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

Good Writing

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 345 posts

Re: Good Writing

#311

Post by gist »

nchmy wrote: post #295
gist wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Writing wise I have a great deal of respect for you (and other top commenters) because you don't have people edit and review what you say you just write it (and take lumps or accolaydes). Something I've mentioned before is I can't get over the fact that Paul has mulitiple people review his essays prior to publishing (which others have defended when I've made the same comment before). I (as most people do) write clien…

I see nothing wrong at all with asking people for feedback on an essay that will be broadly published and read. That just seems prudent. What is more concerning is that I don't think many people who have read widely would consider Paul Graham to be a good writer, and yet people who care about him let him publish this article... He's definitely not a bad writer, and he generally communicates good ideas clearly, which…

> I see nothing wrong at all with asking people for feedback on an essay that will be broadly published and read.

Is he really 'broadly published and read'? Most people outside of tech have no clue (and no interest) in what PG says.

Yes there is 'nothing wrong' except if you put yourself out there as having good unique thoughts why does it not show that you are lacking confidence to have others (again in this situation maybe in another I'd agree) always review what you are posting on your personal site or blog?

And very importantly he doesn't allow comments (on his blog) the only comments are on HN which he doesn't link to. It's unknown if he even reads the HN comments anymore. Or (last interaction over a year ago) comment on HN anymore (to defend his thoughts or position).

Many reasons for this of course but if you can't handle criticism and think so little of what people on HN says why are you publishing at all? That's your biggest audience isn't it?

(Side note YES HN is can be a brutal crowd for sure. Would be interesting if he ever publishes the changes he makes in the essays or what the people reviewing the essay have to say).

Re: Good Writing

#312

Post by mikewarot »

>When I'm working on an essay, I spend far more time reading than writing. I'll reread some parts 50 or 100 times, replaying the thoughts in them and asking myself, like someone sanding a piece of wood, does anything catch? Does anything feel wrong? And the easier the essay is to read, the easier it is to notice if something catches.

This seems to me analogous to the process I've discovered with photography... the more you throw away, the better the remaining photographs.

Clearly, I'll need to adjust my habits. I usually re-read what I wrote a few times, then later a few times should said comments actually attract attention.

This seems to me analogous to the process I've discovered with photography... the more you throw away, the better the remaining photographs.

Re: Good Writing

#313

Post by lkbm »

basket_horse wrote: post #196

> It's hard to be right without sounding right. This doesn't seem true in the age of LLMs, which are notorious for being confidently incorrect. In fact, this whole article seems out of touch with the realities of where AI is going. In my opinion, good writing is dead. Or rather, good writing is commoditized. Good ideas are still very much alive, but if you have an idea and bad prose, iterating with an LLM will have a…

> > It's hard to be right without sounding right.

> This doesn't seem true in the age of LLMs, which are notorious for being confidently incorrect.

You're denying the antecedent.

PG: Right => Sounds right

Your comment: (Sounds right => Right) is false.

These are not in conflict.

Re: Good Writing

#314

Post by gist »

NAHWheatCracker wrote: post #193
nssnsjsjsjs wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is wrong with having someone edit and review? It is just feedback. If the writing itself is an assignment editing is normal. If the writing is part of another process maybe not. For fly.io I can see the appeal of unedited content as it can be rougher (as in breaks style guides and whatnot) and I like that roughness in blogs. E.g. you might get a British idiom come through or a more conversational style.

Having an editor isn't wrong, but it's an luxury for something as small as a Hacker News comment or an email. Paul having an editor isn't a luxury. His essays are edited because it's important for his business. He can easily justify a paying someone. More to the point, we're contrasting Paul's essays to people who don't have the luxury. Paul's essays could be seen as less genuine, even if they seem wiser.

> His essays are edited because it's important for his business. He can easily justify a paying someone.

First he is not paying someone to edit these (any person I've seen appears to be unpaid and affiliated with HN in some way). Second he's not (as far as I can tell) angling these posts for business purposes (for example if the head of some corporation were doing that that would make sense).

Re: Good Writing

#315

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

ctxc wrote: post #305
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dave Barry writes like that, all the time (a lot less so, these days). He uses it for comedic twists, and usually integrated with other tricks. His writing is known for a very smooth cadence. You reach these “lumps” in the narrative, and can almost miss them, which, for me, multiplies their impact. I’ve always considered him one of the best writers that I’ve read. He probably gets less credit than he deserves (althou…

Any suggestions to wade into his work?

Here's his Website: https://www.davebarry.com

Has a delightful 90's flavor.

He was a columnist for the Miami Herald, for many years, and has written a number of books. The site will let you read a number of his columns. His books read about the same, but longer.

Absolute riot.

Re: Good Writing

#316

Post by monkeyelite »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #285
monkeyelite wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is that "making up concerns before even engaging with the author's ideas"? I am responding to the point that pg’s writing is too reductionist. Comments on these articles often include “what about [obvious exception that distract from the main idea]”. These comments indicate they are trying to dismiss rather than understand (the author didn’t even consider my idea!) As an example, “San Francisco is wealthier than Ba…

PG's writing is often so reductionist it muddies his points and HN commenters are often pedants about meaningless issues. Both can be true. I don't blame PG for the pedantry over the minutiae. That's on the readers, and people on HN specifically are prone to this kind of pedantry. I do blame him for weakening his points by using bad language to express them. TFA isn't about how to read, though. It's about writing.

See? I write twice as many words with nuance and responses and we are no closer to the main idea.

Re: Good Writing

#317

Post by tptacek »

NAHWheatCracker wrote: post #193
nssnsjsjsjs wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is wrong with having someone edit and review? It is just feedback. If the writing itself is an assignment editing is normal. If the writing is part of another process maybe not. For fly.io I can see the appeal of unedited content as it can be rougher (as in breaks style guides and whatnot) and I like that roughness in blogs. E.g. you might get a British idiom come through or a more conversational style.

Having an editor isn't wrong, but it's an luxury for something as small as a Hacker News comment or an email. Paul having an editor isn't a luxury. His essays are edited because it's important for his business. He can easily justify a paying someone. More to the point, we're contrasting Paul's essays to people who don't have the luxury. Paul's essays could be seen as less genuine, even if they seem wiser.

Seems wrong.

Re: Good Writing

#318

Post by raldi »

jimnotgym wrote: post #301

>You can't simultaneously optimize two unrelated things; What kind of illogical nonsense is this? I found the speed my car produces the best MPG and simultaneously found the best volume for the stereo. I suppose his overall conclusion works in one way, the article is both poorly written, and devoid of anything useful. Nobody would read it if it wasn't from pg.

An even better example is just a few sentences back in the essay: The speed of a car has nothing to do with its color, and yet you can improve the speed without changing the color.

Re: Good Writing

#319

Post by mykowebhn »

raldi wrote: post #318
jimnotgym wrote: post #301

>You can't simultaneously optimize two unrelated things; What kind of illogical nonsense is this? I found the speed my car produces the best MPG and simultaneously found the best volume for the stereo. I suppose his overall conclusion works in one way, the article is both poorly written, and devoid of anything useful. Nobody would read it if it wasn't from pg.

An even better example is just a few sentences back in the essay: The speed of a car has nothing to do with its color, and yet you can improve the speed without changing the color.

Good find. Sadly there are many such examples

Re: Good Writing

#320

Post by benhoyt »

yojo wrote: post #65
antirez wrote: post #15

I believe that it is not that style helps the content to be more right, not in the way PG believes (like in the example about writing shorter sentences), it is that a richer style (so, not shorter, but neither baroque: a style with more possibilities) can reflect a less obvious way of thinking, that carries more signal. I'll make an example that makes this concept crystal crisp, and that you will likely remember for…

Reminds me of a line by Douglas Adams describing some particularly crude alien invaders: “The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don’t.” He could have written something like: “The blocky ships hovered seemingly in defiance of gravity.” Instead he picked a phrasing that’s intentionally a little hard to parse, but the reader feels clever for taking the time to get the joke, and remembers it. Paul’s…

> “The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don’t.”

That is probably my favourite phrase from the whole book. For some reason I find it hilarious. It has stuck in my brain in much the same way that names don't.

Post reply on HN