The Ultimate Indignity

As a person with a liberal arts degree I have suffered the ultimate indignity. I have had my writing critiqued by an engineer. To further define my level of degradation the explanation for my failure to write properly is based on a psychological evaluation of my hemispheres. Here it is.

"Dan, you're overly logical left hemisphere has betrayed the right and made a binary decision. A lot more white space instead of some more white space. Instead of bullet points, perhaps artistic layout would help the reader. I presume your intent is to impart the content of what you write. Making your musing easy to read facilitates the transfer.

May I suggest you write as you always have. When your done, consider its layout. Perhaps a single space between paragraphs, on long posts perhaps grouping paragraphs with subtitles. Inserting an occasional enhancing graphic, etc.

Thinks of it as complementary parts of exposition. Verbal and visual. Distinct skill sets. The cleaver thing would be to integrate the pair.

...jgk"

Calumny!
Now, I feel I must defend myself against this vile calumny. For a start, the accusation that my left hemisphere is overly rational is quite hurtful. I mean, that's what that hemisphere is for. However, the notion that it has overidden my right hemisphere in making this a binary decision is actually the opposite of the truth. As laid out in my post the reason for my opposition to the advice (and therefore the sabotage of it through excess white space) is from my irrational hemisphere, a position based on emotional autonomy rather than ease of reading.

The second error on the part of my vicious attacker is in saying "Instead of bullet points," when my point is that restricting the size of paragraphs and spacing them out on the page creates bullet points. Smaller paragraphs reduces the amount you can say on a subject. Creating space between paragraphs distances the point of each paragraph from another. Increased white space automatically leads to an effect closer to bullet points, this is inescapable.

The next point is my intent. It is interesting to note that those in favor of a different layout have been a technical writer and an engineer. Those in favor of my normal wordiness have degrees in psychology, art and history. In engineering and techncal writing the intent is to as simply as possible convey information. In art the point of writing is very different. It is to be beautiful in and of itself. It is to convey a depth of multiple meanings. It is to create an emotional environment. A good technical manual has simple sentences, short paragraphs, spaces between those paagraphs. Anna Karenina has long, complex sentences. It has long, dense paragraphs filled with equivical meaning, the point of Anna Karenina only becomes apparent after tens of thousands of words. My intent is somewere between these two extremes.

Shocked!
The thing that has really shocked me about all this is the connection made between spaces between paragraphs and reading comprehension. Are people serious? Is it really true that people cannot understand the exact same information, with the same words, in the same order, without having headings or spaces between paragraphs? Have people become unable to read novels? I read a 600 page novel over the last couple of weeks that had white space only between chapters as per convention. Would people have had trouble understanding this novel as a result?

The Painful Truth
What I think has happened is a combination of two things. First, the internet now dominates daily reading. White space on the internet is free. In print is costs money. The denser the writing on paper the cheaper is the cost of providing it, with the internet it makes no difference. However, in print there is not really an immediate alternative for a reader who becomes bored with what they are reading, while on the internet any moment of boredom can result in the reader goin elsewhere. So people have become accustomed to small paragraphs, in a bullet point style, packing as much emotional content into as few words as possible, exactly in the manner of cable news.
Second, there is a convention that has sprung up as to how blogs should be written. There is literally no reason why different blogs should all look the same. Rather, it seems to me that blogs should represent the views, character, personality and interest of the person writing them.

Summary
If I change the way I write this blog, then it won't be me writing it. Do you really want me to be a different person? Am I not good enough for you, Jim?


Epilogue
If you couldn't tell, this entire post should be read with you tongue shoved firmly into your cheek.