4 ms·

Both yes and no are one syllable. Your drawn out drama-incucing style of writing left a huge hanger that makes it unpleasurable.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
pinkmuffinere 2y ago
I suspect that’s intentional. Not all writing aims to be pleasurable, and I suspect the parent comment illustrates the gut-wrenching pain of war really well. What do I as a reader want the answer to be? That it was worth the death of his friends? That he’d rather they never tried? No answer is happy, and I think that’s somewhat the point. Even more touching if it’s a true story, life is sometimes so poetic it hurts.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > What do I as a reader want the answer to be? Whatever he feels. Would he do it again?
  - pinkmuffinere 2y ago
    Some writing conveys beliefs, and other writing makes readers think about their own beliefs. Both are valid, and the resulting effect may not even follow the writer’s intention. I feel this writing mostly makes me interrogate my own beliefs.
- byteknight 2y ago
  Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. Plain and simple. It draws intrigue, sometimes undue. This is one of them. That doesn't make it bad or wrong to do. As a side note, generally, its not a good idea to take make stances defending someone acting in self-interest with the guise of "art".
  - pinkmuffinere 2y ago
    > Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. I strongly disagree with this. There is a long tradition of leaving obvious questions unanswered, to force a reader to really think. A short list of some that have affected my life: - “Mending Wall” by Robert Frost (it’s unclear whether “good fences make good neighbors” is supposed to be the true belief of the author, or the inaccurate belief of a character) - the book of Job in the Old Testament (it’s ambiguous whether Job ever sins and turns his back on God, despite that very question initiating the conflict) - “Jesus Christ Superstar” (doesn’t actually take a stance on whether the character of Jesus in the musical was good or not, leaving the viewer to think about it for themselves) I know there are many others, because we explicitly studied this technique in class. It’s like the Socratic method for writing. > “art” My understanding of art as a field is that it largely attempts to remove any restrictions over what can or can’t be art. I think the scare quotes is contrary to that. Idk, I tend to believe most experts in their fields, including artists.
    - byteknight 2y ago
      this is not one of those scenarios. The answer is clearly not obvious.
boothby 2y ago
I see "gripping his handout" as significantly more vivid than the uttered response -- which OP confirms to have eluded their memory. That's the story: the teller's reaction to the question was more visceral than verbal. Sometimes the truth is inherently dramatic. I know that when I've responded in that way -- clenching and mumbling a monosyllable -- the clench is honest, the syllable may be effectively meaningless.
- byteknight 2y ago
  And leaves no meaningful result. Without knowing why he gripped the paper it is purely left for interpretation and does not guide to a singular understanding.
  - boothby 2y ago
    The emotional response is meaningful. A desire for simple truths is helpful in some areas of life. Handling ambiguity and complexity is helpful in others. Applying an engineering mindset to emotion is a sure route to madness. Perhaps you could look at the story as a koan, and it might aggravate you less.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

pinkmuffinere 2y ago

I suspect that’s intentional. Not all writing aims to be pleasurable, and I suspect the parent comment illustrates the gut-wrenching pain of war really well. What do I as a reader want the answer to be? That it was worth the death of his friends? That he’d rather they never tried? No answer is happy, and I think that’s somewhat the point. Even more touching if it’s a true story, life is sometimes so poetic it hurts.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> What do I as a reader want the answer to be? Whatever he feels. Would he do it again?
- pinkmuffinere 2y ago
  Some writing conveys beliefs, and other writing makes readers think about their own beliefs. Both are valid, and the resulting effect may not even follow the writer’s intention. I feel this writing mostly makes me interrogate my own beliefs.
byteknight 2y ago
Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. Plain and simple. It draws intrigue, sometimes undue. This is one of them. That doesn't make it bad or wrong to do. As a side note, generally, its not a good idea to take make stances defending someone acting in self-interest with the guise of "art".
- pinkmuffinere 2y ago
  > Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. I strongly disagree with this. There is a long tradition of leaving obvious questions unanswered, to force a reader to really think. A short list of some that have affected my life: - “Mending Wall” by Robert Frost (it’s unclear whether “good fences make good neighbors” is supposed to be the true belief of the author, or the inaccurate belief of a character) - the book of Job in the Old Testament (it’s ambiguous whether Job ever sins and turns his back on God, despite that very question initiating the conflict) - “Jesus Christ Superstar” (doesn’t actually take a stance on whether the character of Jesus in the musical was good or not, leaving the viewer to think about it for themselves) I know there are many others, because we explicitly studied this technique in class. It’s like the Socratic method for writing. > “art” My understanding of art as a field is that it largely attempts to remove any restrictions over what can or can’t be art. I think the scare quotes is contrary to that. Idk, I tend to believe most experts in their fields, including artists.
  - byteknight 2y ago
    this is not one of those scenarios. The answer is clearly not obvious.

boothby 2y ago

I see "gripping his handout" as significantly more vivid than the uttered response -- which OP confirms to have eluded their memory. That's the story: the teller's reaction to the question was more visceral than verbal. Sometimes the truth is inherently dramatic. I know that when I've responded in that way -- clenching and mumbling a monosyllable -- the clench is honest, the syllable may be effectively meaningless.

byteknight 2y ago
And leaves no meaningful result. Without knowing why he gripped the paper it is purely left for interpretation and does not guide to a singular understanding.
- boothby 2y ago
  The emotional response is meaningful. A desire for simple truths is helpful in some areas of life. Handling ambiguity and complexity is helpful in others. Applying an engineering mindset to emotion is a sure route to madness. Perhaps you could look at the story as a koan, and it might aggravate you less.