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

I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

experimental-history.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 360 posts

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#301

Post by somat »

exmadscientist wrote: post #18

> Why this word, this scene, this character, and not some other one? The "why this not that , even when it looks like that would do just fine" style of differential analysis is an exquisitely powerful analytical tool. Asking this question is probably the single most powerful method I know of to generate deep thought, in absolutely any aspect of life. If you haven't tried it... go for it! (Sample question: why'd I cho…

I am always hit hard by the paradox of choice, it is very hard for me to just rank something, But it is easy to compare two items. Considering the metaphysics of this a little too hard I put together this silly little web toy to explorer my ideas on ranking things. https://compare.outband.net/compare/app/compare.html

It still sort of sucks and you can tell I am not a web dev, but it was interesting to think about.

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#303

Post by bambax »

mlsu wrote: post #27

Really loved this essay, loved the irreverent style. I had a similar literary journey as this guy. I think I would take it a step further though. It's not just that great literature has details and motifs that line up perfectly, it's not just that it took great effort to produce, or has some musicality or rhythm that is beautiful to take in experientially. It's that the thing that is communicated is truthful. Great f…

Yes. I really liked and enjoyed reading this post, but was a bit frustrated by the focus on "thickness". Great art is not great just because it has many layers that take some time and effort to discover, like great cooking doesn't need a large number of different ingredients.

Great art, as you say, has something true, profound, and original to tell us about the human experience, and it touches us deeply in a way that not-so-great art doesn't. It "stops you in your tracks" as other comments here mention. It hits you on the head and makes you a different person, at least a little.

And, there's a magic component to it too. Great art is greater, I think, if you can't guess how it could possibly have been made by a mere mortal. That's where trade comes in. Great art is made by great artisans with a touch of genius, but genius alone isn't enough.

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#304

Post by Animats »

bluGill wrote: post #97
magneticnorth wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I agree completely with the Shakespeare point. I was lucky enough to have a close friend (also a teenager!) who really got Shakespeare. She would explain to me what was actually going on, and read it with the correct emphasis so you could mostly actually follow it. She is 100% of the reason that I was ever able to appreciate Shakespeare. You would hope that most teachers could do this, but in my experience it wa…

There is no correct way to read Shakespeare. There are many wrong ways, but don't let your friend's interpretation cloud you from the others. It is really magic when you see some other interpretation and understand both are right despite not being compatible.

"Brush Up Your Shakespeare" [1]

But then, Shakespeare was popular entertainment. It's only difficult today because the language is now archaic. The material in itself is neither difficult nor long.

Dickens was both paid by the word and serialized in newspapers, which is why his books run so long. Long, but not difficult.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8Zzl_HH4XQ

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#305

Post by eszed »

fluoridation wrote: post #78
krige wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yeah. Look no further than the "brevity is the soul of wit" quote. It's taken at literal value when, in context, you know it's a joke, a potshot at the expense of the character saying it, who's anything but brief in speech.

It sounds like it's still meant in earnest, then. That it's a self-deprecating joke doesn't detract from the sentiment.

It's totally in earnest, and it's funny because Polonius isn't being self-deprecating: he wholeheartedly believes in brevity, when he isn't being it. At all.

But, Shakespeare being Shakespeare, he's not being entirely poked fun at. He's saying goodbye to his son, who's headed off into adulthood, and his over-long list of life-advice is like his last chance to to be a loving father. It's a "yeah, dad" moment, but Polonius is ever so slightly desperate to impart all the lessons that maybe he never quite got around to teaching quite as well as he wishes he had, and he's just ever so slightly desperate, and totally not ready to say goodbye, and it's... Really, really relatable.

Though maybe not to high school students, I guess. I think it's still worthwhile for them to try.

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#306

Post by eszed »

e12e wrote: post #266
jrmg wrote: post #4

I’ve long held the opinion that humans ‘over’-value complexity . It’s why we can spend so much time tasting, analyzing, and enjoying fancy coffee or whisky - despite the fact that almost everyone is repulsed by them the first time they try them. Literature might be the same? To be clear, I enjoy all three!

Hemingway might have a few words to say about that. Just a few, mind you. Not many.

Lol. I had the same thought: "but, but... Hemingway!"

Of course, his magic lies in how much thickness he creates with such terse prose.

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#307

Post by Agentlien »

exmadscientist wrote: post #18

> Why this word, this scene, this character, and not some other one? The "why this not that , even when it looks like that would do just fine" style of differential analysis is an exquisitely powerful analytical tool. Asking this question is probably the single most powerful method I know of to generate deep thought, in absolutely any aspect of life. If you haven't tried it... go for it! (Sample question: why'd I cho…

I have had similar thoughts about "x of the week/month/year". But every now and then there's a dirge or deluge of good things and years aren't even comparable because the fourth best thing one year might have been the number one in any other year of the decade.

I think a good example for me personally is 2019 in music. And I assume most people reading this list will shake their head at my (in their view) poor taste.

1. Rammstein released their untitled album which to me remains the best they've ever made.

2. Slipknot released "We are not your kind" which I played on repeat for so long. Nero Forte remained my first or second most listened to song for three years in a row.

3. Lars Winnerbäck also released Eldtuppen, causing the one and only time someone else than AC/DC became my most listened to artist for a year

4. While I didn't like the 2019 Korn album "The Nothing", it made me realize I'd missed their 2016 release "The Serenity of Suffering", which remains one of my favorite albums of the last decade.

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#308

Post by Zee2 »

criddell wrote: post #262
Avicebron wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I would necessarily agree with "strange torture" more like "sore muscles from exercising mental muscles". Yes I remember hating The Great Gatsby when I was 14 and having to read it critically in school, I sure didn't have a lot context, but I remember having to do it, and I can look back after years of secondary and post secondary schooling and appreciate the exercise. I think we should be much denser an…

Gatsby is one of those books I hated in high school. A few years ago I read it again and confirmed it’s a terrible book filled with shallow characters living boring lives doing nothing of interest to me. My opinion of 1984 also dropped when I reread it. Catcher in the Rye, Brave New World, Canticle for Leibowitz, The Chrysalids, and Lost Horizon are all books I liked more when I reread them as an adult.

I’m certain the vapidity of the characters in Gatsby is entirely the point.

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#309

Post by Agentlien »

bambax wrote: post #303
mlsu wrote: post #27

Really loved this essay, loved the irreverent style. I had a similar literary journey as this guy. I think I would take it a step further though. It's not just that great literature has details and motifs that line up perfectly, it's not just that it took great effort to produce, or has some musicality or rhythm that is beautiful to take in experientially. It's that the thing that is communicated is truthful. Great f…

Yes. I really liked and enjoyed reading this post, but was a bit frustrated by the focus on "thickness". Great art is not great just because it has many layers that take some time and effort to discover, like great cooking doesn't need a large number of different ingredients. Great art, as you say, has something true, profound, and original to tell us about the human experience, and it touches us deeply in a way that…

I am actually often a bit annoyed at discussions of depth in discussions of art - especially from art snobs talking about whether or not something is "true art".

I think what depth does do is help something stand not the test of time but deep continuous analysis. It really heightens the experience when you're a fan and can dive deeply into something for years and still discover subtleties you somehow missed that elevate it even further.

But if something catches your attention immediately granting you a sense of wonder and appreciation which lingers... Well, that is valuable art. Perhaps that's another kind of mastery, managing to convey your ideas so effectively that it doesn't need deeper analysis to digest?

Re: I like 'em thick: an apology to my English teachers

#310

Post by cmdoptesc »

the_af wrote: post #271
jameshart wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally. The right way to approach an art gallery is definitely just to walk round until something hits you. Most astonishing time that happened to me was a wall-sized Rothko that just floored me, in a way I never would have expected a slab of color to. Dali’s La Gare de Perpignan stopped me in my tracks too. Rarely been as stunned by more famous works as when I got blindsided by something that leapt out and said ‘lo…

I wish I could do this. In general, in museums I always feel compelled to go through all the exhibits my time allows, when clearly some of them capture my attention and others are just filler. But I would feel guilty "wasting" my time with the piece that caught my attention.

This is where a membership to the local museum comes in handy. Then there's no pressure to see all the exhibits because you could always come back next week.
Post reply on HN