Mostly I agree with this, though I would point out that a well-written essay can contain more than one perspective. The secret, or at least one of them, is to ignore all of the bullshit they teach you in school and write an argument that is purposefully unsatisfactory. You can do lots of tricky stuff with essays, like cite examples that don't support your argument and contradict yourself. One can create tension between what one is saying and what one is arguing. Really great essays usually say more than what's written in the lines.
Not prose, but Antony's funeral oration exemplifies the spirit of what I'm talking about, though one can, of course, be more subtle.
I'd say that it's a different skill, though there's definitely overlap. In Aristotle's Politics there's a part where he seems to be rather nasty towards women, and he says something like "As the poet says, silence is an ornament unto a woman." It's a controversial passage, with some feminist scholars taking him to be a sexist pig and a man of his time, while the more interesting reading, in my opinion, says that Aristotle was using a literary reference to subvert his explicit argument. If you look at the context of the quote, it's from a play called the Ajax by Sophocles. Ajax, mad with envy because Odysseus received the armour of Achilles, says the line to his wife before he goes and slaughters the sheep of Odysseus. Ajax's wife was trying to stop him from doing something very stupid and crazy and that leads to his ruin and suicide in the play, but Ajax dismisses her, says "Silence is an ornament unto a woman," and ruins himself. Obviously, there's tension between the explicit content of what Aristotle is saying, i.e. notion that women should be silent, and a literary reference involving a man who ruins himself because he doesn't listen to his wife! Aristotle wasn't stupid, he knew that and he was being subversive.
Aristotle was not a fiction writer, but he was a clever writer of treatises/essays. Somewhere he writes that pregnant women should walk to the temple -- because exercise is good for them, not because of anything to do with the gods. It's more of a political skill than a strictly literary one. Creating tension is often a way of saying something that you're not allowed to say. Roger Stone, of all people (somewhat below the skills of Aristotle), has a scene in the documentary Get Me Roger Stone where he talks about a mock election at his high school. It was Nixon vs. Kennedy, and at the time Stone supported Kennedy. He tells a story about how he went around telling all the other kids that Nixon had proposed having school on Saturdays. Naturally, Kennedy won in a landslide. Stone then punctuates the story saying something like "That experience taught me the value of disinformation. Of course, I've never practiced it since." Point being, it's a rhetorical technique not exclusive to literary people, though naturally a writer of Shakespeare's caliber makes it look like child's play.
But yeah, it's rare to find anyone who is clever. Substack is full of demented cult of positivity bullshit.
"Tik-Tok refugee and human cholesterol publish" Best quote.... more more more...
A.i is the death of Literacy and the human scrolling echo chamber.
Like most things in modernity: Everyone looking for relativity, whilst foregoing conversation in the persuit to hear there own voice. Look at how homogenised every Video, image and written spectacle is.
Like someone once said...
If you do not become the algo, the rewards are back page disappointment watching the shit floating in vertical format on the front page platforms of the visual sewerage .
The trouble with becoming the algo is, if I’m going to let everyone else write my work for me, I might as well go back to washing dishes. At least it’s useful.
Mostly I agree with this, though I would point out that a well-written essay can contain more than one perspective. The secret, or at least one of them, is to ignore all of the bullshit they teach you in school and write an argument that is purposefully unsatisfactory. You can do lots of tricky stuff with essays, like cite examples that don't support your argument and contradict yourself. One can create tension between what one is saying and what one is arguing. Really great essays usually say more than what's written in the lines.
Not prose, but Antony's funeral oration exemplifies the spirit of what I'm talking about, though one can, of course, be more subtle.
Come I to speak in Caesar’s funeral.
He was my friend, faithful and just to me:
But Brutus says he was ambitious;
And Brutus is an honourable man.
I guess that’s the kind of essay you can write once you’ve written enough fiction?
I'd say that it's a different skill, though there's definitely overlap. In Aristotle's Politics there's a part where he seems to be rather nasty towards women, and he says something like "As the poet says, silence is an ornament unto a woman." It's a controversial passage, with some feminist scholars taking him to be a sexist pig and a man of his time, while the more interesting reading, in my opinion, says that Aristotle was using a literary reference to subvert his explicit argument. If you look at the context of the quote, it's from a play called the Ajax by Sophocles. Ajax, mad with envy because Odysseus received the armour of Achilles, says the line to his wife before he goes and slaughters the sheep of Odysseus. Ajax's wife was trying to stop him from doing something very stupid and crazy and that leads to his ruin and suicide in the play, but Ajax dismisses her, says "Silence is an ornament unto a woman," and ruins himself. Obviously, there's tension between the explicit content of what Aristotle is saying, i.e. notion that women should be silent, and a literary reference involving a man who ruins himself because he doesn't listen to his wife! Aristotle wasn't stupid, he knew that and he was being subversive.
Aristotle was not a fiction writer, but he was a clever writer of treatises/essays. Somewhere he writes that pregnant women should walk to the temple -- because exercise is good for them, not because of anything to do with the gods. It's more of a political skill than a strictly literary one. Creating tension is often a way of saying something that you're not allowed to say. Roger Stone, of all people (somewhat below the skills of Aristotle), has a scene in the documentary Get Me Roger Stone where he talks about a mock election at his high school. It was Nixon vs. Kennedy, and at the time Stone supported Kennedy. He tells a story about how he went around telling all the other kids that Nixon had proposed having school on Saturdays. Naturally, Kennedy won in a landslide. Stone then punctuates the story saying something like "That experience taught me the value of disinformation. Of course, I've never practiced it since." Point being, it's a rhetorical technique not exclusive to literary people, though naturally a writer of Shakespeare's caliber makes it look like child's play.
But yeah, it's rare to find anyone who is clever. Substack is full of demented cult of positivity bullshit.
Good point!
I’m not sure that (statistically, anyone) writing essays online currently can reach that high, though. But good to keep in mind that it is possible!
"Tik-Tok refugee and human cholesterol publish" Best quote.... more more more...
A.i is the death of Literacy and the human scrolling echo chamber.
Like most things in modernity: Everyone looking for relativity, whilst foregoing conversation in the persuit to hear there own voice. Look at how homogenised every Video, image and written spectacle is.
Like someone once said...
If you do not become the algo, the rewards are back page disappointment watching the shit floating in vertical format on the front page platforms of the visual sewerage .
Hehe, well put!
The trouble with becoming the algo is, if I’m going to let everyone else write my work for me, I might as well go back to washing dishes. At least it’s useful.
I just like hearing your acerbic poetry of the diminutive times we live in.
Please write more about how shit A.i is and how dumb the people are that fall for it.
Thank you!!!!
"Nobody tells the truth like the voices in your head."
Funny, I've just been thinking about Julian Jaynes speaking of that.
Do the voices arise from thumos?
"When the Homeric hero is under emotional
stress he may externalize his heart or his thumos,
scolding it or conversing with it..."
https://xtf.lib.virginia.edu/xtf/view?docId=DicHist/uvaGenText/tei/DicHist4.xml;chunk.id=dv4-01
Perhaps fictional characters themselves represent personified passions, like the gods of the Iliad.
Essays, lacking this, are pure exercises in nous, and therefore incomplete, like the disembodied psyche appearing as a shadow in the underworld.
It's an interesting way of looking at things.
Sounds like I need to read this Julian Jaynes person!
Yes, you really should. I don't fully buy his theory, but it's a very good read:
https://books.google.com/books?id=CLDqDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT5&source=kp_read_button&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&gboemv=1#v=onepage&q&f=false