Note: This article is part of the EWP.
You are the reader, and I, the writer, and I would therefore consider it my duty to inform you as to what you can expect from this article. I would rather not maintain the status quo to be didactic, but nevertheless would like to state that, the topic being acumenical in its breadth, I myself have not planned out the following contents and will be putting down in words the thoughts that surface as and when they do. Further, I will be focusing on the different styles of writing I have come across in articles of my authorship, and of my authorship only. That is all.
To begin with, I am a prosaist: a worker with and of creations that function under the prosaic structure of writing. At other times, I swing as a pendulum, with a frequency to compare, if you were to consider my poetry, an art form that I have not been able to master for a long time, and, frankly, am loth to. The reasons are varied and irrelevant. Before I digress further- a point of note in structured writing is the alimentation of emphasis (note: ‘alimentation’ because it denotes the donation as well as reception), and what the reader will assume to be the judicious decision made by the author in employing that style. Wherefore, the possibility of bad writing with good content becomes obvious and easy to come by.
I know of three methods to divert one’s attention toward the literary piece in the context of emphasis: emphasis by adduction, emphasis by dissemination, and emphasis by free distribution.
In the first case, the emphasis is more on the corpus than on what has been written, and is best operated whereby the conveyance of an idea takes precedence over any creative writing, as such. A very good example to illustrate the concept is an argument: the evidence or proof in support of the point being supported is put forth first, and the conclusion is then drawn with ease. Similarly, a paragraph of this design would commence with the publication of evidence and culminate with the quintessence that is of paramountcy.
‘Emphasis by dissemination’ concerns itself with those lines that divert the reader’s attention away from themselves, a wonted ingredient of many poems. In a stanza of five lines, say, with an ‘ABCBB’ rhyming scheme, converging the first three lines toward an ideological standpoint could arouse an expectation in the reader as to what one can expect from the fourth and fifth lines. However, by including a pleonastic fourth line, the focus is momentarily shifted owing to the surprise evoked, a substance that can be utilized with great effect as the poet then steers back to the seeming vanishing point that is the fifth line.
In the last case, emphasis, in nonpartisan quotas, is sustained throughout a single paragraph, and routinely constitutes a smoother read. Getatable in both prosaic and poetic forms, it is the most commonly used since its praxis is not dictated by the author’s, or poet’s, intentions, and therefore presents itself as a test of one’s skills in creative writing, withal. With that, we conclude the motif of emphasis.
Having always preferred the persistence of some structure in my writing, the absence of structure is an abhorrent idea, and of such intensity because I am at a loss to understand as to why the absence of dynamic morphology is credited as being excogitating. That is only my first bone of contention, meager though it may seem.
My second point of departure concerns itself with the use of what many would rate as being “complex” words. Contingently, the label itself refers to words that may be unknown and unfamiliar to the reader while, to me, they seem a good solution to save time, space and, if need be, ink. For example, if it were necessary for me to imply, in meaning, a sense of moderate redundancy, the use of the word “recrementitious” avails me the opportunity to get on with, per se, whatever it is that I am thinking about. However, it becomes perceivable that such conveniences come at the loss of readership. Pity.
This consummates the present session of writing.
Fog index: 16.81