Lydia Davis's "Television" lacks dialogue, which makes the tone almost dry, matter-of-fact. Davis's frequent choice to refrain from using contractions, combined with the generalized nature of many of the sentences, also contributes to that tone. "They give us hints of what is to come and then it comes and it is exciting." There is no actual excitement to this statement. The short clauses and lack of adornment prevent that. Another example of generalization is found in the second section of the piece. "You are waiting until it is a certain hour and you are in a certain condition so that you can go to sleep." No specific hour is mentioned, and the condition is not described.
The piece begins in a vague, inclusive tense, frequently using an ambiguous 'we' that could describe only the narrators family and close companions or could include the reader. The first specific reference that begins to define the narrator is found at the top of page 210, "as the women in my family are not". As the narrator's character is solidified, the sentences become less vague. For example, on pg. 211, Davis includes such detail as "or you watch Pete Seeger's leg bounce up and down in time to his Reuben E. Lee song, then change the channel." At this point, the author uses second person. This was a daring move, at least to me, because of the specifics. Readers can easily be alienated if details in second person don't apply to them. However, as I was reading this piece, I did not find this to be the case.
In the third and final section of the piece, Davis returns to first person, stating that "at the end of the day...my life seems to turn into a movie." There is one unusual phrase that sticks out to me in particular. Davis writes, "I mean my real day moves into my real evening, but also moves away from me enough to be strange and a movie" (emphasis added). Instead of choosing to say "strange like a movie" or "as distant as a movie", she says "strange and a movie." I'm not really sure why she chose to say that.
Re: your final question/comment -- it seems a bit more poetic, no?
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that you found the narrator to be dry and matter-of-fact, but you also say you didn't feel alienated. This is a sign of Davis's skill. She drops in just enough humor and hints about the narrator's life for the reader to be drawn in rather than bored.