Should a writer be flexible with the truth in order to keep the reader interested?
It would be easy in this time of tweets and instant messages to think that in the desire for short sweet messages the truth would be lost in favour of the interesting. Keep the reader interested. Does this allow for the considered development of argument or the thoughtful review of complexities? After all, most things are not as binary as black and white.
Just because a message is short does not mean that it is interesting but equally a long blog is not necessarily any more intelligent that a short. It has always and will always be that a writer must keep the reader interested. I guess it is just easier to scroll over meaningless twitter.
Clever writing might include multiple meanings and words are wonderful like this in a way that numbers are not. Shakespeare was a master at this. Often his minor characters will observe something that we can interpret as either ribald or droll. His situations also very non digital. Two sets of twins, confused, in love with what each other thinks is another. Even death, the most binary of things- you are either dead or you are alive- but in Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet he blurs this line. And of course, this latter is about love, the most annoyingly analogue of human things. Nothing digital about love.
I would love to read what Shakespeare might tweet.
Of love gone wrong or of shipwrecked twins
Of ghosts and the maneuvering of kings
We would think of tears then laugh so sweet,
And later over chardonnay, argue what it meant.
Probably shouldn’t have mentioned shipwrecks in a sailing blog. Here is a picture for you.
No comments:
Post a Comment