4 ms·

Ah 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

Ah 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 ago
Because 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 ago
  Everything 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 ago
    If "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 ago
      You directly reference James Joyce
    - jamesrcole 6y ago
      I think the essay is clearly about _non-fiction_ writing. It's arguing about how best to communicate ideas (he uses the term 'ideas' several times). Sure, fiction can be trying to communicate things, and sometimes even ideas, but to me it's pretty obvious that the essay isn't trying to give advice for fiction writing in general.
      - davidivadavid 6y ago
        It's pretty obvious to me too. That's not the point. The essay makes a generic statement about the superiority of a particular, although loosely defined, writing style. People debate the edge cases of that statement, showing its limits, and pointing to counter examples. The result is that the content of the essay is reduced to a very banal statement of the type: "All other things being equal, prefer writing something simple rather than not simple." As an aesthetic preference, it's all well and good. As a persuasive argument, rather lacking. It "tries to prove too much."
        jamesrcole 6y ago
        The other person (at the top of this sub-thread) did say "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)." I would not consider these edge cases, because I don't think literature is relevant to the essay and its purposes.
        davidivadavid 6y ago
        If you want to restrict Graham's argument to non-fiction, I'll happily grant you that. But let me give you a bit more context: As a Frenchman, when I think "Essay", my mind almost automatically reaches for two authors: Montaigne and Pascal (e.g. in his Pensées). "Simple" is probably the last qualifier I would use to describe their works. They're not simple. They're complex, rich, beautiful, copiously quoting from classical authors and yet often crystal clear. They have the same quality poetry has where replacing a word by another damages the precision of the message and images conveyed. That is also true of non-fiction prose in longer form. I shudder to think what could become of Tocqueville's writing style, a peculiar mix of classical and romantic, if it were translated into "simple" language.
  - throwawaygh 6y ago
    I do not have much of an opinion on the underlying debate happening here^1, but I will disagree with this comment. I do not believe that the article's prescription is confined to business writing. > Paul Graham is a leader in the startup scene That is true. But Graham is also a self-described essayist. He was writing long before he started Y Combinator, and his essays often discuss writing as a thing unto itself. For example, his "Nerds" essay mentions that one of his goals for life in high school was to write well^2. Given that Graham is deeply interested in writing, and that the article doesn't explicitly confine itself to business writing, I think it's quite a stretch to assume that this essay is only talking about business writing. > Again, why the fuck would you assume Paul Graham is talking about James Joyce? This is a strawman (and also unnecessarily combative). -- [^1]: Well, see my top-level comment. But that's not really relevant to this comment. [^2]: "There was something else I wanted more: to be smart. Not simply to do well in school, though that counted for something, but to design beautiful rockets, or to write well, or to understand how to program computers. In general, to make great things." http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
  - dang 6y ago
    > Again, why the fuck would you Please drop swipes like that from your arguments here, and generally please don't escalate hostility even when someone is wrong or you feel they are. Your comment would be fine without that last sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: as for "Try to not be autistic for a second" - we ban accounts that do that. Please review the guidelines and take the intended spirit of the site more to heart, so we won't have to ban you.
- lelanthran 6y ago
  > And the essay presents its position as a general statement void of all context. Are you sure? From the blog (first sentence): > I try to write using ordinary words and simple sentences. Since the "I" in this case refers to someone who does not write poetry, speculative fiction, drama, tragedies, comedies ... and only ever writes for a technical audience, the context is clear: technical[1] audience not seeking poetry, fiction, drama, etc... Further one he says: > So you can't assume that writing about a difficult topic means you can safely use difficult words. Once again, that indicates to me he is talking about writing something technical[2], not prose or poetry. [1][2] "Technical" is not limited to IT and engineering; it's about anything that involves technique. Describing dance moves is "technical", as is writing a recipe (which is very similar in technique to writing a tiny program) or anything involving writing down music (Should you use 7/4 for the first verse, or alternate between 3/4 and 4/4? Which will be clearer to the flautist?)
  - davidivadavid 6y ago
    I don't think Paul Graham writes for a "technical" audience only and am fairly certain he would dispute that claim. I'm also fairly certain that the type of writing he's talking about is mostly non-fiction prose, such as the essays he writes himself (even though he doesn't state that explicitly). Would you consider those "technical" writing?
  - yt-sdb 6y ago
    The title of the essay is "Write Simply." Furthermore, the second sentence is more general than the first: > That kind of writing is easier to read, and the easier something is to read, the more deeply readers will engage with it. That is a general claim. I agree that it is often good advice, but there are caveats which Graham does not provide.
  - zhte415 6y ago
    What is an 'ordinary' word? The first sentence threw me for this precise term, which was internally inconsistent with later in the article talking about second or third+ English language users, or even, not mentioned in the article, first language speakers with differing backgrounds. A very odd term to use. I'd open simply with "Think of your audience, think of your goal" and on thinking of audience expand to "Think of your audience, of which there may be some you've not thought of, or it might just be yourself, and think of your goal, if any."
runawaybottle 6y ago
Well okay, who is he addressing? That’s pretty much the only question I had reading it. Surely it isn’t the modern blogger or clickbait ‘journalists’, since they know what they are doing and we know what they are doing. It’s possible he simply said nothing.
- geofft 6y ago
  It reads very much like it's a response to this not-even-particularly-upvoted comment on his last essay, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26377185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26377185 "Why does he write like an SAT reading comprehension passage" Kind of incredible.
- serverholic 6y ago
  Try to not be autistic for a second. Paul Graham is in the tech scene. PERHAPS he's talking about things like coding tutorials, technical blogs, press releases, documentaiton, etc. I'd argue that simple writing is great in that domain.
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    Lol you think he’s critiquing press releases and documentation? Let’s be friends, you’re particularly my kind of dumb.
    - khimaros 6y ago
      "Be kind. Don't be snarky." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - dang 6y ago
      You've also crossed into bannable territory. That's not cool, regardless of how bad another comment is. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here (all of them, please—you broke several).
  - 6y ago

davidivadavid 6y ago

Because 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 ago
Everything 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 ago
  If "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 ago
    You directly reference James Joyce
  - jamesrcole 6y ago
    I think the essay is clearly about _non-fiction_ writing. It's arguing about how best to communicate ideas (he uses the term 'ideas' several times). Sure, fiction can be trying to communicate things, and sometimes even ideas, but to me it's pretty obvious that the essay isn't trying to give advice for fiction writing in general.
    - davidivadavid 6y ago
      It's pretty obvious to me too. That's not the point. The essay makes a generic statement about the superiority of a particular, although loosely defined, writing style. People debate the edge cases of that statement, showing its limits, and pointing to counter examples. The result is that the content of the essay is reduced to a very banal statement of the type: "All other things being equal, prefer writing something simple rather than not simple." As an aesthetic preference, it's all well and good. As a persuasive argument, rather lacking. It "tries to prove too much."
      - jamesrcole 6y ago
        The other person (at the top of this sub-thread) did say "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)." I would not consider these edge cases, because I don't think literature is relevant to the essay and its purposes.
        davidivadavid 6y ago
        If you want to restrict Graham's argument to non-fiction, I'll happily grant you that. But let me give you a bit more context: As a Frenchman, when I think "Essay", my mind almost automatically reaches for two authors: Montaigne and Pascal (e.g. in his Pensées). "Simple" is probably the last qualifier I would use to describe their works. They're not simple. They're complex, rich, beautiful, copiously quoting from classical authors and yet often crystal clear. They have the same quality poetry has where replacing a word by another damages the precision of the message and images conveyed. That is also true of non-fiction prose in longer form. I shudder to think what could become of Tocqueville's writing style, a peculiar mix of classical and romantic, if it were translated into "simple" language.
- throwawaygh 6y ago
  I do not have much of an opinion on the underlying debate happening here^1, but I will disagree with this comment. I do not believe that the article's prescription is confined to business writing. > Paul Graham is a leader in the startup scene That is true. But Graham is also a self-described essayist. He was writing long before he started Y Combinator, and his essays often discuss writing as a thing unto itself. For example, his "Nerds" essay mentions that one of his goals for life in high school was to write well^2. Given that Graham is deeply interested in writing, and that the article doesn't explicitly confine itself to business writing, I think it's quite a stretch to assume that this essay is only talking about business writing. > Again, why the fuck would you assume Paul Graham is talking about James Joyce? This is a strawman (and also unnecessarily combative). -- [^1]: Well, see my top-level comment. But that's not really relevant to this comment. [^2]: "There was something else I wanted more: to be smart. Not simply to do well in school, though that counted for something, but to design beautiful rockets, or to write well, or to understand how to program computers. In general, to make great things." http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
- dang 6y ago
  > Again, why the fuck would you Please drop swipes like that from your arguments here, and generally please don't escalate hostility even when someone is wrong or you feel they are. Your comment would be fine without that last sentence. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: as for "Try to not be autistic for a second" - we ban accounts that do that. Please review the guidelines and take the intended spirit of the site more to heart, so we won't have to ban you.
lelanthran 6y ago
> And the essay presents its position as a general statement void of all context. Are you sure? From the blog (first sentence): > I try to write using ordinary words and simple sentences. Since the "I" in this case refers to someone who does not write poetry, speculative fiction, drama, tragedies, comedies ... and only ever writes for a technical audience, the context is clear: technical[1] audience not seeking poetry, fiction, drama, etc... Further one he says: > So you can't assume that writing about a difficult topic means you can safely use difficult words. Once again, that indicates to me he is talking about writing something technical[2], not prose or poetry. [1][2] "Technical" is not limited to IT and engineering; it's about anything that involves technique. Describing dance moves is "technical", as is writing a recipe (which is very similar in technique to writing a tiny program) or anything involving writing down music (Should you use 7/4 for the first verse, or alternate between 3/4 and 4/4? Which will be clearer to the flautist?)
- davidivadavid 6y ago
  I don't think Paul Graham writes for a "technical" audience only and am fairly certain he would dispute that claim. I'm also fairly certain that the type of writing he's talking about is mostly non-fiction prose, such as the essays he writes himself (even though he doesn't state that explicitly). Would you consider those "technical" writing?
- yt-sdb 6y ago
  The title of the essay is "Write Simply." Furthermore, the second sentence is more general than the first: > That kind of writing is easier to read, and the easier something is to read, the more deeply readers will engage with it. That is a general claim. I agree that it is often good advice, but there are caveats which Graham does not provide.
- zhte415 6y ago
  What is an 'ordinary' word? The first sentence threw me for this precise term, which was internally inconsistent with later in the article talking about second or third+ English language users, or even, not mentioned in the article, first language speakers with differing backgrounds. A very odd term to use. I'd open simply with "Think of your audience, think of your goal" and on thinking of audience expand to "Think of your audience, of which there may be some you've not thought of, or it might just be yourself, and think of your goal, if any."

runawaybottle 6y ago

Well okay, who is he addressing? That’s pretty much the only question I had reading it. Surely it isn’t the modern blogger or clickbait ‘journalists’, since they know what they are doing and we know what they are doing. It’s possible he simply said nothing.

geofft 6y ago
It reads very much like it's a response to this not-even-particularly-upvoted comment on his last essay, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26377185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26377185 "Why does he write like an SAT reading comprehension passage" Kind of incredible.
serverholic 6y ago
Try to not be autistic for a second. Paul Graham is in the tech scene. PERHAPS he's talking about things like coding tutorials, technical blogs, press releases, documentaiton, etc. I'd argue that simple writing is great in that domain.
- runawaybottle 6y ago
  Lol you think he’s critiquing press releases and documentation? Let’s be friends, you’re particularly my kind of dumb.
  - khimaros 6y ago
    "Be kind. Don't be snarky." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - dang 6y ago
    You've also crossed into bannable territory. That's not cool, regardless of how bad another comment is. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here (all of them, please—you broke several).
- 6y ago