Belief in Style

Among these various authors, whose names hold little significance without having read their work, there are indeed emergent styles which commingle and diverge at varying points throughout the body of these respective works. These elements of style then must be representative of the author's beliefs. Seeing as the beliefs of these authors differ in various ways, it is through these points of belief that differing styles emerge. The prose of theorists and philosophers has the capacity to account for beliefs through their means of logic and argumentation, whereas the poet is able to convey their beliefs through whatever stylistic means they see fit. Within these varying mediums of poetry and prose then one is able to freely express their ideas and beliefs through whatever style they see fit, but one would assume in most cases that this freedom is still limited to the conventions of language. Gertrude Stein proves that these conventions are malleable, but the product of this malleability from the surface would seem incomprehensible.

Throughout her various poems Stein attempts to capture moments in consciousness, which occur solely within the present moment. In her critical essay “Composition as Explanation” Stein refers to this moment as the “continuous present”, which is the conception of a perpetual moment of existing without beginning or end. This concept stands as a guiding principle of her poetry as it requires only action and movement to convey her beliefs, as opposed to the constraints of conventional meaning, which require some agreement between the signifier and what is signified.

Now the product of this composition that is the style of Stein’s poetry is representative of her beliefs in how language should be utilized. Therefore Stein suggests that this language should function only in this moment of composition itself within the continuous. With this belief guiding her stylistic process it is clear as to why most undergraduates would rather do obscene things to their Stein as opposed to reading them. One must realize though that the reaction of one’s beliefs and faculties by which we understand language are being question by Stein, so it left to the reader to decide their actions for dealing with this style that challenges beliefs not in what is written, but rather how it is written.

Charles Sanders Peirce is able to account for these reactions as the reader is being guided by what he refers to as the object of our inquiry, which is founded on the settlement of our beliefs and opinions. When these beliefs then come into question it is all too common then that one reacts according to a method for “fixing beliefs”. Among these methods one can bury his or her head in the comforting sands of a fixed immobile belief, and deny the possibility that one’s beliefs are being challenged. According to Peirce however this means of fixing one’s belief seems improbable as “Unless we make ourselves hermits, we shall necessarily influence each other’s opinions”(Peirce,16). Seeing as the exchange of belief is unavoidable in most instances Peirce’s authority method is more realistic and has a similar effect as the ostrich method, but also bears a frightening consequence, as it creates a sense of ideological hegemony, which regulates beliefs for all to agree with one another.

Now both of these methods only allow for the dominant beliefs to thrive, which prevents the possibility for any new beliefs to form, so it is necessary for the sake of an open and rounded existence then for another method. Peirce refers to this one as the a priori method, as it is founded on the innate ability to believe and form new beliefs. One is therefore predisposed to holding beliefs and adopting new ones as seen fit, so one can either be habituated into maintaining a single belief or freely sliding between them as they see fit. Stein clearly would have selected the latter of the two, as she able to challenge our habituated beliefs through her style, but it is according to the reaction of the reader to gauge the effectiveness of this style as a means of conveying belief, and is left to entertain it as a possibility or simply deny it.