5 ms·
FTA: > This is only true of writing that's used to develop ideas, though. Descriptive writing, especially for fiction, seems out of scope.
by sctb 1y ago
FTA:
> This is only true of writing that's used to develop ideas, though.
Descriptive writing, especially for fiction, seems out of scope.
- Juliate 1y agoEverything starts as fiction for the reader, especially new ideas. It becomes more than that once it gets understood or comprehended.
- gsf_emergency 1y agoThe idea of "haecceitas" has been floating amongst the ... Pop-literati https://www.scribblejerk.com/blog/haecceity-rules https://www.scribblejerk.com/blog/haecceity-rules My take is that it's "writing that calls attention to itself" (or, if you want, writing that is clearly off the wall) Not sure if it can't be applied to exposition, Pontiggia managed it as above? Some pecunious would like it reduced to Jobs ("editing is all you need") but I'd argue Jony has the sparkle, the je ne sais quoi, the more than just functional
- cafard 1y agoI think that the last time I ran across "haecceitas" in a literary context was in an essay by Randall Jarrell. My guess is that he was referring to William Carlos Williams. In that case, Jarrell meant writing that tried to engage each thing as it is, not as part of a larger class.
- gsf_emergency 1y agoYepp the "academic" flavour of it is ... slightly different (& less relevant imho to parent thread) ... than the pop-cultural one, should have stressed that it exists ntheless. Thank you for providing more context for "context elision" :)!