4 ms·

Whenever anyone wants to talk to Paul Graham about writing I always wonder whether they've read any of his works, because since writing "On Lisp" (which I think

Whenever anyone wants to talk to Paul Graham about writing I always wonder whether they've read any of his works, because since writing "On Lisp" (which I think is great) he's been in a death spiral of self-importance. Let's take a recent example (from [1]): > Though no doubt correct, such statements tell the reader > nothing. Useful writing makes claims that are as strong as > they can be made without becoming false. > For example, it's more useful to say that Pike's Peak is > near the middle of Colorado than merely somewhere in > Colorado. But if I say it's in the exact middle of > Colorado, I've now gone too far, because it's a bit east > of the middle. This is deeply pedestrian writing you could be proud of if English was your second language and writing was not any sort of job but as written it reads like that boring father-in-law who collars you at a family picnic and insists on telling you (even though you know) about what a frequent flyer programme is and about that time 15 years ago when they hit silver status. It's a very unfair comparison, but if you want to read amazing technical writing, try reading "Everything and more: A compact history of Infinity" by David Foster Wallace. Or contrast PG's essay with Umberto Eco's "How to write a Thesis"[2]. It's hard to escape the conclusion that PG's writing would not survive a double-blind test where someone didn't see his name attached. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/useful.html http://www.paulgraham.com/useful.html [2] It's a whole book but is excerpted here in a format that bears comparison to PG's essay https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/umberto-eco-how-to-write-a-thesis/ https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/umberto-eco-how-to-write-...

bachmeier 7y ago
I think your problem is in this statement > if you want to read amazing technical writing I haven't been reading PG's recent writing (only so much time in the day) but the quote you gave is a good example of how to teach a concept. It's dead simple, even obvious, when you read it. The key is that you know exactly what his point was when he wrote that. The quote you provided is not technical writing in the sense of On Lisp. If you look at the popular blog posts that make the front page of HN, many of them are at this same level - and that's okay, because it's apparently what many people want to read these days.
- alexpetralia 7y ago
  Alex Danco offers an interesting criticism of Silicon Valley's desire to satisfy "what many people want" without any sense of responsibility or paternalism: https://danco.substack.com/p/progress-postmodernism-and-the-tech https://danco.substack.com/p/progress-postmodernism-and-the-... (I am not saying the critique of postmodernism is right or wrong, but simply that it is insightful and relevant.)
FragenAntworten 7y ago
The pedestrian phrasing is in service of communicating an idea simply. The text you quoted is building to a point: "Useful writing tells people something true and important that they didn't already know, and tells them as unequivocally as possible." Plainly stated; thought-provoking and useful as a tool for assessing prose. I am more inclined to read essays with PG's name attached, but that's because they reliably provide an interesting perspective on their subject matter.
- CaptArmchair 7y ago
  > "Useful writing tells people something true and important that they didn't already know, and tells them as unequivocally as possible." The fallacy here is that statement assumes that what you're saying is a priori true and important, regardless of what the reader might think. As if that thought already existed out there, being true and important in its own right and you were the first to merely stumble across it. "Useful writing" presumes that the reader will agree with the usefulness of your writing and accept whatever you've written at face value. Whereas the entire point of publishing an essay is to push your thoughts out into the world, out of your control, where others might de-construct and criticize what you're bringing to their doorstep. Useful writing is basically a take on Positivism. And while that works in certain areas of scientific endeavor, there's a long philosophical tradition that argues against taking this too far. Especially in social and sociological sciences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism
- injb 7y ago
  This, exactly. He's providing a definition of the term "useful writing" so that he can use that phrase throughout the essay and know that the reader knows exactly what he means.
jessriedel 7y ago
If you're going to write advice for a large audience, some of it is going to be old/obvious to experts. Part of that is because non-experts haven't heard the ideas, and part is because they have heard them but don't practice them. The ideas in "How to Win Friends and Influence People" have been widely publicized, yet they are still deep, timeless, and under-applied. In other words: famous people who give bad advice (e.g., "I won the lottery, and so can you!") seems much more deserving of criticism than famous people who give unoriginal and yet still under-utilized advice. Indeed, if you are a famous person with legions of fans asking for your advice, and you've already written down your best non-trivial ideas for experts, it seems praiseworthy to help non-experts by telling them boring useful stuff.
- claudeganon 7y ago
  > famous people who give bad advice (e.g., "I won the lottery, and so can you!") ...but this actually is a succinct account of startup culture proselytizing?
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  I don’t think the claim is that he has particularly boring ideas, just that he isn’t uncommonly skilled at expressing them.
  - jessriedel 7y ago
    Oh, maybe? Sort of ambiguous, given the context is writing advice. If so, then there's an obvious rebuttal: the point isn't to keep you riveted, it's to communicate an idea. The uncle example is inapplicable because the problem with the uncle is that he is telling you an idea you don't care about, not that he's delivering true useful information in a boring way. EDIT: Also, Wikipedia links to some damning reviews of the David Foster Wallace book, including this one (yikes): http://www.rudyrucker.com/oldhomepage/wallace_review.pdf http://www.rudyrucker.com/oldhomepage/wallace_review.pdf

bachmeier 7y ago

I think your problem is in this statement > if you want to read amazing technical writing I haven't been reading PG's recent writing (only so much time in the day) but the quote you gave is a good example of how to teach a concept. It's dead simple, even obvious, when you read it. The key is that you know exactly what his point was when he wrote that. The quote you provided is not technical writing in the sense of On Lisp. If you look at the popular blog posts that make the front page of HN, many of them are at this same level - and that's okay, because it's apparently what many people want to read these days.

alexpetralia 7y ago
Alex Danco offers an interesting criticism of Silicon Valley's desire to satisfy "what many people want" without any sense of responsibility or paternalism: https://danco.substack.com/p/progress-postmodernism-and-the-tech https://danco.substack.com/p/progress-postmodernism-and-the-... (I am not saying the critique of postmodernism is right or wrong, but simply that it is insightful and relevant.)

FragenAntworten 7y ago

The pedestrian phrasing is in service of communicating an idea simply. The text you quoted is building to a point: "Useful writing tells people something true and important that they didn't already know, and tells them as unequivocally as possible." Plainly stated; thought-provoking and useful as a tool for assessing prose. I am more inclined to read essays with PG's name attached, but that's because they reliably provide an interesting perspective on their subject matter.

CaptArmchair 7y ago
> "Useful writing tells people something true and important that they didn't already know, and tells them as unequivocally as possible." The fallacy here is that statement assumes that what you're saying is a priori true and important, regardless of what the reader might think. As if that thought already existed out there, being true and important in its own right and you were the first to merely stumble across it. "Useful writing" presumes that the reader will agree with the usefulness of your writing and accept whatever you've written at face value. Whereas the entire point of publishing an essay is to push your thoughts out into the world, out of your control, where others might de-construct and criticize what you're bringing to their doorstep. Useful writing is basically a take on Positivism. And while that works in certain areas of scientific endeavor, there's a long philosophical tradition that argues against taking this too far. Especially in social and sociological sciences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism
injb 7y ago
This, exactly. He's providing a definition of the term "useful writing" so that he can use that phrase throughout the essay and know that the reader knows exactly what he means.

jessriedel 7y ago

If you're going to write advice for a large audience, some of it is going to be old/obvious to experts. Part of that is because non-experts haven't heard the ideas, and part is because they have heard them but don't practice them. The ideas in "How to Win Friends and Influence People" have been widely publicized, yet they are still deep, timeless, and under-applied. In other words: famous people who give bad advice (e.g., "I won the lottery, and so can you!") seems much more deserving of criticism than famous people who give unoriginal and yet still under-utilized advice. Indeed, if you are a famous person with legions of fans asking for your advice, and you've already written down your best non-trivial ideas for experts, it seems praiseworthy to help non-experts by telling them boring useful stuff.

claudeganon 7y ago
> famous people who give bad advice (e.g., "I won the lottery, and so can you!") ...but this actually is a succinct account of startup culture proselytizing?
SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
I don’t think the claim is that he has particularly boring ideas, just that he isn’t uncommonly skilled at expressing them.
- jessriedel 7y ago
  Oh, maybe? Sort of ambiguous, given the context is writing advice. If so, then there's an obvious rebuttal: the point isn't to keep you riveted, it's to communicate an idea. The uncle example is inapplicable because the problem with the uncle is that he is telling you an idea you don't care about, not that he's delivering true useful information in a boring way. EDIT: Also, Wikipedia links to some damning reviews of the David Foster Wallace book, including this one (yikes): http://www.rudyrucker.com/oldhomepage/wallace_review.pdf http://www.rudyrucker.com/oldhomepage/wallace_review.pdf