News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Good Writing by pclmulqdq on Saturday May 24, 2025 @05:43PM (#44083975)
I find Paul Graham's writing style to be a bit off. I think he is too overly reductive and simplistic in his use of language and imprecise in his choice of words, and I genuinely don't understand the praise for his writing. You should read his work because these are the thoughts of a highly influential VC, not because they are gems of grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Sometimes a longer, more nuanced word has all the right connotations, and sometimes a more complex sentence carries the perfect rhetorical structure. Paul Graham's writing seems to ignore (or perhaps purposely eschew) such details.
Re:Good Writing by kayodelycaon on Saturday May 24, 2025 @05:58PM (#44084046)
Same. I always get the feeling his ideas aren’t sufficiently thought through or communicated well enough to be actually be useful.

On the other hand, I may know too much about what he writes about to benefit from it. Which means I’m not the target audience.

And I don’t say this to sound smart. I’m a generalist. I know a little about a lot. Plenty of people are far more intelligent than I am.

Re:Good Writing by monkeyelite on Saturday May 24, 2025 @10:15PM (#44085057)
> I think he is too overly reductive and simplistic

I personally feel this is a great filter. The exceptions to the rule are obvious and don’t need to be stated. It increases the signal to noise ratio to leave them out. And the people that complain are signaling their inability to get into the author’s pov.

Re:Good Writing by pclmulqdq on Saturday May 24, 2025 @11:07PM (#44085229)
A great author drags you into their PoV whether you want to see it or not.
Re:Good Writing by monkeyelite on Saturday May 24, 2025 @11:14PM (#44085260)
And a bad reader makes up concerns before even engaging with the authors ideas.
Re:Good Writing by pclmulqdq on Sunday May 25, 2025 @12:15AM (#44085475)
Wait, I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make here. Is it that I commented about Paul Graham's writing style in response to a PG essay on writing style? Is that "making up concerns before even engaging with the author's ideas"? The whole point of the essay we're discussing is writing style, and in particular a set of suggestions he has based on his own work.

It's valid to criticize someone for not giving a piece of writing a charitable read, but the topic of this essay is writing style, not how to read. Writing style is largely about figuring out how to direct the reader to your ideas, so it seems axiomatic that any piece of writing that needs a high-effort charitable read is poorly written.

Being too vague also doesn't increase signal to noise ratio. It just lets you write as though a lot of noise is signal.

Re:Good Writing by monkeyelite on Sunday May 25, 2025 @03:03AM (#44086106)
> 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 Bakersfield”. Almost certainly a bad reader will complain that this does not apply to every resident. But we all know what is meant.

So my general takeaway is that making broad statements without qualification can be a strength, because you filter out bad readers who aren’t interested in big ideas. And catering to them (who cannot be satisfied) only worsens the experience for your interested audience.

This itself is of course a broad statement with exception.

Re:Good Writing by pclmulqdq on Sunday May 25, 2025 @10:20AM (#44088038)
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.

Re:Good Writing by monkeyelite on Sunday May 25, 2025 @02:37PM (#44089883)
See? I write twice as many words with nuance and responses and we are no closer to the main idea.