3 ms·

I think this style of writing can work - but it works best if the story is something other than two people just talking about 'how do you think this thing works

by Closi 5y ago

I think this style of writing can work - but it works best if the story is something other than two people just talking about 'how do you think this thing works?'. Like if you can pick any story, why make it about two people in a study hall, studying and directly asking each other the question? It could be a story about some rogue hackers, international spies, or the characters could be ducks rather than humans, or you could tell it from the perspective of a sentient computer or application... So if you are going to make it into a fictional story, you might as well make it a fun fictional story (either by the premise or by a character!).

reilly3000 5y ago
I think that the process of discovery is engaging, and far more relatable than a man page. Maybe the prose went a little further than it needed to, or as you suggest not far enough. I’m just saying that the mechanism of storytelling exploits some attributes of our evolutionary biology that make learning a concept more relatable and memorable.
- Closi 5y ago
  I agree with the process of discovery - but would personally prefer that to be communicated in the first person (which I personally find clearer and more enjoyable to read). As in telling the true story which is probably “I wondered how ports work, then I did this, then I wrote this script, then it had an unexpected result”, which still reads as discovery to an audience (but is the authentic and true story). IMO Readers will find a true story interesting if told with authenticity and passion. For fiction, you generally need ‘an ununsual thing’ in the story that happens that breaks it away from normality. I think this treads the awkward space inbetween - it’s made up (so no authenticity) but that authenticity isn’t replaced by something ‘unusual’ that drives the story forward. > Maybe the prose went a little further than it needed to, or as you suggest not far enough. I think this is right - although I don’t think there is a happy medium between those points. I think you can go in either direction (further or less), but straddling the middle is the tough bit.

by Closi 5y ago

reilly3000 5y ago

I think that the process of discovery is engaging, and far more relatable than a man page. Maybe the prose went a little further than it needed to, or as you suggest not far enough. I’m just saying that the mechanism of storytelling exploits some attributes of our evolutionary biology that make learning a concept more relatable and memorable.

Closi 5y ago
I agree with the process of discovery - but would personally prefer that to be communicated in the first person (which I personally find clearer and more enjoyable to read). As in telling the true story which is probably “I wondered how ports work, then I did this, then I wrote this script, then it had an unexpected result”, which still reads as discovery to an audience (but is the authentic and true story). IMO Readers will find a true story interesting if told with authenticity and passion. For fiction, you generally need ‘an ununsual thing’ in the story that happens that breaks it away from normality. I think this treads the awkward space inbetween - it’s made up (so no authenticity) but that authenticity isn’t replaced by something ‘unusual’ that drives the story forward. > Maybe the prose went a little further than it needed to, or as you suggest not far enough. I think this is right - although I don’t think there is a happy medium between those points. I think you can go in either direction (further or less), but straddling the middle is the tough bit.