11 ms·
I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: 1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It su
by aabhay 6y ago
I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here:
1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It suits a technical literal mind to have less ambiguity and fewer flourishes.
2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article versus your average academic research paper.
Both of these points considered, I disagree entirely with the premise. There can be value to dense, even perhaps enigmatic writing. I would say that the greatest works of English literature tend towards that direction (James Joyce, Thomas Pynchon, David Foster Wallace).
- nickthemagicman 6y agoYeah but the genre seems to matter. Fiction and poetry vs whatever type of writing blogging is.
- hc-taway 6y ago> Fiction and poetry vs whatever type of writing blogging is. Essayists, pamphleteers, and diarists (blogs), and aphorists (Twitter). Genres with centuries-long histories.
- raspasov 6y agoHow do you define "greatest"?
- runevault 6y agoAgreed. Simple writing is perfectly valid in the right time and place. Rich, dense writing also has a place and value. The real answer is understand what type of writing serves your intent and write with deliberate intent towards that style for that impact.
- leemcalilly 6y agoExactly.
- jamesrcole 6y ago> I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: [...] 2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article versus your average academic research paper. Did you see what he wrote in the essay, regarding this: > Simple writing also lasts better. People reading your stuff in the future will be in much the same position as people from other countries reading it today. The culture and the language will have changed. It's not vain to care about that, any more than it's vain for a woodworker to build a chair to last. Indeed, lasting is not merely an accidental quality of chairs, or writing. It's a sign you did a good job. > I disagree entirely with the premise. There can be value to dense, even perhaps enigmatic writing. I would say that the greatest works of English literature tend towards that direction (James Joyce, Thomas Pynchon, David Foster Wallace). It seems pretty clear to me that the essay is about non-fiction writing, not fiction. All the arguments in it apply to non-fiction writing.
- jamesrcole 6y ago> On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article versus your average academic research paper. I would argue that academic writing tends to be pretty poor.
- hc-taway 6y ago> I would argue that academic writing tends to be pretty poor. The above-namedropped David Foster Wallace certainly thought so. Among people who spend their days thinking about language I'm pretty sure academese is considered more of an elaborate, extended shibboleth than an effective communication tool, going beyond merely being sprinkled with jargon and fake-fancy clichés (like, say, business language) so that it serves as an effective gatekeeping tool. Hard(er than it needs to be) to read, hard to correctly write.
- serverholic 6y agoAh the old nerd trick of disregarding the context of a statement and applying it to a context where it clearly doesn't work. Do you really think Paul Graham is arguing against James Joyce style writing? Why would you think that?
- davidivadavid 6y agoBecause James Joyce's style isn't "simple" by any stretch of the imagination, I would guess? And the essay presents its position as a general statement void of all context. What context are we supposed to assume here?
- serverholic 6y agoEverything has context. Paul Graham is a leader in the startup scene so more than likely he's talking about the types text relevant to startups. Blog posts, press releases, etc. Again, why the fuck would you assume Paul Graham is talking about James Joyce?
- davidivadavid 6y agoIf "more than likely" he's talking about "the types of text relevant to startups" then surely that would be stated in an essay tooting the virtues of "simple." However, that doesn't appear to be the case. It seems more like Paul Graham might be talking about the kind of writing he does himself. Like essays. However, even in such a case, his point is debatable. Which is what people are doing here — debating. No one is assuming he's "talking about James Joyce." You must be confused. He's talking about a certain type of writing style and making contestable generalizations about it. People are illustrating the contestable points with examples.
- serverholic 6y agoYou directly reference James Joyce
- jamesrcole 6y ago
- leemcalilly 6y agoOk, so what makes James Joyce a good writer?
- andrepd 6y agoI think the point is that one should use a direct and clear style of writing where the objective is to convey a clear message. Examples include technical papers or journalism. Of course, literature is not included.
- davidivadavid 6y agoDirect and clear doesn't always mean simple. That's the main shortcoming of this essay. It doesn't define what it means by "simple". "If you want to be clear, write clearly" is a bromide, not an essay.
- jamesrcole 6y agoThe essay is titled "Write Simply". It's about why you should try to write simply, rather than being a how-to. I think that's reasonable. It may be very difficult to precisely define what "simple" means, and it may not be that necessary: it's just telling people why (he thinks) they should aim for simplicity. Most people can make a conscious choice about how simple or complex their writing is - and this essay is advice about which direction to go in.
- borepop 6y ago>People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. My perception is the reverse. Probably 60% of the articles linked on this site, day in and day out, are a thicket of impenetrable jargon. Endless blog posts that make no attempt to explain to the non-initiated what the various acronyms mean or why the concepts might matter for a person who is not deeply, deeply immersed in whatever technical field the author is writing about. I wish more people who write about coding/tech would realize that a larger audience is interested in what is going on, but that the communication of the concepts needs to be approachable. This is not just a shortcoming of this field, obviously, as people in all sorts of technical/specialized fields tend to write the same way, speaking only to the in-crowd.
- randcraw 6y agoI think jargonistic writing is typical when trying to impress. Academics have long employed jargon to obfuscate in order to seem more clever and subtle. Expressed simply, ideas seem simple. Among folk who depend on appearing clever, the last thing they want is to appear simple. Insightful ideas are rare. Hiding mundane thoughts in abstruse verbiage leaves questions in the mind of the readership: "I don't see the author's point. But he seems pretty smart. I must have missed something." Vote up. Many well established schools of untestable academic thought are often built on foundations as sandy as these, IMHO.
- ozim 6y agoI also will defend PG point. Most of us are not creating greatest works of English literature and me or many others are not James Joyce neither David Foster Wallace. If you are writing some greatest work of literature please use all the tools that language gives you. But for clear communication use simple language, please.
- randcraw 6y agoHe didn't say it, but I'm pretty sure Graham is talking only about writing non-fiction essays, especially posts in social media. Writing with verve and elan requires variety and timing and imagination, not just clarity and simplicity. Other genres of literature like poetry, fiction, haikus, plays, sonnets, and even longer forms of non-fiction... these are horses best depicted not by monotone but by a rich spectrum of color.