I'm not trying to be a [penis] when I say this, or come across as pretentious, but the amount of time it takes me write a message is the same as the amount of time it take me to type it. I just sit down and I start typing and then I hit post and that's that. I offer up this information because I, too, have been sometimes accused of excess verbosity and over-inclusion of hundred dollar words. My verbosity of course isn't quite as legendary as that of TennyD, but if TennyD takes the same approach to writing message board posts that I do -- and I suspect that he does -- his original post likely didn't take him any more than 20 minutes to write.
TennyD can come on here and confirm or deny this, but I'm willing to bet about a hundred million dollars that he did NOT do anything remotely resembling -- I mean even loosely analogous to -- first writing a sentence and then going back and "enhancing it with larger words". Again, there is no way for me to write what I'm about to write without coming across a bit pretentious, but I write sentences that resemble -- both in structure and diction -- the sentences from TennyD's post that you referred to...and I write them off the top of my head without making any conscious effort to make my words fancy or obscure.
fair enough. it really doesn't matter either way. just felt like "purposely stirring some people up" lol I guess if you can write that way without putting in any more effort than you would writing a normal, to the point sentence, then more power to you. It's not difficult to write that way, and i am sure most people on here can write sentences that "resemble -- both in structure and diction -- the sentences from TennyD's post." My point was more that it would take most normal people, and probably even most people with above average intelligence, more time and thought to write that way instead of writing normal, to the point sentences. I wasn't necessarily saying that the only way he could write that way would be by going back and changing his sentences. Perhaps he pauses during sentences to think of better ways to word things in a more eloquent format. Regardless, i just found it hard to believe that he sat down and typed out that entire message without stopping to spend some time on making it sound more eloquent and filling it with "hundred million dollar words." Then again, you say he probably wrote it that way with little effort, so who am i to judge.
Tenny D's stream of consciousness is far above that of what you call "normal." It's his urine stream that struggles, though. We all have gifts, Indy.
again, I don't doubt your opinions of him, and i really know nothing about him. I've just always been deemed a talented writer by my peers, professors, etc, but i would not be able to write like that without at least putting some effort into it. I just found it odd.
By introducing a second possible variable, your analogy opens for debate not only TenD's skills with the written language but also the quality of Indy's personal hygiene and the efficiency of his digestive tract.
My motto in college was, "If you can't dazzle them with intellect, baffle them with bullshit." It served me well.
Quick thoughts: 1. There are innumerous people on here who have met / spoken with me, directly, and off-line (i.e. in person, telephonically, email, chat, etc.), and who could shed some light on the comparative question of my written versus "live" speech. I've never really paid attention to it what difference might exist, if any. But, others may have found it to be more noticeable, if such exists. 2. If I had to list my single greatest deficiency as a writer, it's that I too often ramble in a steam of consciousness manner, which, at times, often causes me to lose sight of the larger point I'm making, and the least circuitous route towards it. My writing "style" (which sounds stupid even as I type it) is too often unnecessarily wordy, even for me. I most admire those who can write succinctly, and who still clearly and effective convey their thoughts. I make a conscious effort to do so, but it very much remains a work in progress. As two ready examples - see my posts on QP's departure (yesterday) and my announcement of the new forum style (earlier today) as instances where I made a conscious effort to write "tightly". 3. In my opinion, an expansive vocabulary is somewhat of an indicator of intelligence, but a poor and indirect one, at best. You can know all of the words in the world, but if they cannot be easily and aptly applied to convey your thoughts to any number of others, it's a rather useless "skill". 4. I both prefer and detest writing. I prefer it because it has a rhythm to it, and I can more carefully and exactingly measure my words, and far more than when speaking, in my opinion. But I detest it because it can be a chore when forced upon me. Too often, people mistakenly believe that showing some adeptness or (seemingly) ease in producing a written work must mean that you actually like or love to do it - and I often do not, except when I have something of merit to say, and it compels me to do so. Simply, my mot hellish of scenarios would be in a situation where I had to produce a novel or other literative work. I would have it, and instead, would procrastinate for as long as possible to avoid it. 5. I appreciate the written word, and those who know how to use it properly and effectively, and have since a young age. This likely served as the impetus for my study and appreciation of it - much like a garage band guitarist knows just enough to appreciate the skill of an Eddie Van Halen. Just as the amateur guitarist would eventually learn something by listening to his music, so have I by reading retain authors. In fact, I often find myself imitating my favorite authors in my own writing, and others who know me can (like my wife) can easily spot when I do. Whether I'm reading Lewis, Churchill or even a Sorenson (JFK's speechwriter), I subconsciously adopt their style. 6. A large part of my job requires me to communicate remotely, and often, in abstentia. So, I spend a considerable amount of time writing, and with enough verbosity to provide the proper context, but pointedly enough as to prevent the recipient from failing to recognize my aim. 7. I don't take the questioning of my written versus oral communication badly at all. It's not only an interesting question, but a fair one as well. 8. I often re-read my posts, but rarely correct them outside of grammar or spelling. You can see that my post history is littered with run-ons, fragments, obtuse angles and jutted endings. Were I going so far as to look up words to heighten the perceived intelligence of my prose, it's unlikely that I would then allow such glaring and elementary mistakes to also remain. 9. I began this post at 7:24pm (EST) - and am now concluding it at 7:45 - or, 21 minutes later. 10. And I have written the entirety of it via my iPhone.
Bunch of smart [uck fay]ing people on this site. I'm gonna get murdered for my Dooley-loving ways and general redness, I'm sure. Can't wait to engage!
The only thing anyone gets killed for around here is not standing behind their opinions and failing to back them with reasonable analysis.
i feel as though it would be pretty entertaining to get all the people that are part of the clan/clique together to share conversation and some drinks. you guys are all odd in your own ways but all seem pretty intelligent and witty.
