This reminds me of the Azazel stories by Isaac Asimov. (In a good way.) Do you write in this style naturally or did you just affect it for the purposes of this story?
Incidentally, if (as this comment suggests) you haven’t read any Wodehouse yet, you should do so immediately. Anyone who wants to be a writer should study Wodehouse—he’s the single greatest prose stylist in English literature, and while he has nothing of importance to say, and no great messages to impart, you can learn more about how to put words together in interesting and amusing ways from The Inimitable Jeeves than you can from several years of college.
I’d start with The Inimitable Jeeves, the first of the Jeeves series, a collection of interlinked short stories (this was published as just Jeeves in the US originally—look for both titles). My other personal favourite, Right Ho, Jeeves, a novel, is available on Project Gutenberg—http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10554 . My Man Jeeves is also on Gutenberg, which is an early one that was later rewritten as Carry On Jeeves, the second proper Jeeves book and another good ’un.
Other than that, check publication dates. Everything’s good, and pretty much stand-alone, but anything before 1909 is juvenilia. He peaked more-or-less between 1923 (with the first Jeeves stories proper) and 1940 - everything after that is riffing on the same themes. He never really lost it, but became increasingly irrelevant.
Ones usually considered among his best are the Mike & Psmith stories, The Clicking Of Cuthbert, Ukridge, Lord Emsworth And Others, Thank You Jeeves and The Code Of The Woosters, but I’ve read much less than a quarter of his prodigious output, so there may be some very good ones I’ve missed.
Asimov was, as Costanza says, writing as a deliberate homage to Wodehouse (though more to his stories of The Oldest Member at the Drones club and the Ukridge stories than to the Jeeves stuff). I do also love Azazel, but Wodehouse did this stuff first and best.
As for whether I write in the style naturally, I do and don’t. I definitely chose the ‘voice’ for the story deliberately because it’s the closest I can come to imitating Wodehouse’s voice, but at the same time it’s one I fall into very, very naturally. Wodehouse’s word-choices and rhythms have influenced British humour to such an extent that pretty much every humourist I like from about 1935 onwards has picked up his style by osmosis, and it’s something I can just fall into without thinking.
If you like Azazel, you should absolutely find some of P.G. Wodehouse’s Jeeves and Wooster books. Asimov’s Azazel was basically an homage to Jeeves. AndrewHickey’s work is a fanfic set in a modern-day Jeeves and Woosterverse. Speaking of fanfic, I’m told there are people doing amazing fan fictions, providing whole new perspectives on popular stories like...Harry Potter and Twilight, just for example. Also, before there was House* there was Fry and Laurie, and somewhere in the meantime there was the Jeeves and Wooster TV adaption .
This reminds me of the Azazel stories by Isaac Asimov. (In a good way.) Do you write in this style naturally or did you just affect it for the purposes of this story?
Incidentally, if (as this comment suggests) you haven’t read any Wodehouse yet, you should do so immediately. Anyone who wants to be a writer should study Wodehouse—he’s the single greatest prose stylist in English literature, and while he has nothing of importance to say, and no great messages to impart, you can learn more about how to put words together in interesting and amusing ways from The Inimitable Jeeves than you can from several years of college.
Where’s the best place to start with Wodehouse?
I’d start with The Inimitable Jeeves, the first of the Jeeves series, a collection of interlinked short stories (this was published as just Jeeves in the US originally—look for both titles). My other personal favourite, Right Ho, Jeeves, a novel, is available on Project Gutenberg—http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/10554 . My Man Jeeves is also on Gutenberg, which is an early one that was later rewritten as Carry On Jeeves, the second proper Jeeves book and another good ’un.
Other than that, check publication dates. Everything’s good, and pretty much stand-alone, but anything before 1909 is juvenilia. He peaked more-or-less between 1923 (with the first Jeeves stories proper) and 1940 - everything after that is riffing on the same themes. He never really lost it, but became increasingly irrelevant.
Ones usually considered among his best are the Mike & Psmith stories, The Clicking Of Cuthbert, Ukridge, Lord Emsworth And Others, Thank You Jeeves and The Code Of The Woosters, but I’ve read much less than a quarter of his prodigious output, so there may be some very good ones I’ve missed.
Asimov was, as Costanza says, writing as a deliberate homage to Wodehouse (though more to his stories of The Oldest Member at the Drones club and the Ukridge stories than to the Jeeves stuff). I do also love Azazel, but Wodehouse did this stuff first and best.
As for whether I write in the style naturally, I do and don’t. I definitely chose the ‘voice’ for the story deliberately because it’s the closest I can come to imitating Wodehouse’s voice, but at the same time it’s one I fall into very, very naturally. Wodehouse’s word-choices and rhythms have influenced British humour to such an extent that pretty much every humourist I like from about 1935 onwards has picked up his style by osmosis, and it’s something I can just fall into without thinking.
If you like Azazel, you should absolutely find some of P.G. Wodehouse’s Jeeves and Wooster books. Asimov’s Azazel was basically an homage to Jeeves. AndrewHickey’s work is a fanfic set in a modern-day Jeeves and Woosterverse. Speaking of fanfic, I’m told there are people doing amazing fan fictions, providing whole new perspectives on popular stories like...Harry Potter and Twilight, just for example. Also, before there was House* there was Fry and Laurie, and somewhere in the meantime there was the Jeeves and Wooster TV adaption .
I should have added, a masterful one!
Thanks for the ‘masterful’ - much appreciated.