― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
― James Blount (James Blount), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:16 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:18 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:19 (twenty-one years ago) link
Not that I don't have that reaction now. (In fact, probably more so after hanging out with you folks for the last few months.) But one thing that I am more inclined to think about now is the idea of "obligation" to one's readership. Kogan discusses how writing in a hallway-style is more similar to actual readers' lives. On principle, I'd agree. But shit, I tried reading that "Disco-Tex" essay and had no fucking clue what Kogan was talking about. Even though I generally think criticism would we wise to admit more personal/anecdotal content and more conversational style, I worry that this can be taken to an extreme and thus rendered not useful. (I also allow for the possibility that I gave up too easily, wasn't willing to meet Kogan on his own terms, etc.)
― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:20 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:21 (twenty-one years ago) link
(since it's published on my website and all)
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:35 (twenty-one years ago) link
(jamie conway's Big Second-hand Theory of Theory is more interesting for the nine tenths it leaves out)
"a clear idea is a little idea"
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 16:43 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:14 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:15 (twenty-one years ago) link
So here is my argument against it: occasionally people who are bad (as in unconfident?) writers happen on a *good* new idea about something — or let's say the door through to a good new idea — which they then lose hold of, and they squish the life from it as they try and turn what they're saying into someone else's conception of good/clear writing (sort of the same as lots of rock bands get more ordinary the "better" they get at what they do). Intuitions w/o showing the working aren't intrinsically an anti-communicative idea (in fact I suspect "showing the working" generally needs difft kinds of expressive skills to "bold state the intuition", tho some are good at both, obv).
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:37 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:41 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jel -- (jel), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:47 (twenty-one years ago) link
Fucking hell, I live inside that paragraph.
― s woods (s woods), Friday, 23 May 2003 17:59 (twenty-one years ago) link
― dave q, Friday, 23 May 2003 18:06 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:11 (twenty-one years ago) link
besides, if it's a BAD idea unclearly expressed you can always misread it yrself, and enjoy the better idea yr actually projecting onto it!!
it's win-win!!
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:19 (twenty-one years ago) link
trans. = "osmotic alien tongue pressure")
(this shd really go on the kuhn thread)
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 18:30 (twenty-one years ago) link
― scott seward, Friday, 23 May 2003 18:32 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:30 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:42 (twenty-one years ago) link
(since I wasn't trying to dispel anything nor leave you w/a greater appreciation of criticism, YOUR criticism is empty and petty)
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:43 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:49 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:53 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 23 May 2003 20:54 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 21:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 23 May 2003 21:55 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 21:57 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 21:58 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Friday, 23 May 2003 22:14 (twenty-one years ago) link
not so for us mere finite lower beings, who wish to find out about stuff we know that we don't know, and are only too humbly aware that we may need to think about things we've never thought about before
does he just hang around with us to LAUGH at us? baffling are the ways of the arching gods to mortals
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 22:41 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:08 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:23 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:28 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:28 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:32 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:37 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:40 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:42 (twenty-one years ago) link
night oops (i'm on yr side on the war against boys thread btw)
― mark s (mark s), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Friday, 23 May 2003 23:47 (twenty-one years ago) link
― scott seward, Friday, 23 May 2003 23:57 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Saturday, 24 May 2003 05:54 (twenty-one years ago) link
um, i'm surprised you're arg against ''good'' writing bcz you have ranted abt bad writers in many other threads no?
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Saturday, 24 May 2003 08:49 (twenty-one years ago) link
From frank's essay: ''I've heard Marcus's prose attacked for being too dry. Compared to what, the Great Flood?''
Miccio didn't give any examples but this is why this thread has been so 'successful'. he didn't put a line where good criticism ends and academic crit begins and then where that ends and overacademic crit begins.
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Saturday, 24 May 2003 09:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
http://www.mtv.com/news/images/p/prodigy980507.gif
― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 24 May 2003 16:30 (twenty-one years ago) link
There's another group here (and I'm sure this doesn't exhaust things), of which I'm a member. Those who love the highly intellectual stuff and feel privileged to read the fantastic stuff here from Sinkah and Kogan and Nabisco and Jerry the Nipper and indeed Sterling - but who have not had the kind of education that means we necessarily have much info about Gramsci and the like in our heads. Kogan's Kuhn thread (on ILE) addresses this point explicitly, by explaining the ideas he wants to discuss. I find that I can generally grasp and follow the ideas reasonably well that people like those I just mentioned bring up, and can even make some attempt to address them at times, and that comes from seeing the ideas talked about, not from any previous knowledge of them (usually) or any knowledge of their originators (which I think is generally the least important bit).
I don't complain if someone cites Gramsci and I don't know what ideas they are referencing. Sometimes I might look something up, if I have the right books to hand. If I don't know, then (at least) that part of what you've said hasn't communicated with me, but there's no rule that says I'm the audience that has to be addressed. There are very many people who know far more than me here, and if you want good talk about Gramsci, you're obviously far better off talking to them than to me anyway. If you wanted to discuss some individual idea of Gramsci's, you've excluded some people who might have had something interesting to say, which seems less desirable all round (that's still far from being something to complain about, I should emphasise). Obviously intelligence doesn't perfectly correlate with knowledge of Gramsci.
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 24 May 2003 22:07 (twenty-one years ago) link