Can I ask you to expand on this? I am curious as I had trouble making my way through it. I am also seeing people stating they gave up trying to understand it.
So, I am genuinely curious to hear what makes it well written according to other people.
Do you mean to say that from a literary perspective, the essay has strengths? Like the use of vivid metaphors, style, clever grammatical sentence structures, distinct voice, etc? Because these I can agree with, but these do not make a well written essay in my opinion.
At least in my mind, well written means that the message comes across. Meaning that clarity and readability are factors that weigh heavily into a well written essay. Here it very much falls short, again in my opinion.
Sentence length is high, the vocabulary swings between conversational and academic and has trouble following through with what is being said. It feels like it meanders, circles ideas without directly stating them. Basically it lacks a clear organizational structure. By which I don't mean the typical bullet point madness that people seem to overly rely on to make clear points these days. What I mean is that simple things like signposting (basically drawing conclusions at appropriate places) are lacking.
Given that multiple people have actually stated they like the writing, I am almost wondering if this is a different form of “technical” where reading long form texts in this same format is a learned skill. Because it reminds me of the sort of writing I see in certain academic circles. Which causes a lot of the same reading "fatigue" I experienced with this specific article.
The writing per se flows well, where most writing does not. I did find several places farther in where the author's comma-phobia cost me a few milliseconds, and a couple passages that would probably need to be heavily re-arranged for basic clarity to be achieved.
I had to get all the way to the end, though, to figure out that this is about a particular kind of "big tech" culture among a very few people in a very few places, which is why I spent most of the article failing to understand WTF it was about. It does not communicate well at all, and in fact, even knowing that now, it assumes familiarity with that kind of culture to such a degree that I'm still in the dark about most of the piece.
Can I ask you to expand on this? I am curious as I had trouble making my way through it. I am also seeing people stating they gave up trying to understand it.
So, I am genuinely curious to hear what makes it well written according to other people.
Do you mean to say that from a literary perspective, the essay has strengths? Like the use of vivid metaphors, style, clever grammatical sentence structures, distinct voice, etc? Because these I can agree with, but these do not make a well written essay in my opinion.
At least in my mind, well written means that the message comes across. Meaning that clarity and readability are factors that weigh heavily into a well written essay. Here it very much falls short, again in my opinion.
Sentence length is high, the vocabulary swings between conversational and academic and has trouble following through with what is being said. It feels like it meanders, circles ideas without directly stating them. Basically it lacks a clear organizational structure. By which I don't mean the typical bullet point madness that people seem to overly rely on to make clear points these days. What I mean is that simple things like signposting (basically drawing conclusions at appropriate places) are lacking.
Given that multiple people have actually stated they like the writing, I am almost wondering if this is a different form of “technical” where reading long form texts in this same format is a learned skill. Because it reminds me of the sort of writing I see in certain academic circles. Which causes a lot of the same reading "fatigue" I experienced with this specific article.