Re: [bookclub] Prose style in 'Losing Your Grip'

[Nick Montfort <nickmontfort@my-deja.com>]

In article <87a6os$1uj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
  J.D. Berry <jdberry@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <87a244$u21$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>   Nick Montfort <nickmontfort@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'll ask if there is
> > anyone else who sees writing issues like these as real and
> > important, and deserving of greatly heightened attention?

> Also a consideration is the "what is 'good' art" issue?
> Hemingway?  Crude?  Bold?
> Proust?  Run-on or stream of consciousness?
> Van Gogh?  Hey, you left the brush strokes on!
> Rap music?  Noise?  Powerful?
> eecummings can't find a turabian manual
> [...]
> Anyway, I'm certainly not trying to solve that question...

First of all, no one complains about discussing why some puzzles work
better than others, and are more interesting and engaging. Why not
focus discussion on writing, too?

Second, I'm not suggesting that we try to develop a complete aesthetic
on r.a.i-f. In more of a workshop mode, discussion can help IF authors
to achieve their goals, even without completely tacking the question of
what good art is.

Writing that provokes, that comes across with power and brings to life
the simulated world I've tried to create - that's what I think of as
good, and what I want to accomplish. I think many IF authors have a
close enough idea of good writing that discussion is worthwhile.

> With the exception of the professional and/or truly gifted writers
> here, how much better are the rest of us going to get with criticism
> if this is but a hobby?

Wallace Stevens was an insurance salesman and poetry hobbyist. William
Carlos Williams was a pediatrician and poetry hobbyist. Linus Torvalds
writes operating system kernels for a hobby. If one is a serious enough
hobbyist who puts effort into creating a work of IF -- learning Inform,
going through the complicated process of setting and puzzle design,
testing the work thoroughly, reading newsgroups to improve one's level
of craft, etc. -- than *I* think that author should care about how
well-written the work is, and be willing to participate in discussion
that is focused on writing.

> I'd hate to think an otherwise fine author (produces "fun" games)
> would shy away from creating a game because people were going to
> nitpick his style (which is highly subjective in the first place.)

If a critique like this has such an effect, then, no, r.a.i-f / r.g.i-f
isn't an appropriate place for the discussion. The outcome should be
improved IF, not fear of nitpicking. (Just to nitpick, by the way, I
consider my earlier post to be a "detailed and constructive critique"
rather than an example of "nitpicking.") I certainly hope the
discussion has a place somewhere, though. I hoped the Book Club would
be, among other things, one such place.

-Nick M.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.