4 ms·

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, fict

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.

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.