Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Write Simply

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 354 posts

Re: Write Simply

#51

Post by runawaybottle »

serverholic wrote: post #45
aabhay wrote: post #20

I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: 1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It suits a technical literal mind to have less ambiguity and fewer flourishes. 2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article v…

Ah the old nerd trick of disregarding the context of a statement and applying it to a context where it clearly doesn't work. Do you really think Paul Graham is arguing against James Joyce style writing? Why would you think that?

Well okay, who is he addressing? That’s pretty much the only question I had reading it. Surely it isn’t the modern blogger or clickbait ‘journalists’, since they know what they are doing and we know what they are doing.

It’s possible he simply said nothing.

Re: Write Simply

#52

Post by leemcalilly »

runevault wrote: post #31
aabhay wrote: post #20

I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: 1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It suits a technical literal mind to have less ambiguity and fewer flourishes. 2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article v…

Agreed. Simple writing is perfectly valid in the right time and place. Rich, dense writing also has a place and value. The real answer is understand what type of writing serves your intent and write with deliberate intent towards that style for that impact.

Exactly.

Re: Write Simply

#53

Post by CivBase »

I'd rather "write usefully" than "write simply". If a "fancy" word is more useful for getting my thoughts across, then I will use it.

I think of "useful" language as a balance of precision, concision, and understandability. If I use terms that I don't expect my audience to understand, then my language not very "useful" even if it's the most precise and concise. Conversely, there's no reason for me to refrain from terms which I expect my audience to understand if using them makes my language more precise or concise.

Re: Write Simply

#54

Post by leemcalilly »

aabhay wrote: post #20

I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: 1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It suits a technical literal mind to have less ambiguity and fewer flourishes. 2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article v…

Ok, so what makes James Joyce a good writer?

Re: Write Simply

#55

Post by andrepd »

aabhay wrote: post #20

I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: 1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It suits a technical literal mind to have less ambiguity and fewer flourishes. 2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article v…

I think the point is that one should use a direct and clear style of writing where the objective is to convey a clear message. Examples include technical papers or journalism. Of course, literature is not included.

Re: Write Simply

#56

Post by borepop »

aabhay wrote: post #20

I think there are two sources of confirmation bias here: 1. People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing. Simple. Precise. Direct. It suits a technical literal mind to have less ambiguity and fewer flourishes. 2. On the web, where each individual piece of writing is not meant to last as long, the writing style has become more casual. Consider the difference between your average Medium article v…

>People on HN are already primed to appreciate this style of writing.

My perception is the reverse. Probably 60% of the articles linked on this site, day in and day out, are a thicket of impenetrable jargon. Endless blog posts that make no attempt to explain to the non-initiated what the various acronyms mean or why the concepts might matter for a person who is not deeply, deeply immersed in whatever technical field the author is writing about. I wish more people who write about coding/tech would realize that a larger audience is interested in what is going on, but that the communication of the concepts needs to be approachable. This is not just a shortcoming of this field, obviously, as people in all sorts of technical/specialized fields tend to write the same way, speaking only to the in-crowd.

Re: Write Simply

#57

Post by u678u »

I agree, but it seems success is highly correlated with ability to bullsh*t. From school essays all the way to CEOs. If you can bluff your way with long stories, spew buzzwords continual assertions, and talk louder than everyone you seem to win.

Re: Write Simply

#58

Post by blueyes »

PG is making some assumptions about who will read and benefit from this essay, and secondarily, who will read and benefit from the writings of his readers.

The assumptions aren't wrong, they're just not explicit. Because he is not stating them overtly, he's getting criticized for not writing like Nabokov or the grand vizier of an emperor.

Most of us will never be Nabokov, or the emperor's vizier. But we will write things for other people that they will need to understand and act on, and those are the people PG is writing for.

An equally good way to state his point would be to echo Feynman: if you can't write it simply, you probably don't understand it. So it's good advice for anyone beginning to write something new, and it's good advice for anyone new to writing.

Write simply first, if you can. And above all, write in a style that your audience can absorb.

Re: Write Simply

#60

Post by davidivadavid »

serverholic wrote: post #50
davidivadavid wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because James Joyce's style isn't "simple" by any stretch of the imagination, I would guess? And the essay presents its position as a general statement void of all context. What context are we supposed to assume here?

Everything has context. Paul Graham is a leader in the startup scene so more than likely he's talking about the types text relevant to startups. Blog posts, press releases, etc. Again, why the fuck would you assume Paul Graham is talking about James Joyce?

If "more than likely" he's talking about "the types of text relevant to startups" then surely that would be stated in an essay tooting the virtues of "simple." However, that doesn't appear to be the case.

It seems more like Paul Graham might be talking about the kind of writing he does himself. Like essays. However, even in such a case, his point is debatable. Which is what people are doing here — debating.

No one is assuming he's "talking about James Joyce." You must be confused. He's talking about a certain type of writing style and making contestable generalizations about it. People are illustrating the contestable points with examples.

Post reply on HN