What makes a "good writer?"

Parent Cafe
21

<p>FountainSiren writes with too much esoteric goobledegook, which, while impressive to the uninitiated hayseed, leaves much to be desired by those who prize clarity. There does seem to be a good deal of substance in it, to be fair, so at least that works in her favor.</p>

<p>Until she realizes this she will not even be considered a good writer, let alone a great one. But, then, perhaps writing is not her calling. And so, in her ivory tower she may remain, I am afraid, with the few others who can (or pretend to) appreciate her style. </p>

<p>Pity, really, as it appears she has much to say. If only she could find a way…well she is young…perhaps with time…</p>

22

<p>Emily (FountainSiren) writes with great depth and clarity when she’s not playing around with us on CC, leanid. Between The New Criterion and The Dartmouth Review she’s put together a pretty impressive portfolio of essays for a first-semester sophomore. You will most assuredly be reading/hearing/seeing her in major media outlets in the near future. I’m not “outing” her, btw, her published work and by-line have been posted here before, with her consent. Here’s a couple of recent ones:
<a href=“http://www.dartreview.com/archives/2006/10/13/lolita_at_50_shes_finally_legal.php[/url]”>http://www.dartreview.com/archives/2006/10/13/lolita_at_50_shes_finally_legal.php&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“http://www.dartreview.com/archives/2006/10/01/the_alumni_constitution_in_brief.php[/url]”>http://www.dartreview.com/archives/2006/10/01/the_alumni_constitution_in_brief.php&lt;/a&gt;
You can find the others using DR’s search engine.</p>

23

<p>I don’t doubt that, Driver. Much as I give our FS a hard time about her CC word salad, I actually have read some of her articles and find them quite spectacular.</p>

24

<p>Leanid,</p>

<p>Your concern, if not your condescension, is appreciated. </p>

<p>As it stands, I will probably continue to listen to the professional and collegiate editors who solicit my work (google my name and you will see no small supply of published writing–page after page, in fact [the hayseeds even pay me …what a country!]). </p>

<p>But to be fair, if you would like to pass along your name I would be happy to read some of your published writing (refrigerator manuals don’t count, dear). Because, fwiw, your writing here on cc is, if anything, indistinguishable from any other (hey, ya got no voice–take that as you wish) only going into high dudgeon when gay rights and <em>spelling</em> are the issue of concern (I mention this only because it is there, and no where else, that you actually begin to have a distinct and recognizable voice…a fine, if non-melodious, tremolo in your writing).</p>

<p>It’s really none of my business (but that doesn’t seem to stop anybody else around here–critiquing other’s sex lives…and the swirl of the mystical pen), but I’d stick to your well worn and salted routine as the spelling Nazi <strong>heel click-salute</strong> (while lightening up a bit on that whole gay thing, it’s kind of yucky to be honest). </p>

<p>To paraphrase the bard (never one for clarity)…A Nincompoop by any other name still smells like poop. But then, that was a simpler, if more pungent, time.</p>

<p>[edit: I would have preferred to send this to you in a pm, but you have it turned off, thus, here we are]</p>

<p>Am,</p>

<p>don’t go soft on me…</p>

25

<p>Never, FS, never. If not for me, you’d grow all soft and pudgy from praise. :p</p>

26

<p>I think there are many types of great writers, because there are many different tastes in writing/reading. Some people enjoy flowery language with unusual phrases and hidden meanings that only those with a vast literary background and a smattering of foreign language can truly understand. Others prefer clear, down-to-earth writing that is simply written and easy to understand. (Although even that kind of writing can have hidden meanings.) Others appreciate something in-between. One is not necessarily better or worse than another. Different writers can reach different audiences.</p>

<p>Great writing, as others have said, moves the reader. It brings out thoughts, feelings, and dreams (or perhaps nightmares, if you like Stephen King) within us and makes us see things in new ways. I would tend to agree that competency in writing can certainly be taught, but that special spark of creativity that makes great writing probably cannot.</p>

27

<p>Great writers have something to say and the ability to make a connection with others.</p>

28

<p>Oh, come on. We’re all just jealous. I’d love to be able to think of phrases like “grim-reader” and “scholastic mouse in your pocket” and all of the other extremely clever phrases FS comes up with. Who wouldn’t? They are terrifically fun to read! :p</p>

29

<p>FS,</p>

<p>I am not a “spelling Nazi” – never have been – bad GRAMMAR is what gets my goat. And, if my writing on this forum is “indistinquishable” from the others, I’d say I am in pretty good company (I admire many of the posters here on cc), especially in light of the fact that I have never written anything which I attempted to publish.</p>

<p>I do not write with a dazzling baroque and, furthermore, doubt that I could. But, that does worries me none as too much of that sort of effusiveness leaves the reader dizzy, and I, for one, would rather elicit a feeling of well-being by whatever I write – writer that I am not – than impress him with literary gymnastics. </p>

<p>My passions (if you will) are a little more inclusive than opposing gay marriage and good grammar. I have posted on cc about other interests such as the wonders of Italy and its culture; the nature of matter and the question of its infinite divisibility; the nature of god; the redeeming qualities of selfless service to others. Also, I think anybody will tell you that my treatise (wink) on bidets was one of my finer moments. And, because I practice what I preach about hygiene I think you will find me rather nincompoopless!</p>

<p>I do not speak with much conviction about politics, because, frankly, they bore me. And, I always feel that such discussions are execises in futility, with minds already made up and little to no “listening” taking place. Politics is also a grand arena for the endless display of what man does to himself – when not viewed with tears (which is not infrequent) it can be a great source of amusement. But, to actually waste one’s time immersed in it is beyond my comprehension.</p>

<p>I am so glad for you that you have found success in having your various writings published. I am also aware that at no other time in history has so much been published, the vast majority of which is a waste of time and effort.
It seems to me that many of those “professional and collegiate editors” are very busy indeed these days. Their judgement, if not their competence, is open to criticism, but what is more alarming is the judgement of the publishers, who allow much of that tripe to be put into print.</p>

30

<p>Many are called, but few are chosen.</p>

31

<p>I think bordering-on-genius writers write in completely new and innovative ways. And it is fun. Good writers don’t have to, though. It also depends enormously on what one is trying to write.</p>

<p>I’m a journalism major, and we are constantly being told to simplify. THere are a lot of words and conventions that make writing sound more advanced that, for the purposes of journalistic newspaper style, just add clutter. In Journalism 1, we were told to use about, not approximately, and use, not utilize, for example. In some ways it is a big challenge, to be able to symplify and cut down your writing, so that you are clearly and concisely telling the reader exactly what he/she wants to know, and nothing else. I’m impressed when I read a really well-written news-story, because that ability contrasts a lot with some traditional ideas about good writing.</p>

<p>That said, I love reading work with fabulous descriptors and metaphors and all that other fun stuff. I think of Gabriel Garcia-Marquez as a writer who uses a lot of language – that might be frowned on in a newsroom – but in his novels, it’s amazing. There are so many types of good writing, it’s hard to quantify exactly what it is.</p>

32

<p>I think good writing can be taught and practised, but great writing is a combination of talent and hard work, just like great music or art. I also agree with the notion that there is a lot of subjectivity involved in the definition of good writing.</p>

33

<p>“I also agree with the notion that there is a lot of subjectivity involved in the definition of good writing.”</p>

<p>Yes, well it is an art, after all.</p>

34

<p>There are different types of writing, varying by context. There are novels and literary criticism, op-eds, technical writing, etc. What may be considering good writing in one context won’t necessairily get the job done in another context.</p>

35

<p>In teaching my sons to write, the school has focused on grammar, spelling, and structure. I have provided guidance around content and style. The results remain generally pitiful, in my view. If my kids read more, they would likely write better, but it hasn’t happened yet and I am close to giving up hope. Why they don’t enjoy reading remains one of life’s mysteries. I have been addicted to books all my life.</p>

<p>In addition, good writers enjoy writing. My boys enjoy exercise. They don’t have to force themselves to go out and run for the health benefits. They simply love to run. For me, exercise is a chore. For them, writing is a chore. People who love to write will do endless revisions just for the personal pleasure of seeing how many different ways the same idea can be expressed. It’s hard to teach that inner joy.</p>

36

<p>“(refrigerator manuals don’t count, dear).”</p>

<p>FS - Now who is being condescending?</p>

<p>I did read your “More French Radicals - Who Knew?” in the DR and found that I agree with your keen take on deconstructionism (after all, civilization, in all its flawed splendor, has developed not by listening to those who would tear down but to those who would build up) . The article made several clear points and I feel that where such clarity appears it is the product of reasoning and logic, and is, interestingly, devoid of the window dressing that surrounds the superfluous.</p>

<p>I cannot deny that you have “a way with words” and that is nothing if not entertaining. For my part, what stands out and is best remembered are the times your pen actually “sits still” and makes it point.</p>

37

<p>

A key point. </p>

<p>

So true. </p>

<p>

A wonderfully turned phrase, imo (although I am staying away from the underlying argument).</p>

<p>Now, can overuse of cited work by others compromise the art of good writing? :rolleyes:</p>