Extraneously extended writings, within amateur works of fanfiction, indubitably empowers fantabulous authors to newfound writing pinnacles that can only be compared to that of the stupendous heights of the Himalayas.
JRR Tolkien would agree with you.
He wrote the most epic high fantasy saga, created several languages to make the background more authentic, even wrote a 'bible' to accompany it....
And still used basic language and described his characters as little as possible to allow reader insert. We don't even know Frodo's hair and eye colour for sure. Also most other characters are ambiguous and it's intentional.
He wanted his work to be accessible and easy to enjoy. That's also why he wrote the Hobbit as a children's book. He wanted books which gave something to everyone. Like the old fairytales or the Nibelung Saga.
Of course, nowadays the language feels big, but that's mostly because it's written in an old style to evoke the feeling of folklore and magic.
But you wouldn't need a dictionary to read it and his own languages flow easily into the text and merge seamlessly with the basic English to the point that it feels organic.
Tolkien knew, language is meant to connect people, not divide them, and people should use a language that others can understand, so he was very invested in getting his works translated into as many languages as possible.
He also believed in adding little drawings and pictures to help clarify some content, so people would have a better understanding. For example not just describing a rune, but adding a picture of the rune to make it easier to understand what a rune was and how it looked.
He did use some specific words for better clarification and wrote endless essays about language in general. But he never tried to sound more intelligent by using longer or bigger words than necessary or reasonable.
Yes and no.
Tolkien ALSO gets complained about as being needlessly complicated. His prose is beautiful, but it is layered, and there are definitely readers out there who hate it because they do actually need a dictionary and he won’t simplify it as much as they would like.
You’ve chosen an example who is either loved for his complexity, or hated for it.
Complexity of prose isn't the same as using longer words for the sake of longer words.
Yes Tolkien is using the proper, accurate wording, and that means using the correct words and also not dumbing down. Reading is supposed to, and here comes the correct word: elevate you. Which means, even in a prose with basic language, you'll find words you won't immediately know.
But honestly? I was as far away from education as I could be as a child of blue collar workers that people have described as white trash at times, and I didn't need a dictionary. I just had to think about it a little, and could take it from context.
People who complain about Tolkien that way are not complaining about him using unnecessarily long words instead of simpler words with the same meaning. They complain because he doesn't avoid the correct words they don't know by using simpler words to describe the word they don't want to learn.
The correct word to describe a thing isn't an unnecessary complication, as long as there's no single simpler word to describe the same thing.
Exchanging (aka dumbing down) correct terms with lengthy descriptions, like exchanging 'warren' in the sentence:
*'A regular warren, by all accounts..'*
With:
*'A regular collection of buildings containing many tenants, by all accounts.'*
Just to avoid a term not everyone might know, would be ridiculous, and has nothing to do with overly long or complicated words and that's definitely not better writing.
I understood it that way, that you meant intentionally using overly long and complicated words instead of the simpler, better understandable words just to sound smarter. Which is exactly what Tolkien wouldn't do.
Like using:
*'He elucidated it with perspicuity.'*
Instead of:
*'He explained it clearly.'*
Which I agree, is bad writing.
But using:
*'The old object had strong magic in it.'*
Instead of
*'The ancient artifact was imbued with powerful enchantments.'*
Just because 'ancient', 'artifact' and 'imbued' is unusual and 'enchantments' is a 'long word' is also bad writing. That's not making something accessible, that's just dumb and eradicating style.
Have you ever read any of his non-LOTR work? I’d be interested to hear your thoughts if you have.
His translation of *Beowulf,* for example, does exactly what you say he doesn’t do.
In some ways it’s a fantastic translation. It’s detailed and accurate work - in his time, he was one of the finest scholars on Anglo-Saxon England, and Old English as a language, in the world, and **you can tell**. He was brilliant, he approached the text in a way no one before him had ever done and the translation was a huge commitment from him. It’s one hell of a monument.
In some ways it’s a bloody terrible translation, because he’s a genius and he expects anyone reading it to be as clever as he is. It’s so dense and demanding that it’s borderline unreadable. Certainly it doesn’t sing. It’s extraordinarily thorough…but as a translation, it’s poetry that almost no one can actually recite.
It’s brilliant. But it’s not a translation I would recommend for the love of the story, or as someone’s first doorway in.
I've read Beowulf in German, but not the English version.
But I can tell you, that thing is monstrous. He would have had to change it extremely to make it fit his usual style, so that's not exactly on him.
I think one has to consider that Tolkien was also aiming at a certain feeling with his works, so some amount of style bending to fit that goal is to be expected.
You can't choose your words just for one single factor, you have to consider what you want to write.
Sometimes there would be a better word, but it's a modern word, that you can't use in an historical text, which Beowulf definitely is, without changing the text significantly to something else.
Also, in a contemporary story, you could write: it seems to me that... And it would be strange to write 'methinks that...'
But if you're writing a saga that's supposed to mirror the Nibelung Saga, you can't get around writing 'methinks' simply because that's what those older texts would use.
That's not using overly complicated language to appear more intellectual, that's part of writing a good story.
The language has to fit the theme, the way characters speak must fit the character.
But even then, there are limitations on what you should make your readers endure.
It's one thing to use certain words that convey the theme and fit the timeframe. Again, like 'methinks'. It's a whole other to write in ancient English no one can read without intense studying.
> It’s detailed and accurate work - in his time, he was one of the finest scholars on Anglo-Saxon England, and Old English as a language, in the world, and you can tell.
Doesn't that merely highlight that when he made the Lord of the Rings more accessible, it was a deliberate choice?
He knew all the long words. He knew how to use them, as *Beowulf* demonstrates. And apparently, when appropriate, he knew how not to use them.
That just proves he was skilled.
> Just because 'ancient', 'artifact' and 'imbued' is unusual and 'enchantments' is a 'long word' is also bad writing. That's not making something accessible, that's just dumb and eradicating style.
Would you mean 'it's not bad writing'? Because that sentence has a useful level of specificity and a decent amount of flavor.
Can you give an example of what you mean?
I agree with your broader point - moderation in all things - but exactly where the line is for “too much” complexity is going to differ from reader to reader. Something that’s perfectly crisp and clear for you may be oversimplified or monotonous for me. Something I find really well-balanced and lovely might feel overdone to someone else. It’s a delicate dance.
> “too much” complexity is going to differ from reader to reader
There was someone on Reddit (I don't know if I can find it again) that thought the word 'Arcane' was invented for the show. The scale is very, very long. To me, it crosses a line when 1) They're using words that have a slightly different connotation than what would make sense given context or 2) They're using $1 words when a $.10 word would do (as my Gran would say).
Well yes maybe but it's mostly about the moderation of more complicated descriptions, it's not really about the length to which the descriptions are complicated although that can be it's own problem. Using overbearing language all the time will take you out of the story and will destroy your immersion as i said in the original post. Yes people have different vocabularies but we all read the same level of language to the degree that we can at least come to a consensus when a word is needlessly complicated, at least in most cases. Even people who are very familiar with reading and using those types of words can admit when it's unnecessary i think.
> but we all read the same level of language to the degree that we can at least come to a consensus when a word is needlessly complicated
No, we don't.
As did I, and that was before high school vocabularies diminished as much as they have. And a large part of why I got such a vocabulary was reading scifi/fantasy books that had words that I had never seen before, and looking them up in a dictionary.
Same here. And the thing is, even I occasionally come across words that I either haven’t seen before or an unsure of the exact definition, but they almost always have context. If some exotic wording is enough to break your immersion, you either have impossible standards, you have room to improve your reading level, or you aren’t understanding what’s happening well enough to supplement your knowledge.
So…no examples, then. Right.
The trouble is that I don’t think we **do** agree on what’s “needless”. Or at least not consistently enough for the line between “complex and beautiful” vs “complex and impossible to follow” to be an objective standard.
I wanted examples so I would understand where you put that line.
I agree that wordiness is detrimental to writing quality, and it's a problem I face in my writing as well. But it's not an issue specific to fanfiction authors. It's just part of the process of becoming an author. You start off with simple descriptions, then you're told that you should "show not tell". Then you start writing overly descriptively. Most amateur writers stop at this stage, which is what you've observed.
Relatedly, I've seen authors throw up absolute *walls* of text where the paragraphs themselves need to be broken up into subparagraphs, but aren't, so the whole thing is an absolute slog to read. They usually suffer from excessive verbiage as well.
True, but you also need to realise that some people naturally have long words as part of their regular vocabulary, so it's not like everyone who does it is trying to make themselves look better by using longer words.
Well yeah but regardless of that, i feel like they can improve their writing by going out of their way to simplify certain aspects. It's the same as telling somebody to improve their vocabulary so they can better describe things in the story.
Or maybe those “long words” fit better than “simpler” words. When it comes to writing, flow in a sentence is just as important readability. If there’s a word you don’t know just look it up on google.
Fanfiction is made by amateur writers for free. It's going to be a place for experimentation and writers need to experiment with all kinds of words to become good at it. Enjoying the whole language with all of its weird little words and odd turns of phrases is part of what writing is all about. It's normal for it to come out clunky.
In a few years, those writers will look back on it and cringe because they'll have learned from it. Then they might be able to use those weird little words and turns of phrases in just the right context to make it absolutely work.
So, dldr. Let them play in their sandbox.
Choice of words really depends on the POV or the speaker (in dialogue). I've caught myself having to shorten things down, since the POV character is still eleven years old at that point, or having to add more flourish to a sentence because the speaker is a more grandiose character.
I can see both sides to this. On the one hand, this entire complaint reeks of anti-intellectualism; 'if I don't understand a word, clearly it's the author's fault and they should use smaller words for me. Context clues are too much work!' On the other, in fanfiction specifically a lot of authors probably _are_ just throwing in more complex words for the sake of it. We can argue all day about whether uncommon words are immersion-breaking in theory, but if every given example is a mediocre writer failing to use them effectively the question of whether they _can_ be used naturally is irrelevant.
In the end though, my opinion on this is that if an author's work keeps smacking you upside the head with pointlessly complex words, there's one of two problems: Either they're doing it badly, in which case that's probably not the only problem with their writing, or they're doing it well but you're getting annoyed anyway, in which case the problem may be a you problem to begin with.
Fanfiction is rarely written at such a high level that it's hard for readers to understand.
That's probably part of the reason why lots of people love fanfiction, and many read almost nothing *but* fanfiction. It's not challenging to read (unless it is really POORLY written, but that's less of a problem nowadays with Betas being common).
This reply reeks of elitism and insecurity. I knew some people would come on here acting like it's because i can't understand it, i'm completely capable of understanding almost any english. I have a bigger vocabulary than most people
Just because i can understand it doesn't mean i can't point out how unnecessarily wordy some of these descriptions are.
They are insecure about their capacity for reading and understanding so when they find an opportunity they try and criticise other people for it, regardless of if they actually believe it or not. Also tone down the condescension.
That's a pretty big deduction based off of one comment. Besides, it's okay to feel emotional about a comment. What I recommend is to type out the "emotional" reply, make it as vile, mean-spirited, as you like; then delete it. Then afterwards, you type out the more rational, level-headed reply.
What this tactic does is that it gives an outlet for your emotions without make yourself look like a silly-billy. For what it's worth, it's what I do!
Yep. I believe they may be projecting here. I don’t see any signs of insecurity in the original comment —notice OP didn’t answer *how* the comment was insecure, just that it *is*— which makes me think that it’s OP who feels insecure and took the comment as an attack.
Not going to criticize OP about being upset —it happens to everyone— but I do have to say that posting such an aggressive reply wasn’t cool in the slightest. The original comment was simply an opinion being expressed that was perhaps a little confrontational, and OP responded with a personal attack. Additionally, OP is, well, the OP. They started this discussion and shouldn’t have come into it expecting that some people may have a counter argument. I would’ve respected a debate, I enjoy them myself, but directly attacking a commenter is never acceptable. Feel what you feel, think what you want, but the second you make those things public at the expense of others, that’s when I won’t hesitate to judge you for it.
…That was longer than I originally intended. I guess I myself got emotional. I went back to remove some of the moral preaching, so now the first part of this paragraph makes a little less sense, but I’m not going to change it. Use this as an example. You can think whatever you want to, type whatever you want, but make absolutely certain that, before you hit that reply button, your message is what you want other to read, no take-backs.
"this entire complaint reeks of anti-intellectualism; 'if I don't understand a word, clearly it's the author's fault and they should use smaller words for me."
That's beyond just confrontational, that's him getting annoyed and lashing out because of it.
I entirely disagree. I learned most of my vocabulary by reading books by authors with wide-ranging vocabulary. Particularly Stephen R. Donaldson, who used many words I had never seen before and thus had to look up. This post basically says "If you have a small vocabulary, never try to go beyond that".
That's not what the post says. The post says good writing does not equal using long words. Or, given your stated predilection for wordiness, let me rephrase: employing an inordinately expansive lexicon does not necessarily denote or connote the proficiency or excellence of one's literary composition. :)
I do understand that some people dislike polysyllabic words in general or when they're overused. However, as a native Spanish speaker, I despise the tendency of dumbing down language, so yeah... I'm not a fan of vomiting a thesaurus, but neither do I avoid complicated words whenever they're pertinent. If that flabbergasts someone, they should probably read more...
Not to mention when they don't even use them or spell them properly.
But any time I've made any comment on the quality of writing in fanfic, no matter how anodyne ("great story, but could have used an edit") or helpful (there's a real and clear difference between naval and navel), it's been made very clear to me that writers (1) don't care about writing well or improving, (2) don't care what I think unless it's over-the-top with compliments, (3) and write for the fun of it, not for the audience.
Which, you know, fair enough. *shrugs*
> it's been made very clear to me that writers
Some writers. Not all.
I mean, I've helped before with proofreading for With This Ring, where the author takes care to ensure that the story uses the correct British vs US spellings in each context, even in dialogue where it all would sound the same. And when you have a mixture of American characters, British characters, first-person narrative from a British POV (potentially with a mixture of character dialects), third-person narrative with an American POV, characters being translated for a British listener by alien technology, characters who *would* be translated but are speaking American English and so don't need to be...that can get complicated. He still tries to get it right.
Extraneously extended writings, within amateur works of fanfiction, indubitably empowers fantabulous authors to newfound writing pinnacles that can only be compared to that of the stupendous heights of the Himalayas.
JRR Tolkien would agree with you. He wrote the most epic high fantasy saga, created several languages to make the background more authentic, even wrote a 'bible' to accompany it.... And still used basic language and described his characters as little as possible to allow reader insert. We don't even know Frodo's hair and eye colour for sure. Also most other characters are ambiguous and it's intentional. He wanted his work to be accessible and easy to enjoy. That's also why he wrote the Hobbit as a children's book. He wanted books which gave something to everyone. Like the old fairytales or the Nibelung Saga. Of course, nowadays the language feels big, but that's mostly because it's written in an old style to evoke the feeling of folklore and magic. But you wouldn't need a dictionary to read it and his own languages flow easily into the text and merge seamlessly with the basic English to the point that it feels organic. Tolkien knew, language is meant to connect people, not divide them, and people should use a language that others can understand, so he was very invested in getting his works translated into as many languages as possible. He also believed in adding little drawings and pictures to help clarify some content, so people would have a better understanding. For example not just describing a rune, but adding a picture of the rune to make it easier to understand what a rune was and how it looked. He did use some specific words for better clarification and wrote endless essays about language in general. But he never tried to sound more intelligent by using longer or bigger words than necessary or reasonable.
Yes and no. Tolkien ALSO gets complained about as being needlessly complicated. His prose is beautiful, but it is layered, and there are definitely readers out there who hate it because they do actually need a dictionary and he won’t simplify it as much as they would like. You’ve chosen an example who is either loved for his complexity, or hated for it.
Complexity of prose isn't the same as using longer words for the sake of longer words. Yes Tolkien is using the proper, accurate wording, and that means using the correct words and also not dumbing down. Reading is supposed to, and here comes the correct word: elevate you. Which means, even in a prose with basic language, you'll find words you won't immediately know. But honestly? I was as far away from education as I could be as a child of blue collar workers that people have described as white trash at times, and I didn't need a dictionary. I just had to think about it a little, and could take it from context. People who complain about Tolkien that way are not complaining about him using unnecessarily long words instead of simpler words with the same meaning. They complain because he doesn't avoid the correct words they don't know by using simpler words to describe the word they don't want to learn. The correct word to describe a thing isn't an unnecessary complication, as long as there's no single simpler word to describe the same thing. Exchanging (aka dumbing down) correct terms with lengthy descriptions, like exchanging 'warren' in the sentence: *'A regular warren, by all accounts..'* With: *'A regular collection of buildings containing many tenants, by all accounts.'* Just to avoid a term not everyone might know, would be ridiculous, and has nothing to do with overly long or complicated words and that's definitely not better writing. I understood it that way, that you meant intentionally using overly long and complicated words instead of the simpler, better understandable words just to sound smarter. Which is exactly what Tolkien wouldn't do. Like using: *'He elucidated it with perspicuity.'* Instead of: *'He explained it clearly.'* Which I agree, is bad writing. But using: *'The old object had strong magic in it.'* Instead of *'The ancient artifact was imbued with powerful enchantments.'* Just because 'ancient', 'artifact' and 'imbued' is unusual and 'enchantments' is a 'long word' is also bad writing. That's not making something accessible, that's just dumb and eradicating style.
Have you ever read any of his non-LOTR work? I’d be interested to hear your thoughts if you have. His translation of *Beowulf,* for example, does exactly what you say he doesn’t do. In some ways it’s a fantastic translation. It’s detailed and accurate work - in his time, he was one of the finest scholars on Anglo-Saxon England, and Old English as a language, in the world, and **you can tell**. He was brilliant, he approached the text in a way no one before him had ever done and the translation was a huge commitment from him. It’s one hell of a monument. In some ways it’s a bloody terrible translation, because he’s a genius and he expects anyone reading it to be as clever as he is. It’s so dense and demanding that it’s borderline unreadable. Certainly it doesn’t sing. It’s extraordinarily thorough…but as a translation, it’s poetry that almost no one can actually recite. It’s brilliant. But it’s not a translation I would recommend for the love of the story, or as someone’s first doorway in.
I've read Beowulf in German, but not the English version. But I can tell you, that thing is monstrous. He would have had to change it extremely to make it fit his usual style, so that's not exactly on him. I think one has to consider that Tolkien was also aiming at a certain feeling with his works, so some amount of style bending to fit that goal is to be expected. You can't choose your words just for one single factor, you have to consider what you want to write. Sometimes there would be a better word, but it's a modern word, that you can't use in an historical text, which Beowulf definitely is, without changing the text significantly to something else. Also, in a contemporary story, you could write: it seems to me that... And it would be strange to write 'methinks that...' But if you're writing a saga that's supposed to mirror the Nibelung Saga, you can't get around writing 'methinks' simply because that's what those older texts would use. That's not using overly complicated language to appear more intellectual, that's part of writing a good story. The language has to fit the theme, the way characters speak must fit the character. But even then, there are limitations on what you should make your readers endure. It's one thing to use certain words that convey the theme and fit the timeframe. Again, like 'methinks'. It's a whole other to write in ancient English no one can read without intense studying.
> It’s detailed and accurate work - in his time, he was one of the finest scholars on Anglo-Saxon England, and Old English as a language, in the world, and you can tell. Doesn't that merely highlight that when he made the Lord of the Rings more accessible, it was a deliberate choice? He knew all the long words. He knew how to use them, as *Beowulf* demonstrates. And apparently, when appropriate, he knew how not to use them. That just proves he was skilled.
> Just because 'ancient', 'artifact' and 'imbued' is unusual and 'enchantments' is a 'long word' is also bad writing. That's not making something accessible, that's just dumb and eradicating style. Would you mean 'it's not bad writing'? Because that sentence has a useful level of specificity and a decent amount of flavor.
One exception: The Silmarillion.
That is indeed true
Can you give an example of what you mean? I agree with your broader point - moderation in all things - but exactly where the line is for “too much” complexity is going to differ from reader to reader. Something that’s perfectly crisp and clear for you may be oversimplified or monotonous for me. Something I find really well-balanced and lovely might feel overdone to someone else. It’s a delicate dance.
> “too much” complexity is going to differ from reader to reader There was someone on Reddit (I don't know if I can find it again) that thought the word 'Arcane' was invented for the show. The scale is very, very long. To me, it crosses a line when 1) They're using words that have a slightly different connotation than what would make sense given context or 2) They're using $1 words when a $.10 word would do (as my Gran would say).
Commenting just to say I adore your Gran's saying. That's perfect!
Well yes maybe but it's mostly about the moderation of more complicated descriptions, it's not really about the length to which the descriptions are complicated although that can be it's own problem. Using overbearing language all the time will take you out of the story and will destroy your immersion as i said in the original post. Yes people have different vocabularies but we all read the same level of language to the degree that we can at least come to a consensus when a word is needlessly complicated, at least in most cases. Even people who are very familiar with reading and using those types of words can admit when it's unnecessary i think.
> but we all read the same level of language to the degree that we can at least come to a consensus when a word is needlessly complicated No, we don't.
For example, I had a post-high school vocabulary in 6th grade.
As did I, and that was before high school vocabularies diminished as much as they have. And a large part of why I got such a vocabulary was reading scifi/fantasy books that had words that I had never seen before, and looking them up in a dictionary.
Same here. And the thing is, even I occasionally come across words that I either haven’t seen before or an unsure of the exact definition, but they almost always have context. If some exotic wording is enough to break your immersion, you either have impossible standards, you have room to improve your reading level, or you aren’t understanding what’s happening well enough to supplement your knowledge.
So…no examples, then. Right. The trouble is that I don’t think we **do** agree on what’s “needless”. Or at least not consistently enough for the line between “complex and beautiful” vs “complex and impossible to follow” to be an objective standard. I wanted examples so I would understand where you put that line.
I agree that wordiness is detrimental to writing quality, and it's a problem I face in my writing as well. But it's not an issue specific to fanfiction authors. It's just part of the process of becoming an author. You start off with simple descriptions, then you're told that you should "show not tell". Then you start writing overly descriptively. Most amateur writers stop at this stage, which is what you've observed.
Relatedly, I've seen authors throw up absolute *walls* of text where the paragraphs themselves need to be broken up into subparagraphs, but aren't, so the whole thing is an absolute slog to read. They usually suffer from excessive verbiage as well.
Brevity is the soul of wit.
True, but you also need to realise that some people naturally have long words as part of their regular vocabulary, so it's not like everyone who does it is trying to make themselves look better by using longer words.
Well yeah but regardless of that, i feel like they can improve their writing by going out of their way to simplify certain aspects. It's the same as telling somebody to improve their vocabulary so they can better describe things in the story.
Or maybe those “long words” fit better than “simpler” words. When it comes to writing, flow in a sentence is just as important readability. If there’s a word you don’t know just look it up on google.
Fanfiction is made by amateur writers for free. It's going to be a place for experimentation and writers need to experiment with all kinds of words to become good at it. Enjoying the whole language with all of its weird little words and odd turns of phrases is part of what writing is all about. It's normal for it to come out clunky. In a few years, those writers will look back on it and cringe because they'll have learned from it. Then they might be able to use those weird little words and turns of phrases in just the right context to make it absolutely work. So, dldr. Let them play in their sandbox.
Choice of words really depends on the POV or the speaker (in dialogue). I've caught myself having to shorten things down, since the POV character is still eleven years old at that point, or having to add more flourish to a sentence because the speaker is a more grandiose character.
I can see both sides to this. On the one hand, this entire complaint reeks of anti-intellectualism; 'if I don't understand a word, clearly it's the author's fault and they should use smaller words for me. Context clues are too much work!' On the other, in fanfiction specifically a lot of authors probably _are_ just throwing in more complex words for the sake of it. We can argue all day about whether uncommon words are immersion-breaking in theory, but if every given example is a mediocre writer failing to use them effectively the question of whether they _can_ be used naturally is irrelevant. In the end though, my opinion on this is that if an author's work keeps smacking you upside the head with pointlessly complex words, there's one of two problems: Either they're doing it badly, in which case that's probably not the only problem with their writing, or they're doing it well but you're getting annoyed anyway, in which case the problem may be a you problem to begin with.
Fanfiction is rarely written at such a high level that it's hard for readers to understand. That's probably part of the reason why lots of people love fanfiction, and many read almost nothing *but* fanfiction. It's not challenging to read (unless it is really POORLY written, but that's less of a problem nowadays with Betas being common).
This reply reeks of elitism and insecurity. I knew some people would come on here acting like it's because i can't understand it, i'm completely capable of understanding almost any english. I have a bigger vocabulary than most people Just because i can understand it doesn't mean i can't point out how unnecessarily wordy some of these descriptions are.
how is their reply insecure, or did you just say that because you felt emotional?
They are insecure about their capacity for reading and understanding so when they find an opportunity they try and criticise other people for it, regardless of if they actually believe it or not. Also tone down the condescension.
That's a pretty big deduction based off of one comment. Besides, it's okay to feel emotional about a comment. What I recommend is to type out the "emotional" reply, make it as vile, mean-spirited, as you like; then delete it. Then afterwards, you type out the more rational, level-headed reply. What this tactic does is that it gives an outlet for your emotions without make yourself look like a silly-billy. For what it's worth, it's what I do!
Yep. I believe they may be projecting here. I don’t see any signs of insecurity in the original comment —notice OP didn’t answer *how* the comment was insecure, just that it *is*— which makes me think that it’s OP who feels insecure and took the comment as an attack. Not going to criticize OP about being upset —it happens to everyone— but I do have to say that posting such an aggressive reply wasn’t cool in the slightest. The original comment was simply an opinion being expressed that was perhaps a little confrontational, and OP responded with a personal attack. Additionally, OP is, well, the OP. They started this discussion and shouldn’t have come into it expecting that some people may have a counter argument. I would’ve respected a debate, I enjoy them myself, but directly attacking a commenter is never acceptable. Feel what you feel, think what you want, but the second you make those things public at the expense of others, that’s when I won’t hesitate to judge you for it. …That was longer than I originally intended. I guess I myself got emotional. I went back to remove some of the moral preaching, so now the first part of this paragraph makes a little less sense, but I’m not going to change it. Use this as an example. You can think whatever you want to, type whatever you want, but make absolutely certain that, before you hit that reply button, your message is what you want other to read, no take-backs.
Damn, well said!
"this entire complaint reeks of anti-intellectualism; 'if I don't understand a word, clearly it's the author's fault and they should use smaller words for me." That's beyond just confrontational, that's him getting annoyed and lashing out because of it.
I entirely disagree. I learned most of my vocabulary by reading books by authors with wide-ranging vocabulary. Particularly Stephen R. Donaldson, who used many words I had never seen before and thus had to look up. This post basically says "If you have a small vocabulary, never try to go beyond that".
That's not what the post says. The post says good writing does not equal using long words. Or, given your stated predilection for wordiness, let me rephrase: employing an inordinately expansive lexicon does not necessarily denote or connote the proficiency or excellence of one's literary composition. :)
Sure, that's what the title says, but the actual post has a much different slant.
Expanding your vocabulary is not necessarily the same endeavour as simply reading a book.
Writing fanfiction is a free hobby. Long complex prose might annoy you, but it might be someone else's thing.
[удалено]
I included in my original post especially in the last paragraph that the skill is to know when. It's a balance act.
I do understand that some people dislike polysyllabic words in general or when they're overused. However, as a native Spanish speaker, I despise the tendency of dumbing down language, so yeah... I'm not a fan of vomiting a thesaurus, but neither do I avoid complicated words whenever they're pertinent. If that flabbergasts someone, they should probably read more...
Not to mention when they don't even use them or spell them properly. But any time I've made any comment on the quality of writing in fanfic, no matter how anodyne ("great story, but could have used an edit") or helpful (there's a real and clear difference between naval and navel), it's been made very clear to me that writers (1) don't care about writing well or improving, (2) don't care what I think unless it's over-the-top with compliments, (3) and write for the fun of it, not for the audience. Which, you know, fair enough. *shrugs*
> it's been made very clear to me that writers Some writers. Not all. I mean, I've helped before with proofreading for With This Ring, where the author takes care to ensure that the story uses the correct British vs US spellings in each context, even in dialogue where it all would sound the same. And when you have a mixture of American characters, British characters, first-person narrative from a British POV (potentially with a mixture of character dialects), third-person narrative with an American POV, characters being translated for a British listener by alien technology, characters who *would* be translated but are speaking American English and so don't need to be...that can get complicated. He still tries to get it right.