Dr. David Sorfa.  Quaranta has also acquired a bachelor’s degree as well as two masters’ in similar studies.  In such high-education institutions and research, it is only fair to assume individuals like Quaranta have been long exposed to the “Official Style” and how to effectively use it.  In order to affirm this notion, I have chosen to explore an excerpt of Quaranta’s research article, “A Cinema of Boredom: Heidegger, Cinematic Time and Spectatorship” (2020).  It is a piece for the highly academic world, so it was only necessary, in this view of Quaranta’s environment and goals, that she also work with a language and writing style that was of similar professional standards and for her fellow peers to observe.
            The initial focus of the critique combed through textual evidence.  What sort of style strategies were being utilized to indicate an “Official” theme?  Or, what makes the piece sound “Official” and convinces us, readers, that the writer is knowledgeable on the topic?  Beginning with some stability was also a goal, so to build some foundations, I collected a few numbers of data from a general readability calculator that reads as follows:  Gunning Fog Index (17.43), SMOG (16.14), Flesch Reading Ease (35.13).  The two former data indicate an estimated grade level of education needed to understand the article; the latter represents a level of complexity—lower-scoring numbers being more challenging to read.  Thus, from small data research, we can form a preliminary hypothesis that Quaranta’s writing qualifies for the “Official Style;” The numbers show that Quaranta’s article requires a higher level of education for better comprehension of the writing. 
            Now, what about specific, detailed evidence?  How can we conclude an individual’s writing style to be official based upon solely numbers?  As for textual evidence, Quaranta provides a lot for the general understanding of the “Official Style” such as, simply put, longer and more complex sentences and structure.  But specifically, the writing utilizes a lot of examples of “Official Style” key strategies.  In the introductory section alone, there were several relative clauses, prepositional phrases, many appositives, and various conjunctive adverbs, just to name a few.  In addition, the article was sanctioned off by various ideas for better, “Official” organization and had interesting diction choices like “counterintuitively,” “etymology,” and more. 
            Quaranta’s article was published by the Edinburgh University Press, in the February 2020 edition of Film-Philosophy.  Directly from the press’s website, they state that the journal “is an open access peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the engagement between film studies and philosophy” and are “interested in the ways in which films develop and contribute to philosophical discussion” (EdinburghUP). This information, alongside Quaranta’s own education, provides an indication of what kind of sphere of human activity the writing operates in.  The subject of philosophy tends to complicate things for many right off the bat, however, this topic can also insinuate why Quaranta writes in the fashion that they do.  For example, the heavy use of conjunctive adverbs makes a connection to logical arguments, namely conclusions, in philosophy.  Quaranta presents ideas, or premises, but often indicates when they are connecting ideas and creating a flow of thought.  This logical current resonates more effectively with those that may be familiar with philosophy, and some of the content resonates better with individuals who are familiar with Heidegger, film theory, or specific ideas like “horror vacui” (3).  This also gives the readers a chance to manifest and evaluate their own questions as if participating in the article or the philosophy of the argument.  The downfall, however, comes from readers who cannot or do not dig deeper with their thoughts and ideas.  Some readers will have more questions than others regarding Quaranta’s piece and may find it even more difficult to engage with the text and other resources.
            The average adult can comprehend reading at a level around the seventh grade; therefore, pieces that portray an “Official Style” tend to be more complex and harder to evaluate and consider.  Chiara Quaranta, a student of higher-education and many years of professional and higher-lever writing exposure, is just the individual to follow an “Official Style” to operate within their specific sphere of activity.  Quaranta’s writing is from a professional for other professionals, and it perpetuates the need for a specific style.  It does not indicate that we ought to write in a certain way, but it nevertheless creates a separation of understanding between people.  In Quaranta’s case, many people may be left out or isolated from the values of the writing because they may lack the education, among other variables, needed for full comprehension and involvement.



Brittany Estes

No comments:

Post a Comment