Gorecki wrote:No, he's utterly gobsmacked (as we all are) at the fact that you can write such massive posts whilst seemingly oblivious to the existance of paragraphs. You probably make some interesting and valid points but most of us can't even read further than the part I quoted above. The total lack of structure reduces everything you say into a babbling mess and the only people who will take what you say seriously are those with the extreme patience to grind their way through it all.
Once again, it's not what you say, it's the way that you say it.
For me, I find this frankly comical. Absolutely hilarious.
Because, you see, I cannot now simultaneously satisify all the "writing advice" I've been given on various forums.
On one forum, I was informed that it wasn't so much that I wrote too much but it was that I packed it all into only a few paragraphs which simply contained far too many sentences.
I listened to this advice and learnt to adopt the current "one or two sentences per paragraph" style in order to satisfy the "advice" I was given at that time.
I was told that this was the "correct" way to write because the additional white space and clearly compartmentalised thoughts lead to a freer flowing text...
...or so I was told.
Now I'm being advised the complete opposite.
In all, across numerous forums, I've been told to:
1. Separate out my points across multiple postings because I put too much into an individual posting.
2. Not to double post because I should, in fact, merge multiple postings into a single post, so that they aren't separated out.
3. Use more concise language to pack more into a few setnences.
4. Use plainer language and make my points more monosyllabically over a number of sentences for better comprehension.
5. That I should use more smaller paragraphs, containing a single compartmentalised thoght in sach to make what I write more readable.
6. That I should stop uising many smaller paragraphs and use longer ones because this is unreadable.
In short, for every piece of "advice" someone has given me on a forum, someone else has given me totally contradictory advice.
All have asserted their "advice" with clear and firm authority, as if they know what they are talking about.
I'm not oblivious to the fact that there are moany fucking gits for which nothing that "the new guy" does is ever good enough. It's just that I've been "advised" so much contradictory "advice" from all and sundry about my writing - some of which I did pay attention to at the beginning, eager not to offend anyone - that I've ceased to care.
Because, plainly put, I've done what I've been asked before and it didn't make a single blind fucking bit of difference.
Whatever I did, I was "advised" that I was wrong and should be doing the other.
After a while, I came to realise that the problem was only marginally mine. I do have a tendency to ramble and digress, producing long postings.
What can I say? I actually enjoy talking. When this became a crime or a terrible sin, I don't know. But, apparently, it's now become the 8th deadly sin and carries the death penalty. Plus, eternal damnation thrown in as well, no doubt.
Tet, the most contradictory thing for me is that, in some forums, I'm genuinely praised for my writing as being highly eloquent with a turn of phrase. But, in others, I'm a lesser animal than the spawn of Satan because I have: no paragraphs / too many paragraphs / sentences that are too long / sentences that aren't long enough. Dekete as applicable.
One forum I am praised for my writing and asked if I've considered writing novels. On another forum, I'm told that I lack even the most fundamental appreciation of basic literacy.
Logically, it's as simple as this: Someone is lying.
As such, I ignore all "advice" because none of the self-proclaimed literacy experts ever consistently agree on the same piece of "advice".
The only consistent pattern I've noticed is that all these complaints happen when I'm newly posting to a forum.
The conclusion I've drawn from that observation is that this is probably simply "bully the new guy to see how far you can push" syndrome.
Especially because, elsewhere, those who initially were critical of my writing then later praised me for an exceptionally good ability at writing about pretty much anything clearly and without bullshit.
The critic becoming the "fan": It was just too much hypocrisy to bear.
It seems Abraham Lincoln was right: You can't please all of the people all of the time. So I gave up even trying.
You hate me. I get it.
I'm too assertive for "the new guy" or I made a comment about Doctor Who which was an opinion that contradicts your fundamental worldview. Maybe I over-punctuate or wrongly punctuate or choose shorter or longer paragraphs than you personally would.
Whatever. You hate me and you're letting me know, so that I back down from assertiveness or become too shy to repeat my comments or this is simply brow beating your opinion over mine by criticising my writing until I meekly become too coy to fight my corner.
The problem is that this has just happened too often and the reasons stated are contradictory and never the same for any two critics.
Whatever is really bugging people - the blunt personality is a likely possibilty - it's not me who's being too shy and too coy, it's my critics who bizarrely seem to not criticise what they actually think is the problem but choose some random "technical issue" they've just made up to complain.
I initially accomodated such "advice" - I am blunt and will always fight my corner but I genuinely am not a confrontational person by nature and always try to seek neutral ground or accomodate a genuine concern - but it frankly became so ludicrous and contradictory after a while that I've been forced no real option in the matter but to ignore it. Though I try to remain fair and, therefore, I ignore all of it equally.
And understand that I was simply offered no choice in this matter: Accomodating one critic was displeasing another who thought I should adopt the polar opposite.
But, as I say, one pattern emerged:
1. The criticisms all appear when I'm "new guy" to the forum.
2. The criticisms all appear
after I've been in a heated debate on a topic.
3. The criticisms most often come from those who I was arguging the opposite to in that heated debate.
4. Once "new guy" shows that he's no-one's fool and won't be pushed around so easily, all criticism stops (and it even goes so far as to have found those critics praising my writing later on).
Conclusion:
You're testing me out. Seeing where my limits are. Pushing me to see how far I'll go. Baiting me to see how I react to being pushed.
I'm "the new guy" in the schoolyard and you're calling me "four eyes" to see if I'll jump and how high.
Now that I've posted once too often to simply be "passing through", I'm being assessed to see if I'm the new bully or the new victim.
But, to save time, the way it works with me is pretty simple. If you want to be the bully then you've picked the wrong guy in the playground, as I've slayed dragons and intellectual giants when on top form. But I do not seek confrontation, I merely won't tolerate it when it is sent my way. Treat me fairly and respectfully then you'll never hear a single bad word out of me ever.
But, to be clear, it's not the way you say it, it's what you're saying:
Everyone considers themselves the literary expert who knows how and where I'm going wrong but all such "advice" has been contradictory and wholly inconsistent: If I really were at fault then surely all self-proclaimed literary experts would be quoting the exact same fault.
But they don't - it's a new "problem" each and every time - and, therefore, I either end up like HAL in 2001 trying to follow irrational contradictory advice to the point of madness or I ignore all such "programming" because it's clearly flawed in some regard.
I've opted for the latter, as the retention of some semblence of sanity sounded the preferrable option.
i know, I know. I didn't phone through first to book an appointment. I didn't pull a ticket with a number on it from the ticket machine. The cheek of "the new guy" to make a "suggestion" on his first day. Kids today, they don't know they're born. Who let all this riff-raff into the room? That one's smoking a joint and that one's got spots! If I had my way...
..I'd have the lot of you shot.
But, as much as I enjoy Pink Floyd, maybe it's about time we changed the record. Let us not go through all that nonsense and just get to the crunch: Liek me or hate me. Decide now and if I'm "black balled" here then I'll leave without making a fuss.
Life's simply too short and already full of bullshit to let a trivial clash of personalities get in the way. I can happily overlook it. Can you?
p.s. Yes, to quote the Doctor, I'm the nightmare monsters have.
"Words ought to be a little wild - for they are assaults of thought on the unthinking."
- John Maynard Keynes
