 sj |
||
|
||
BS: What are the absolutes of good writing?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Amos Date: 29 Aug 07 - 04:46 PM In any case, I think it is clear from these examples that phony dialects are NOT one of the absolutes (or even one of the ingredients) of good writing. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 29 Aug 07 - 04:58 PM Which is nae tae say that they canna be of some use frae time tae time... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Peace Date: 29 Aug 07 - 05:00 PM I think it was Lewis Carroll who said, "Start at the beginning. When you get to the end, stop!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Bert Date: 29 Aug 07 - 06:49 PM I would say that there is only one absolute and that is "Communication". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: katlaughing Date: 29 Aug 07 - 07:44 PM Eh? Wot's that yew sed, Bert? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 30 Aug 07 - 07:42 AM "That would be the Yamato and the Musashi. They mounted the largest guns ever put on battleships, and were the largest 2 battleships ever built." LH - I had trouble finding this again. But as I understand it, the size of the projectiles these ships fired, combined with the ballistics and the way air works on an object traveling through the atmosphere, these ships were able to shell American battle ships from a distance so great that the Americans couldn't reach them to fire back. Is that correct? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Peace Date: 30 Aug 07 - 11:21 AM Both ships: Bore 18.1 inches Weight 162.4 tons Length OA 831.9 inches Weight Projectile 3219 lbs. Muzzle Velocity 2559 ft/s Max. Elevation +45/-5 degrees Max. Range 45,960 yards Rate of Fire 2/min Found that on the www. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 30 Aug 07 - 12:53 PM This doesn't have anything to do with the thread, so I won't waste anymore of anybody's time, but that's a little over 26 miles, about the length of a marathon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Aug 07 - 01:31 PM Theoretically, perhaps, Rinslinger... However, I doubt that it would have turned out that way in practice, because the USA's newer battleships had considerably more advanced rangefinding systems than the Japanese did. Their rangefinders were harmonized with very advanced surface radar equipment for increased accuracy. The Japanese had much more primitive radar...I think it was only useful for spotting aircraft...and they had to rely on optical rangefinders that were not as good as the American ones when fighting gunnery duels. I think the American ships would have had a distinct advantage at longer ranges. Firing at the most extreme ranges usually yields few, if any hits. At shorter range things would have been more equalized. Anyway, it's sort of a moot point because by 1944 the Americans had established what amounted to almost total air supremacy at sea, and it was their many hundreds of carrier aircraft which presented the most deadly threat to Japanese surface vessels. The Japanese Navy really had no chance at all in the one-sided battles of 1944 and 1945, despite the advanced design features of some of their fine warships...and the unquestionable courage of their personnel. Yamato and Musashi were deliberately built to be larger than any conceivable American battleship...by the simply expedient of giving them a beam broader than can pass through the Panama Canal! All American capital ships had to be narrow enough in the beam to get through there, for obvious reasons, and that limited their size to below a certain tonnage. The Yamato and Musashi were considerably wider built ships of a heavier tonnage. This made them quite a bit harder to sink, and it allowed the mounting of heavier guns and more armor. They were also surprisingly maneuverable, due to a very good hull design. They were really the final statement in battleships...all they lacked was the very sophisticated radar and rangefinding equipment of their American counterparts. Oh, and the Japanese ships also lacked as effective an anti-aircraft system with which to protect themselves. American anti-aircraft guns were way ahead of any other nation's at the time...proving devastatingly effective against Japanese aircraft. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 30 Aug 07 - 04:57 PM That's all very interesting, thanks. I guess once the battle ship became obsolete, nobody had any reason to revive them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:10 AM What follows is an e-mail my husband sent from work with examples of engineering writing for usual clients and his Chinese clients. Little Hawk asked to see some. I should mention that the subject of the reports is the pollution of groundwater by previous owners of the land under investigation. When chemicals flow in groundwater, they follow a shape called "a plume." ========== I have tried to put together a few examples of the use of concrete terms that we would typically try to use with our Asian clients, versus more abstract expressions we casually fall into in everyday life. It involves more than just simplifying the way one tries to say something (which I try to do with most clients anyway). Ever since you raised the concept that Asians are more likely to achieve a clearer understanding of an idea if it stated in concrete terms, I have tried to listen to the way they speak, and have found that to a large extent, the concept holds. In performing this exercise, I tried to get the second version to sound the way I hear them (which is also the way I now try to talk). The terms that can be considered more abstract are underlined. The migration rate of the leading edge of the groundwater contamination plume is approximately 25 feet per year. Vs.: The leading edge of the groundwater contamination plume moves approximately 25 feet per year. The distribution of the contaminants in the subsurface is indicative of the origin of the pollution. Vs.: The shape of the plume tells us where its source was. The state environmental regulatory personnel have a preference for personal interaction as opposed to corresponding by letter. Vs.: The state environmental regulatory personnel like face-to face meetings rather than letters. And, most importantly: The charges on our invoice are reflective of the actual level of effort expended. Vs.: The invoice shows how many hours we worked on the project. Although their english is a lot better than my Mandarin chinese, they still have a monumental struggle with understanding and being understood in this country, in ways that I am now convinced go far beyond limitations in vocabulary. I don't know if these examples are sufficiently clear demonstrations of the concept, as I just dashed them off on the spur of the moment, so some of the examples may not be as abstract as we sometimes get. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:20 AM Aha! In other words, when talking to the Chinese, discard the psuedo-impressive business style techno-babble that is so popular these days and just talk in straightforward, easy to understand English! Wow. I think we really need the Chinese to teach us something here. ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Bert Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:24 AM Forget about these Battleships, and let's "all go dahn to th' Battle Cruiser!!!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:29 AM If you want Japanese battle cruisers, that would be the Kongo class. Hiei, Kirishima, Kongo, and Haruna. Eight 14-in guns in twin turrets on each of them, and a 30 knot speed. Pretty useful ships they were, and they saw a lot of action. All were sunk by war's end except for Haruna, which was sitting in harbor more or less a wreck from cumulative air raid damage. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Bert Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:32 AM LH, yer gonna 'ave ta lern Cockney one ov these bluddy days me ol' china. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:33 AM Oh, I'd love to, Bert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: From: Riginslinger Date: 31 Aug 07 - 07:19 AM "What are the absolutes of good writing?" Maybe that's the key to good writing, lear Cockney. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 31 Aug 07 - 10:09 AM I agree with you about discarding "pseudo-impressive business style techno-babble", Little Hawk. However, that is easier said than done. For various reasone (which ought to be looked into), many people find that words don't flow naturally once they start writing for an audience. This could be something akin to stage fright in a musician. For another thing, it doesn't do to write in a clear, practical manner if your boss mistakenly believes that this proves you are a rube. By the way, I got the idea about using concrete language for the Chinese clients after I read a long detective story by a Japanese author. I closed the book and realized that there had been only one abstract concept in the entire novel - one paragraph on loneliness. And loneliness isn't that abstract, as concepts go. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:40 PM You're quite right, leenia. I guess the important thing is always to remember who one is writing for, and shape one's approach accordingly. There's hopefully a happy medium one can strike between grossly pretentious techno-babble and talking like a rube... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 31 Aug 07 - 02:30 PM Besides, if you talk like a rube you could be mistaken for the president. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 04:09 PM But it would get you a lot of votes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 31 Aug 07 - 06:43 PM That's true! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,AR Date: 31 Aug 07 - 07:35 PM The 'absolute(s)' of good Writing: Use a good pen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 07:49 PM "It's all in the wrist." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,AR Date: 31 Aug 07 - 07:55 PM No, it's in the tool. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 31 Aug 07 - 11:10 PM It's in how you wield the tool. The tool is nothing without he who wields it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Jeri Date: 31 Aug 07 - 11:28 PM It's indicative of the mood of Mudcat these days that a significant number of people seem to be focusing on the naked and uninteresting skeleton - grammar and spelling. Pedanticism is the refuge of those lacking in creativity or passion. It's not a bad thing to care about the mechanics, but if you think it's what makes good writing, you're missing the point. Communication's important, but it's not what makes good writing. Well, it does in technical writing. I understand maybe that appeals to some, but I still sort of like creativity. It's been said that the internet is a 'posters' medium'. People write because it floats their boat to see their little words go sail around the world. They don't have to care whether anyone wants to read what they write and they likely don't read what anyone else writes. If they communicate, fine, but that's not necessarily their primary goal, which is shouting "I AM" to an uncaring and bored-out-of-their-shorts 'audience'. Hell, we have people at Mudcat who continuously write inane and should-be-embarrassing one liners, say the same thing over and over, write an enormous quantity of blather or diatribe, often completely ignoring the subject to go have a wee wank at our expense. They read posts looking for anything to disagree with and they correct grammar and spelling because they lack the ability, initiative or simple the courtesy required to do anything else Good writing is NOT primarily for the enjoyment of the writer. Good writing feels like the writer is completely engaged in telling you about something that excites them, because they want you to understand too. Good writing does not scream "LOOK AT ME" - it whispers secrets, it shows you dappled sunlight and dancing shadow, it makes you understand pain and celebrate redemption. Good writing sounds like, "Hey, here's something to enjoy... just for you." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,leeneia Date: 01 Sep 07 - 01:09 AM Very good points, Jeri. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 01 Sep 07 - 08:56 AM Jeri - Who would you hold up as an example of a good writer? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Jeri Date: 01 Sep 07 - 02:02 PM Few people are consistently good writers, Riginslinger. Many, many people are capable of good writing. This Blake Madison post is my favorite bit of writing here, although most of the Blake Madison posts have been remarkable. There have been other pieces of writing, both inspired and inspiring, done by various people. There have been pieces about war and loss, about love and hope, about other people and other times. They didn't share the same author, but what they had in common is that for a while, telling the story was the most important thing. It was more important than self consciousness and fear of ridicule, more important than anything anyone else had to say, more important than projecting an image of themselves. I read mostly works of fiction. My sole criteria for whether I think a book is good or not is whether I enjoy it without noticing the 'bones'. There are many things that contribute to my enjoyment, but I couldn't begin to analyze all of them. Sometimes, the writing gets my imagination going, and sometimes it rises above that and just sings. When I read for other reasons, my definition of good writing changes. Of course Stringsinger said it here, more concisely than I would. I score tests for a day job - most of the time, English essays. Every once in a while, a kid will write something that makes my eyes leak simply because the writing is excruciatingly beautiful, and so unexpected on a school test. Sometimes, those kids can write as well or better than current published authors. Of course, they only have to last for a few pages. I think my point (you HAD one, Jeri?) is that authors' names are irrelevant. Lots of people can shine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 01 Sep 07 - 02:33 PM You're quite right in what you say about good writing, Jeri, and yes, the Black Madison posts are wonderfully done. However, I think that a great deal of the overtly pedantic posts are done entirely tongue in cheek, don't you? It's just some joshing around between friends. I doubt that any of us would seriously assert that it is perfect grammar and perfect spelling which make for good writing. I would also say that there are times when one wishes to write seriously and really communicate something significant with others...and there are other times when one wishes simply to amuse oneself, pass the time, and engage in other completely unimportant and non-weighty activities of that sort...activities which have no lasting merit in the world of fine art. I do not intend to kneel before some digital God of "good writing" and tearfully apologize for having sometimes done the latter, and I don't see why anyone else here ought to either. As you say, many of us are capable of good writing. That does not mean we are under some stern obligation to do absolutely nothing BUT good writing in our time spent in these sacred halls, I hope. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Amos Date: 01 Sep 07 - 02:51 PM Communication's important, but it's not what makes good writing. Ya know Jeri, you have a hell of a roundhouse. My first instinct was to blather in protest when I read this. After all, the only measure of writing's success, I would have said, is what, how much and how well it communicates; communication is the whole burrito. But I think you mean something else, far more subtle -- that if writing is well-crafterd, but does not come from the authentic own depths of the writer hisself, the writing can miss even if it seems polished as communication. This is a very interesting point, assuming I have gathered it in right. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Stringsinger Date: 01 Sep 07 - 03:03 PM Jeri, I submit to you that if writing is not authentic, but specious and insincere, this does not qualify as communication. To me, communication is when something is clearly written, evokes an emotion of empathy or understanding on a deeper level than some tripe written for effect. Creativity in writing is a form of communication. There's always this caveat. Some writing communicates to some people and not to others. There are authors who I have been told write well but they do nothing for me personally. Since they have been touted as good writers, I am expected to go along with the program. I don't see this as valid or necessary. The writer that communicates to me personally in a way that evokes thought, feelings, empathy, paints pictures that I can see, opens my mind to new ideas or conveys something human and personal is my idea of a good writer. Frank Hamilton |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 01 Sep 07 - 03:06 PM People's writing can shine when they are truly inspired, when they really mean it from the depths of their being (as Amos just said). That happens, but it doesn't happen too often. For most of us, it happens quite rarely. I read mostly works of non-fiction, primarily spiritual philosophy of one kind or another. In other words, I am drawn more to reading about ideas, than reading about personalities, life stories, and specific events. I want to understand my position in life itself, my spiritual nature and purpose, that sort of thing. Still, I have read some fine fiction now and then. I think the book that hit me most powerfully in the last 10 years was Mark Twain's "Joan of Arc". Why? Well, that would be a long story. The idea of the sacred female, the heroine, seems to be at the centre of my being. It is for me the strongest of all archetypes. For me, the Christ figure ends up being a female. Don't ask me why, because I don't know. It's a mystery. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Big Mick Date: 01 Sep 07 - 03:25 PM So many things go into the mix that I think, on a personal level, it simply comes down to what grabs me and holds me. Due to the fact that Union Organizers spend weeks on end alone, and in places far from their homes, I tend to read a great deal. Sometimes it is for pure entertainment, sometimes it is inspirational, sometimes it is information oriented so that I may come to know my adversaries, and most of the time it is research oriented so that I may sing my songs from a position of understanding what the conditions were that spawned them. I consider myself strong in the empathy suit, so that if I can find a really well written treatise on a person, act, event, conditions, around which songs were built, then I can sink into that song and relate it to the audience that I am singing it to. Which brings me to a point about good writing. I am unschooled, and unsophisticated, when it comes to understanding what constitutes good writing. I have never studied the elements of it, and when I write something, such as some of my Vietnam posts, or posts for the kids in Why We Sing, it is usually from the heart. But when I am reading, it is easy for me to discern good writing, as it relates to me. If it turns into "white noise" and I realize that I have read several pages, or para's, and I don't know what they said, then I am reading from an author that just fails to hold my interest. If I am reading something, I am interested in what it says. But if the author lacks the ability to phrase, and as Frank says, fails to paint pictures that I can see, that content is going to go by the wayside for me. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: katlaughing Date: 01 Sep 07 - 04:39 PM That's exactly it, Mick. I cannot often name the exact element of what may be wrong or The other question the chief editor asked of me was "What authors/works are examples of great writing?" Here is what I answered, though there are many more I could have named and, I agree, they do not all need to be known except for the purposes of the specific job test I was taking. I've seen equal or better writing than all of the following, right here on Mudcat. I also learned about a few of these from other MUdcatters: Rudolfo Anaya – Bless Me, Ultima; Alburquerque: A Novel; Bendiceme Ultima Tony Hillerman – any title Marion Zimmer Bradley – any title Judith Thurman – Secrets of the Flesh: The Life of Collette Peter Tremayne – any of the Sister Fidelma series Lindsey Davis – any of the Falco series Morgan Llywelyn - 1916: A Novel of the Irish Rebellion Anything by M. R. James and other "classics," i.e. Kipling, Scott, etc. Nevil Shute – Round the Bend James Herroit - any |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,mg Date: 01 Sep 07 - 05:15 PM True what Jeri said about good writing..but the position in question is an editing position..probably not a proofreading/copyreading one, but one that selects or improves on good writing..but an editing position nevertheless...mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Little Hawk Date: 01 Sep 07 - 05:20 PM I have not read most of those on your list, Kat. If I were asked to name some really fine writers I've read, then I'd pick... Mark Twain H.G. Wells Sir Arthur Conan Doyle H. Ryder Haggard Rudyard Kipling C.S. Forester Sri Aurobindo I don't tend to read modern novels much, so I'm sure I've missed out on a lot of great contemporary writers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,mg Date: 01 Sep 07 - 05:22 PM Good writers here.scratch that..people I enjoy reading..well, I would say Big Mick, John in Kansas (I can't remember his style one way or another, but he seems knowledgeable as though he writes engineering books for a hobby), Sir John of Hull, Alice, Marion, CapriUni, oh that is enough for now. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Slag Date: 01 Sep 07 - 05:37 PM And there you have it, boys and girls: The bare bones absolutes of good writing. Study the foregoing and I am confident that you too, will be a Good Writer whom can write well, er, as good or even gooder then me! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: katlaughing Date: 01 Sep 07 - 06:37 PM LOL, Slag! Ya done well...er..weller...or, I mean ya did good! LH, I think you would really like Anaya's writings. They are really quite beautiful. Also I think you'd really enjoy reading about this fellow's exploits AND, this gal from seventh century Ireland, not only a religieuse, but also a dalaigh, an advocate of the ancient law courts. Really interesting and engaging. Oh, and I agree with your list, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: GUEST,Cruz Date: 01 Sep 07 - 11:52 PM I always say there are no absolutes in the Universe. However, there is now one absolute I have learned by reading this thread, when I did not nodd off to sleep, and following my many years of searching for the Holy Grail of Science: Absolutely never-ever-no-how-for-sure-fire-and-for-certain ever come to a place like the BS section of any such forum as Mudcat, especially so, to inquire about the absolutes of good writin' Er, I do have 1 question: when DO you use a : instead of a ; and should I use the numerical 1 instead of 'one' in my scientific abstracts, and etymologically when should I ........................ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 02 Sep 07 - 12:05 AM I had a long entry, but I clicked on an entry in the middle of it, and lost everything. Lesson learned. "Few people are consistently good writers, Riginslinger. Many, many people are capable of good writing." "I read mostly works of fiction." I disagree. I think there are people who are consistently good writers. The only writer I've tried to read on katlaughing's list is Tony Hillerman, and I didn't find it very compelling. On Little Hawks list I agree with Mark Twain, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and C.S. Forester. I suspect there's an element of gender bias in this. I can read anything by Robert B. Parker and be thoroughly entertained. I don't know why. I've tried to immitate him, on occasian, with limited success. Anyone who reads Ernest Hemingway's "The Old Man and the Sea," and can say that's not great writing is brain dead. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Amos Date: 02 Sep 07 - 12:53 AM Frank: I feel the same way about Steinbeck's stuff. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Bert Date: 02 Sep 07 - 02:32 AM Jeri says, "Communication's important, but it's not what makes good writing. Well, it does in technical writing. I understand maybe that appeals to some, but I still sort of like creativity." I dunno Jeri, if you are not communicating, then nobody is going to continue reading. It doesn't matter how creative and original your thoughts are; if you don't communicate them, then your readership has fallen asleep after the second paragraph. And Little Hawk, Did you ever read Sir Nigel, or The White Company? Such a dreary load of CRAP and Sir Arthur thought they were his best works. His Sherlock Holmes books were good though. Some authors seem to have one masterpiece in their life which stands out amongst a lot of mediochre work. For instance, did Tom Sharpe write anything better than "Wilt" or did Brian Callison write anything better than "Trapp's War" Although they both wrote other books that were OK. did they contain "the absolutes of good writing". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Jeri Date: 02 Sep 07 - 09:49 AM Stringsinger, "Creativity in writing is a form of communication."yes I agree. I think I was interpreting 'communication' to be more surface-level and obvious. Amos, sometimes I just talk out of my ass, but I think what I meant was what I said in a vague sort of way. On communication being not the most important thing: sometimes creative writing asks questions and makes you think, sometimes it leaves things unsaid so you can fill in the blanks. Get a group of people to agree on what certain lines by ee cummings or Bob Dylan mean, and you'll understand what I mean. If you want to call the empty space that calls you fill it up with your imagination 'communication', I can understand. Questions are communication of a sort and I don't want to quibble, just explain why I said what I said. There's also the unimportant communication that involves a writer wanting to tell me something and being completely competent, but I don't want to read it. From the reader's point of view, it may be good writing, but it doesn't matter. From a writer or an editor's point of view, is it good writing if most people don't want to read it? The writer's communicating his little butt off, but that doesn't matter. There is something needed beyond communication. Riginslinger, I was trying to avoid listing favorite authors/good writers because the thread's about what makes good writing. Most writers are consistently competent, thanks to their proofreaders. 'Good' is a step above 'competent' and I'm pretty sure we can find passages in every author's work that we find lacking. I think we've had author fan lists before. (I don't know the thread titles off the top of my head though.) The question isn't 'who', it's 'why'? What is it about the author's writing that makes it good? I think when we get rid of all the opinions about good writing we don't agree with, we may be left with this: good writing is that which readers want to read. Then again, someone will feel that some other aspect is more important, so Cruz probably has it write: there are no absolutes in the Universe. (Almost always never.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 02 Sep 07 - 10:33 AM GUEST,Cruz, asked in part: Er, I do have 1 question: when DO you use a : instead of a ; and. . . Sometimes it's hard to tell whether a poster is serious in asking a question or if it's a tongue-in-cheek rhetorical joke, but I'm going to assume it's a real question. I'll try to give some guidance, on that basis. A colon expresses a sense of expectancy. It's an introduction of an expansion or explanation of the first part of the sentence. I was going to say that it's the equivalent of "as follows" or "that is to say" or something like that, but often the colon actually follows that kind of phrase. It says to the reader: "Here comes an explanation or expansion." The semicolon has two uses: As the period's cousin, and as the comma's big brother. As the period's cousin, it is used to put what might have been two full grammatical sentences together as one, when the thoughts of those two units have a particular relationship that's better understood together. Unfortunately, you often see people try to do this with a comma, which in my high school and university English classes was a no-no; it would earn you an automatic F, regardless of other merits of the paper. As the comma's big brother, the semicolon is used to separate a series when one or more of the parts of the series already calls for a comma or commas, which would make the whole thing an incomprehensible mess if you then tried to separate the series with commas in addition. Oh, and there's another, not-so-common, use of the semicolon, which you will see in legal writing quite commonly, but not generally in general writing. In legal (and maybe other complex) writing there may be a series of thoughts which would justify paragraphs in themselves, and which should be separately considered. The writer will present the thoughts as a series of paragraphs on the page, but ending each with a semicolon rather than a period before the change of line and the indentation of the next paragraph. Now, I just hope that the question was asked seriously. Otherwise, I've just unnecessarily bored you to tears. Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 02 Sep 07 - 10:45 AM Jeri said, in passing: There's also the unimportant communication that involves a writer wanting to tell me something and being completely competent, but I don't want to read it. From the reader's point of view, it may be good writing, but it doesn't matter. From a writer or an editor's point of view, is it good writing if most people don't want to read it? The writer's communicating his little butt off, but that doesn't matter. There is something needed beyond communication. Seems to me that communication is not a one-way street. If the writer gives you a long paragraph (or even a whole article) of inconsequentials, and loses you as a result, there is no communication. In that case the writer put a lot of stuff down, but he's not "communicating his little butt off", to use your enchanting phrase. As a parallel, take a schoolteacher who knows his subject, organizes it well, but fails to motivate the class to pay attention: No learning is going to occur. Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Riginslinger Date: 02 Sep 07 - 11:50 AM "Most writers are consistently competent, thanks to their proofreaders. 'Good' is a step above 'competent' and I'm pretty sure we can find passages in every author's work that we find lacking..." "The question isn't 'who', it's 'why'? What is it about the author's writing that makes it good?" Jeri - Yes, that's a good point. In today's market place well placed writers are often revised extensively by editors and proofreaders. In a sense it kind of becomes a writer's conspiracy. I suspect this is especially the case in nonfiction. I was watching Glenn Beck on television--in a weaker moment, and somebody was ragging on him because he "didn't even write his own book." His response? "Nobody writes their own books anymore." In the case of both Ernest Hemingway and Robert B. Parker, they both insist they never revise. I find this incredibly hard to believe, but it keeps them from falling into the catagory of a writing factory with a big name for promotional purposes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: What are the absolutes of good writing? From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 02 Sep 07 - 12:29 PM "Aww, gee whillikers, shucks!" said he, lowering his eyes, blushing, and scrubbing the dirt with his toe. Dave Oesterreich |
