I think people take English too seriously. People definitely take creative writing too seriously. Literature is not technical. It's an art form. My advice is to loosen up coz there is no prestige in what we do. IDK lol. I guess it kinda irks me when English is treated like a math equation.
Trouble is, poppet, language is an agreement. It's really not more than that, but it's also not less than that. We agree words have given meanings. We agree syntax structures help string those meanings together into more complex ideas. We agree how that stringing together happens, otherwise the meaning is not discernible. Is there flexibility? Of course there is. That's how languages evolve through time and over geographic area. But still, the fact that an agreement has flexibility is not the proof that the agreement can be done without. For example, one can quite easily argue that Modern English and Modern German are each the end result of a long progression of flexibility moving in a given direction. We know that English and German are closely related languages. In the grand scheme of things, they are very closely related. They are also mutually unintelligible to someone who is not bilingual in both.
It's fair to say some folks take these subjects a bit too seriously. However, I doubt it only plagues creative writing and other sister-subjects.
Who treats English like a math equation? And since when does art mean disdaining skill? Do you assume that the master artists of history just woke up one day and created their masterpieces on the very first try?
I have no idea what you mean here. People who don't care about precision in language are treating language like math? Math is pretty precise.
what do I mean? ... well all I said was everyone who treats English like a math equation is objectively bad at English. see in a math equation there are laws and rules and such and you can't break them, EVER, or you're doing bad math. And some people like to treat English the same way. See, if I'm writing something and my personal style/taste is in conflict with a rule, I'm simply going to break the rule. And then other people can judge whether or not my decision made the literature better or worse. You do have to learn ALL the rules first, before you can start breaking them.
By the way, you engaged in an interesting mis-use of language. I said: And you said: but you incorrectly believe that you said: The statements: "Everyone who treats English like a math equation is objectively bad at English." and "Everyone who is objectively bad at English treats English like a math equation." do NOT say the same thing. Do you believe that they say the same thing? You certainly seem to believe that they do.
im surprised u caught that, chicken friend But yeah, I do. I mean, if you, say, don't know any rules of English and ur just writing down gibberish that no one can understand except for you, then I'd say you are subjectively bad at English, not objectively bad. Because English to me is subjective, and if you treat it objectively, that's where you fall down completely.
the one distinction I'd like to make here is I was only really talking about written English, *not* spoken English. I agree, spoken language is an agreement, because we need to understand each other when we communicate, of course. But written English is all I was referring to... I believe it's an art form unless it is technical like y'know, an academic textbook, medical terminology, legal jargon, etc. and then other languages, I dunno what to think of them tbh
You're contradicting yourself. You also seem to be using text speak purely to annoy. And you're not going to convince me that the sloppiness in capitalization and punctuation above is an artistic choice. Also, you claim that someone who treats English "like a math equation" is "objectively" bad at English, but you claim that it's impossible to be objectively bad at English, so you yourself are making the judgement that you condemn. Maybe you're doing it as a sort of weak joke, but I need more logic than this. As a side note, you've also failed to come up with an example of anyone at all who does treat English like a math equation. So...written language is not intended to communicate? Eh? Is it just pretty black squiggles? And all artists would agree that skill is utterly irrelevant to art, of course. That's why no one ever, ever studies or practices painting, music, acting, any of that. That would just be silly.
You're not making yourself understood too well in this thread. Would you say your lack of clarity means your writing is subjectively bad, or objectively bad?
I have a lifelong pull to communicate with people who are determinedly immune to communication. I blame my mother. In my entire acquaintance with her, I don't think that I ever managed to communicate an abstract thought to her. More concrete concepts were pretty iffy, too. I once spent a good half hour trying to break through her determined refusal to understand the request, "Could you hand me that bottle?" The idea, "When the washing machine instructions say to use half a cup of soap, that means that you should use half a cup of soap," was never successfully transferred. And I'm pretty sure it was totally voluntary on her part. The woman graduated from Vassar.
