3 ms·
Sure, but most of the content they are writing is neither entertaining or engaging, its long and wandering and I couldn't care less. No novel is allowed to lol
by hobs 5y ago
Sure, but most of the content they are writing is neither entertaining or engaging, its long and wandering and I couldn't care less.
No novel is allowed to lollygag around the point its trying to achieve in the way these articles flagrantly waste your time.
It's like someone misunderstood that the act of moving your eyes along the page is not interesting in and of itself.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago>No novel is allowed to lollygag around the point its trying to achieve in the way these articles flagrantly waste your time. With barely less than a second's though: Watership Down, a hugely popular novel in the 1970s, spends untold amounts of text/paper immersed in detailed descriptions of the flora that the characters are moving through or eating. Why not just say "I don't enjoy this style of writing", rather than trying to come up with some supposedly objective metrics for how other people should write?
- dredmorbius 5y agoThere is lollygagging in irrelevancies, and luxuriating in details. The distinction can be quite arbitrary, but it usually does stand out. Herman Melville and Neal Stephenson also come to mind. In nonfiction, John McFee.