“Toward A More Literary Geography” by Barry N. Flyod: Summary and Critique

📌 The Need for a More Literary Geography

Floyd argues that geography, though rooted in scientific observation and analysis, lacks a strong literary tradition. He emphasizes that geographers must develop better writing skills to improve the clarity, engagement, and accessibility of their work. As he states, “it is perhaps salutary to pause and review certain time-honored methods of geographic exposition” (Floyd, 1961, p. 7). Without a focus on literary quality, geographic knowledge risks being obscured by dull, jargon-filled writing.

---

📌 The Three Phases of Geographic Study and the Overlooked Third Phase

Floyd identifies three essential stages of geographic research:

1. Observation and Data Collection – The empirical gathering of facts in the field.
2. Interpretation and Analysis – Making sense of the collected data.
3. Presentation and Exposition – Communicating findings effectively.

While the first two stages have received significant attention, Floyd argues that the third phase—the effective presentation of geographic research—has been neglected. He warns that “neglect of the third stage threatens to obscure the worth of geographic investigation through inadequate presentation of the results” (Floyd, 1961, p. 9). The key to impactful geographic research is not just rigorous data collection but also the ability to communicate it effectively.

---

📌 Grammar and Composition in Geographic Writing

Floyd critiques the poor grammatical standards in geographic writing, asserting that “the basic fault of much present-day writing is to say what one has to say in as complicated a way as possible” (Floyd, 1961, p. 9). He highlights several common issues:

• Overuse of long and convoluted sentences.
• Excessive use of subordinate clauses.
• Lack of proper punctuation, making texts either overly cluttered or completely lacking structure.

To combat this, he suggests that geographers follow clear and direct grammatical rules, emphasizing that “a piece of writing should have an adequate introduction and should be divided into paragraphs of reasonable length to maintain the reader’s attention” (Floyd, 1961, p. 9).

---

📌 The Importance of Literary Style

Floyd stresses that literary style is not merely decorative but essential for effective geographic writing. He follows Sir Ernest Gowers’ view that “clarity of thought and simplicity of expression” are the hallmarks of good writing (Floyd, 1961, p. 10). Good writing, he argues, should not be confused with excessive verbosity or unnecessary complexity.

Furthermore, Floyd points out that jargon has infiltrated academic geography, making research inaccessible. He states that “there is a tendency for scholars in many fields to justify their disciplines by an appeal to obscure words and a complex terminology” (Floyd, 1961, p. 10). He cites S.T. Williamson’s critique of academic jargon: “Such pedantic Choctaw may be all right as a sort of code language or shorthand of social science to circulate among initiates, but its perpetrators have no right to impose it on others” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11).

---

📌 The Debate Between Scientific Objectivity and Literary Expression

Floyd challenges the belief that scientific objectivity and literary style are incompatible. Some scholars, like Richard Hartshorne, argue that geographic writing should prioritize quantitative objectivity. Hartshorne contends that “only trained geographers can provide an objective, quantitatively measured, scientifically interpretative, and dependable presentation of an area” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11).

However, Floyd refutes this notion, arguing that complete objectivity in geography is nearly impossible. He writes:
“Two geographers entering an area to study its geographical features are certain to receive differing impressions… thus, there can never be an exact evaluation of geographic facts once and for all; an element of subjectivity is unavoidable” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11).

By embracing literary expression, geographers can more effectively convey their interpretations and engage a broader audience.

---

📌 The Role of Geography as Both a Science and an Art

Floyd ultimately argues that geography must balance scientific rigor with literary art. He states:
“It depends upon science in that it must perform every possible office of scientific research and objective criticism. It depends upon literary art in that, if it is to prove a vital branch of human knowledge, it must have literary attractions of form and style and spirit” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12).

He concludes that literary excellence is not about mere embellishment but about “intellectual finesse upon intellectual fact” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12). The best geographic writing should be both scientifically accurate and stylistically compelling.

---

📌 Conclusion: The Call for a More Literary Geography

Floyd’s article is a call to action for geographers to refine their writing skills. He argues that clarity, readability, and literary elegance are as important as scientific accuracy. To be truly impactful, geography must move beyond dry, technical writing and embrace a literary approach that engages, informs, and inspires.

📌 1. Stylistics and Literary Form Theory

• Floyd emphasizes clarity, structure, and aesthetics in writing, aligning with stylistics, which studies linguistic style and how it affects meaning.
• He argues that geography should incorporate literary elegance to enhance communication:

“To achieve style one must cultivate unremittingly that clarity of thought and simplicity of expression which have always been preached by those who have studied the art of writing.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 10)

• The idea that form and content are inseparable aligns with New Criticism, where structure and meaning are mutually reinforcing.

---

📌 2. Reader-Response Theory

• Floyd suggests that the effectiveness of geographic writing depends on the reader’s engagement, making his argument relevant to Reader-Response Theory, which emphasizes the interpretation and experience of the reader.
• He warns that dense jargon alienates audiences, which weakens the impact of geographic research:

“Such pedantic Choctaw may be all right as a sort of code language for social science to circulate among initiates, but its perpetrators have no right to impose it on others.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11)

• His advocacy for accessible and engaging writing connects to theories by Stanley Fish and Wolfgang Iser, who argue that meaning is shaped by the interaction between text and reader.

---

📌 3. Poststructuralism and the Critique of Objectivity

• Floyd critiques the assumption that geographic writing can be purely objective, arguing that all knowledge is shaped by perspective.
• This aligns with Poststructuralist Theory (Derrida, Foucault), which argues that language and knowledge are socially constructed rather than neutral.
• He challenges the belief that scientific writing must be devoid of personal influence:

“Two geographers entering an area to study its geographical features are certain to receive differing impressions… an element of subjectivity is unavoidable.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11)

• This reflects Foucault’s discourse theory, which states that knowledge is not neutral but shaped by power and ideology.

---

📌 4. Narrative Theory and the Role of Storytelling in Science

• Floyd asserts that geography, like literature, relies on narrative to convey meaning.
• His emphasis on the importance of storytelling in geography contributes to Narrative Theory, which examines how stories construct meaning in different disciplines.
• He states:

“It is possible to be scientific and exact and also write with high literary charm… Literary art is not simply a valuable ally of geography but is indispensable to its highest achievements.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12)

• This aligns with Hayden White’s argument in Metahistory (1973) that scientific and historical texts use narrative structures just like literary works.

---

📌 5. Theories of Rhetoric and Persuasion (Aristotle, Perelman, Burke)

• Floyd discusses how geographers must persuade their readers, echoing classical rhetoric (Aristotle’s Ethos, Pathos, Logos).
• He argues that geographic writing should be both scientifically rigorous and stylistically engaging to convince readers of its value.
• He references Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, who stated:

“The style is the man, and where a man’s treasure is, there is his heart and his brain, and his writing will be also.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 9)

• This reflects Kenneth Burke’s rhetorical theory, which sees writing as an act of persuasion and identification with the audience.

---

📌 6. The Aestheticization of Science (Romantic Influence on Scientific Writing)

• Floyd’s work resonates with the Romantic tradition, which argues that science should incorporate creativity, emotion, and artistic expression.
• He criticizes the mechanization of academic writing, warning against reducing geography to technical, lifeless language:

“There are plodding research workers in all fields who would persuade us that good writing is ‘something extrinsic to the subject, a kind of ornamentation laid on to tickle the taste’.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11)

• His call for aesthetic sensibility in scientific writing aligns with the Romantic movement, which emphasized the union of intellect and artistic beauty.

---

📌 7. Disciplinary Crossovers: Science and Humanities Integration

• Floyd’s essay contributes to interdisciplinary literary studies, arguing that science and literature should not be seen as opposing forces.
• He asserts:

“It depends upon science in that it must perform every possible office of scientific research and objective criticism. It depends upon literary art in that, if it is to prove a vital branch of human knowledge, it must have literary attractions of form and style and spirit.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12)

• His argument supports C.P. Snow’s “Two Cultures” debate, which critiques the artificial divide between scientific and literary disciplines.

---

📌 Conclusion: Floyd’s Contribution to Literary Theory

Barry N. Floyd’s “Toward A More Literary Geography” contributes to multiple literary theories by emphasizing the importance of clarity, accessibility, and storytelling in academic writing. His work:

• Advocates for better style and readability in scientific writing (Stylistics & Rhetoric).
• Challenges the myth of objectivity in geography (Poststructuralism).
• Emphasizes the reader’s role in interpreting geographic texts (Reader-Response Theory).
• Argues that science itself is shaped by narrative (Narrative Theory).
• Calls for a fusion of artistic creativity with scientific precision (Aestheticization of Science).

📌 1. Overemphasis on Literary Style at the Expense of Scientific Rigor

• Floyd’s argument prioritizes clarity and literary engagement in geographic writing, but some may argue that scientific precision should take precedence over stylistic elegance.
• The complexity of technical geographic research may not always allow for the simplistic and aesthetic writing style he advocates.
• Example Critique: “A piece of writing should have an adequate introduction and should be divided into paragraphs of reasonable length to maintain the reader’s attention.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 9) – This might not be feasible for highly detailed or data-driven research.

---

📌 2. Underestimation of the Role of Specialized Terminology (Jargon)

• Floyd heavily criticizes the use of academic jargon, arguing that it alienates readers. However, technical terms are often necessary to convey precise meanings in scientific research.
• His critique does not fully acknowledge that many disciplines, including geography, require specialized vocabulary to maintain academic rigor and consistency.
• Example Critique: He states, “Such pedantic Choctaw may work among initiates but should not be imposed on others.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11) – This generalization ignores the functional necessity of discipline-specific language.

---

📌 3. Assumption That Objectivity and Literary Expression Are Always Compatible

• Floyd challenges the idea that scientific objectivity and literary style are incompatible, but his argument oversimplifies the issue.
• Some may argue that subjectivity in geographic writing can introduce biases that undermine the credibility of research.
• Example Critique: “Two geographers entering an area to study its geographical features are certain to receive differing impressions.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 11) – While true, this suggests that subjectivity is inevitable, rather than something to be minimized.

---

📌 4. Lack of Concrete Methodology for Implementing Literary Improvements in Geography

• Floyd’s argument calls for better writing but does not provide a clear framework for how geographers should improve their literary style while maintaining scientific accuracy.
• Without practical guidelines, the essay remains an idealistic proposal rather than an actionable academic reform.
• Example Critique: “It is possible to be scientific and exact and also write with high literary charm.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12) – This statement lacks specific guidance on achieving this balance.

---

📌 5. Potential Conflict with Academic Publishing Standards

• Modern academic journals prioritize quantitative data, peer review, and technical precision, which may not align with Floyd’s emphasis on artistic literary expression.
• His argument romanticizes literary style but does not address how geographers can balance creativity with the rigid structure of scientific publishing.
• Example Critique: “Geography must balance research with literary appeal.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12) – This balance is difficult to maintain within strict academic writing guidelines.

---

📌 6. Limited Discussion on Digital and Visual Forms of Geographic Communication

• Floyd’s work is rooted in traditional academic writing and does not anticipate the rise of digital cartography, GIS, and visual storytelling in geography.
• Today, geographic knowledge is often communicated through interactive maps, infographics, and data visualizations, making his focus on textual style somewhat outdated.
• Example Critique: His argument assumes that written language is the primary medium for geographic communication, which is no longer the case in modern research.

---

📌 7. Subjectivity in Literary Style Can Lead to Misinterpretation

• While Floyd champions artistic expression in geographic writing, this could introduce ambiguity and misinterpretation in research findings.
• Geographic writing, if overly artistic, may lead to reader-dependent interpretations rather than factual clarity.
• Example Critique: “If geography is to prove a vital branch of knowledge, it must have literary form and spirit.” (Floyd, 1961, p. 12) – This suggests that aesthetic writing is necessary for credibility, which is debatable.

---

📌 Conclusion: Strengths vs. Weaknesses of Floyd’s Argument

• Strengths: Floyd’s essay is a valuable critique of the rigid, jargon-heavy nature of academic geography and serves as a reminder that clarity and engagement matter.
• Weaknesses: His romanticized view of literary style, underestimation of jargon’s necessity, and lack of a concrete methodology weaken the applicability of his argument in modern geographic scholarship.