Live data from Hacker News

Write Simply

paulgraham.com

101–110 of 354 posts

Re: Write Simply

#101
post #86

Seems like this whole essay argues for clarity rather than simplicity — probably a better goal to aim for, too. He opposes simple to "fancy", but the opposite of simple isn't just "fancy", that's, well, a simplification. The opposite of "simple" writing may be: "rich" writing, "complex" writing, none of which are particularly problematic for Graham's goal provided that they're paired with enough clarity. That "simple…

> That "simple" writing lasts longer is disproved by many works of literature that have made their way to us through history, most of which, by the standard of this essay, could be considered complex. - Would that literature have been considered complex at the time it was written? How much of that perceived complexity is due to changing writing styles, education standards, etc? - Writing a book and writing a proposal…

> - Would that literature have been considered complex at the time it was written? How much of that perceived complexity is due to changing writing styles, education standards, etc?

Great question, can't say I'm able to answer it authoritatively. I would guess most works of literature, essays and speeches, even at the time they were produced, tend to be a fair bit more complex than what the average person is used to. Especially if they come from eras with lower literacy.

> - Writing a book and writing a proposal for the next project/product have entirely different definitions of "lasting". Context matters greatly.

It certainly does.

> This sentence is a good example of the kind of unnecessary complexity described by the essay.

It's a pretty simple sentence. What's tripping you up?

> You seem to be saying that "pure ideas are not possible without language", but that's not clear in your writing.

No. I'm saying that thinking "pure ideas devoid of any language" is a naive concept to anyone who's researched that topic a minimal amount. I wasn't flexing.

> If your intent it to exclude people who do not have a "modicum of experience in the philosophy of language", I have to ask: why?

That's not my intent at all. I'm providing context to my judgment. If that was my intent, I would have said: "If you don't have experience in the philosophy of language, don't write about this topic." Good thing is — I'm not a Nazi, so I tend not to do that kind of stuff.

Re: Write Simply

#103
post #61

This reminds me of an interview with Ernest Hemingway who mentions how he was influenced by great artists who were not writers, for instance, Cezanne, and (I think) Mozart, and others. When the interviewer pushes for more detail, he elaborates briefly on one example and then, tantalizingly, says the other examples are too obvious to explain. Always wondered about what he had in mind.

That interview with George Plimpton (I think) is great, but Hemingway does eventually go into a bit more detail when pressed. My interpretation is that he admires people who have a deep well of talent and knowledge and use that to push art and science in a new direction. Bill Watterson is an excellent classical painter and painted the Creation of Adam on his dorm room ceiling, and although Calvin and Hobbes doesn't look like Michelangelo, that painting and experience is "in" his comics. Dali, Cezanne, and Mozart could have easily mimed past art and music, but they saw beyond what was done before to push in new directions. For his part, Hemingway goes on to explain that (to him) writing is like an iceberg - 7/8 of it is experience and knowledge hidden from the reader - they only see the part sticking above the water.

Re: Write Simply

#104
post #97

I think this is PG's worst opinion. The man is undeniably intelligent, undeniably successful, and undeniably talented in business (and deserves huge credit for his contributions to the startup community). But I just thing he's deeply wrong here. His simple writing style (and those that have inherited/copied it) is a detriment to the community. It's the take of a (talented!) engineering mind. It's the same attitude th…

“The gap between most writing and pure ideas is not filled with poetry.” It’s a simple sentence, filled with ideas, humour even. And it comes across vividly for me as some prone to over elaboration. It always comes back to “as simple as possible” being a rule to live by, write code by.

Re: Write Simply

#105
post #97

I think this is PG's worst opinion. The man is undeniably intelligent, undeniably successful, and undeniably talented in business (and deserves huge credit for his contributions to the startup community). But I just thing he's deeply wrong here. His simple writing style (and those that have inherited/copied it) is a detriment to the community. It's the take of a (talented!) engineering mind. It's the same attitude th…

You ever try to read some social science papers? Or a consultant's slide deck? They're quagmires of "wtf does this even mean?"

In college (and then consulting), I was basically trained to write like I'm trying to convince someone I'm smart. It only got in the way once I left and started trying to communicate real ideas. Graham's advice is very good for mundane, day-to-day writing.

Re: Write Simply

#106
post #97

I think this is PG's worst opinion. The man is undeniably intelligent, undeniably successful, and undeniably talented in business (and deserves huge credit for his contributions to the startup community). But I just thing he's deeply wrong here. His simple writing style (and those that have inherited/copied it) is a detriment to the community. It's the take of a (talented!) engineering mind. It's the same attitude th…

I think it depends on where you are from and what you read growing up. I hail from a place that most outsiders would describe as unsophisticated, so naturally I rebelled in my youth by reading the most technically and prosaically dense language I could find. While I do still enjoy that type writing -- fiction books where I have to keep a dictionary, calculator, and pad of graph paper handy -- for professional communication pg and Feynman and all the advocates for simplicity are right.

There is no benefit to insiders or outsiders in a field to unnecessary use of jargon when simpler forms of expression are available. I greatly the prefer the no-nonsense, practical, straight talking, ignore the eggshells on the floor, git-r-done communication of a classical sci-fi engineer.

Re: Write Simply

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first review on that page[1] is a well argued counterpoint to Graham's essay. Getting your ideas understood is often only one part of what you're trying to achieve. If that really is your only goal, then I agree, the simpler the better. [1] https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/755379555?book_show_ac...

Having read a fair amount of Zizek and some Foucault I have to agree. Obfuscation can be just as useful as clarity.

Can you explain that? As an engineer I think generally anything that can be done more simply is nearly always better.

Re: Write Simply

#108

> the more deeply readers will engage with it You're already hypocritical - readers don't want to 'engage' with writing. People don't want to 'engage' at all. This is not an ordinary way of talking about things outside a pretty niche circle of VCs and marketing managers. Choose what to read and who to associate with as well as it will strongly influence your own language :)

I don't think I agree. I find 'engage' to be a fairly average verb in this context. More importantly, if that's the most hypocritical word you can find I think he's probably taking his own advice in this article.

Re: Write Simply

#109

> the more deeply readers will engage with it You're already hypocritical - readers don't want to 'engage' with writing. People don't want to 'engage' at all. This is not an ordinary way of talking about things outside a pretty niche circle of VCs and marketing managers. Choose what to read and who to associate with as well as it will strongly influence your own language :)

I think he’s talking about “engage” in the meaning of the word before it became a metric. Like to think about it, try it out in your own life, and discuss with others. Not view, like, share, comment, subscribe.

Re: Write Simply

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to not be autistic for a second. Paul Graham is in the tech scene. PERHAPS he's talking about things like coding tutorials, technical blogs, press releases, documentaiton, etc. I'd argue that simple writing is great in that domain.

Lol you think he’s critiquing press releases and documentation? Let’s be friends, you’re particularly my kind of dumb.

"Be kind. Don't be snarky."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN