----- Original Message -----
From: Dennis Horte <winddance@direct.ca>
To: TimeRunner <keiichi@i-manila.com.ph>; FFML <ffml@fanfic.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2000 6:27 AM
Subject: [FFML] Re: Gratuitous Self: Meta-Meta-What? pts. 13-14
As much as my final project of the semester needs to be completed, I
really
just had to respond to this.
Asimov's writing was 'sparse'. I have no problem being tagged with
the
same adjective used to describe the writing of the author of the
Foundation
books, one of my all-time favorite SF series.
It brought a smile to my face to see my own example brought up here and
expanded on. It's things like this that really make C&C worth writing.
Well, your comments were very insightful, which is why they were the first
thing that came to mind when I wrote this.
portraying lovemaking, or cancer, or autumn leaves. No propensity to
substitute long, Latinate words for short, brief, low-grade Anglo-Saxon
words.
Dear God, spare me. I once had to read a Dickens novel in Grade 12
English.
It was one of the most painful experiences of my life. Not only was the
subject matter of little interest to me, the story was written in such a
way that
the one aspect I might have enjoyed, character interaction, was completely
lost in a lintany of worthless descriptive narative.
I know. I'm still trying to read through it again, just to teach myself
patience. :)
I blame my insecurities about my writing on my education.
I blame a lot of things on my education. All of them bad.
This is all Plato's fault. ^^;
So why should I talk down to my readers? Just because my 'teachers'
want me to pander to the lowest possible denominator? No, thank you.
Why indeed? No one likes to be talked down to. While your examples are
chosen to make the suggestions of your proffesors look particularly
ludicrous,
And they worked, too. ^^;
more complex examples certainly apply. For some styles of writing though,
the "pandering to the lowest possible denominator" makes sense. For you,
it just bogs down the flow of the prose.
Precisely. If I feel that a particular portion of the text disrupts the
flow, then I finish up that part and move on the the sections that matter to
me.
Tell the Readers Where and When: This is related to reader
inference.
When I say Keiichi and Skuld are riding their motorcycle home while the
sky
turns from blue to orange and the cherry blossom petals fall, I assume
that
the readers know that they're on the road, that it's sunset, and that it's
spring. Unfortunately, some of my teachers seem to want me to expound on
it
in the following manner:
Keiichi and Skuld rode down the highway to the temple during a
spring
sunset.
I really have to wonder who your proffesors for creative writing were.
Did they do a lot of drugs in the 60's?
Probably. ^^; I admit, though, some of my professors were better than that.
These teachers had different faults, though (always late or absent for
class, too prone to digression).
In any event, Meta-Meta-What? has taken a turn from the exposition on GS
it
was touted to be in the beginning. Still, I find the commentaries
interesting
and sometimes enlightening and I look forward to future installment as
they
may appear.
Don't worry. The preceeding two sections are sort of a lead-in for the next
sections, which are specifically about GS.
I'm glad you enjoyed reading this, and I always look forward to your
commentary.
=====
w.o.m.
TimeRunner's Web Page:
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Towers/7482
=====
All persons, living and dead, are purely coincidental.
- Kurt Vonnegut