Speak Out: What ever happened to this kin of writing?

Replies (11)

• This is from a Rudy Keller article "150 Years Ago" in the Columbia Tribune.

  I'm not talking about the politics of the day but the style of writing.

  What do you think?

  And that should be Kind instead of Kin.

  -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 1:20 AM

• It appears to me that Mr Keller was one of that rare breed of people who could tell a man to Go to Hell.... and to do it in such a manner that the man addressed was happy to do so.

  So I am not accused of plagiarizing some one, I have read somewhere of someone describing someone else in that manner, but have no idea who said or where I read it.

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 2:15 AM

• "Modern writing should be clear, concise, and direct."

  That is perfectly fine for business correspondence and term papers, but writing as art ought to have the flourish of a baroque painting. Minimalism has an appeal to some, but most recognize great art as being a bit more varied.

  -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 6:44 AM

• "... a patriot, whose motives will never be impugned."

  The modern journalist seems to see it as their duty to impugn all motive.

  -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 6:45 AM

• "the flourish of a baroque painting" Agree, but far too often in this paper articles are too wordy and repetitive for no apparent good reason.

  -- Posted by CSIP2016 on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 7:03 AM

• "To be, or not to be, that is the question--

  Whether 'tis Nobler in the mind to suffer

  The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,

  Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,

  And by opposing end them?"

  Somehow that sounds better than "Dude, what should I do?"

  :-)

  -- Posted by not_sorry on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 7:50 AM

• Brevity has always been my choice for it seems unnecessary to repeat, reiterate and retell what was already said, but an echo without reverberation is a dull and boring sound of little interest or beckoning one's wit aroused. :)

  -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 9:51 AM

• Speaking of repetition ad nauseam; Rick why do you continue to bait others about your lack of intelligence? It seems you are endlessly fishing for compliments and pity. JMO

  -- Posted by good.for.the.gander.good.for.the.goose on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 11:25 AM

• "Modern writing should be clear, concise, and direct."

  Would this short example be considered acceptable.

  'I 8 sum eggs 4 brkfst, do I need 2 brush my teeth b4 I go 2 work.'

  It seems where a lot of people with a relatively decent level of schooling seem to be going with their texting.

  -- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 11:48 AM

• Obituaries used to serve as a sort of written eulogy, rather than a mere record of someone's passing. The Southeast Missourian distinguishes between "obituaries" (paid tributes) and "death notices" on their pages. Some people still take the time (and money) to write and publish flourishing accounts of the death of their loved ones, whereas many are content to simply let the undertaker publish a notice of passing.

  But the difference in journalism can be noted beyond the obituary pages. Engagement notices, and even records of events were often written with more flourish "back in the day", as writers apparently thought a sentence worthy of publishing ought to at least strive to be memorable.

  Not so, these days, it seems. "Just the facts, Ma'am" would be the rule of the day, if only we could count on their facts being factual.

  -- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 12:13 PM

• I consider the preamble eloquent writing.

  Would the writers of that and the Constitution understand modern legal documents?

  -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Feb 3, 2014, at 5:48 PM