![]() ![]() I understood that my reader-instructor expected a style of clarity. I was disappointed that she did not appreciate the designs I embedded in the selection of words and paragraph organizations that were intended to respond to the main arguments and to relate the resources I read. Such accusations made me feel so anxious to the extent that I started to deliberately avoid composing complex sentences. She also mentioned that I failed to follow the spirit of Barbara Johnson who can express complicated arguments in a clear and accessible way. Last semester, a course instructor criticized my writing style as convoluted and complex. To digest new and complex knowledge cannot be an easy task. Whenever we pause and attempt to comprehend the obscure writings, the fluency of reading is surely to be interrupted, but the breaks are also chances for our mindsets to welcome transitions. She also points out, “hought as a break is different from thought as a chain” (165). Johnson notes “nderstanding the conceptual breakthrough … depends on pausing there long enough” (164). They are just difficult to read, foreign to our established mindsets. Therefore, obscure works are not a result of bad writings. To appreciate such complexity needs a set of advanced reading skills that readers can hardly achieve unless they are properly trained. In other words, complex theoretical thoughts sometimes require convoluted expressions. Johnson notes, “fter the theory revolution it is no longer possible so serenely to separate style from thinking, idea from language” (162). Readers can at least suspend their judgment and reflect more on their own reading attitudes, skills and strategies (Johnson 160). However, Johnson argues, it is unfair to critique authors simply because their works are difficult to read. “‘Don’t understand!’ becomes an accusation,” and readers blame the “incomprehensible writing” as “the cause of incomprehension” (Johnson 160). We were uncertain whether it is appropriate for us to decide if these great thinkers compose good writings, but we agreed without any doubts that these authors are super intelligent.īearing in mind the question of what makes good writing, I started to read one of Barbara Johnson’s essays “Bad Writing.” In this short article, Johnson defends at least three types of “bad writings.” One of these “bad” qualities lies in obscurity-that readers assume a text to be bad if it is difficult to read. I have heard people complain about these authors: “Their writings are too incomprehensible!” “Why can’t they write in a more reader-friendly way?” My discussion with the acting director on the standards of good English writing remained unresolved. Whenever I attempt to read these great thinkers, I would often find myself trying to single out the main arguments from their obscure styles-convoluted syntax, jargon with special connotations, and complicated sentence structures. Some are written in straightforward plain English some are less accessible to read, as those written by Derrida, Lacan, Spivak, and Homi Bhabha. As a graduate student, I have witnessed numerous writing styles published in academic journals. Window.The other day, I had a discussion with our acting director on what are the standards for good writing. Overleaf Editor Custom VIM Keybindings I installed a Tampermonkey chrome extension, and under "Dashboard", I added the following userscript (All the commented-out lines I tried below > didn't work). I am aware that Tampermonkey ( ) could potentially do this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |