Why is it that presently it is so common for people to describe the world's greatest authors as excessively verbose? This is what my experience would indicate: How many times have I heard such great and immortal authors as Mill and Shelley and Coleridge and even Dickens described thus. Such writing was rightfully accepted in former years, but now, alas, owing to the current simplicity of the commom reader, even mildly complex sentences are frowned upon: magazines, for instance, do not surprass the seventh grade reading level. "Verbose and pretentious" they say, but nothing could be more contrary to reality. Nowise ought this to be allowed; it is an insult to humanity! And soon, such great works of the human mind will escape our interest, and our minds will decay, and we will be inclined to further corruption due to our separation of our minds from wisdom and wisdom-loving, and our society will grow wholly timocratic and we will function principally by means of procuring money, and thus become an abstract number, slaves to the whims and fancies of Capitalist Might. Corporations coerce writers to write simpler and simpler, vaguer and vaguer, as they have been doing now since the birth of Capitalism, for the "mass market".

How verbose is that for you? Hah! I did that to show you what REAL pretentious verbosity is like. As peculiar as it sounds, it is far superior to the majority of the current popular writers. The problem is that they use too many contractions, too many verbs, and rather than form a picture in our minds, they give us a vague and concise description in the form of a deficient sentence. Deficient, because they could have oftener than not phrased the same five sentences in a long, harmonious sentence; one pleasing to the ear and comprehensible to the mind. And the similes and metaphors are ludicrous and simplistic:-- my seven year old sister conjures better metaphors than the various authors I am describing. They do not use enough commas and semicolons; they use certain words, such as "as", oftener than they ought to; and I daresay such writers are popular to the lot of you. How I pity you, you victims of Capitalism, as I once was.

Newspeak.

i'd rather not.

It's a toss up folks...The "new" Brent or the "old" Brent.

*Nox scratches head*

*Nox wonders why there are only two options*

*Nox wonders if "NO" Brent is an option*

*Nox decides NO Brent is not only the best option, but the ONLY option*

*Nox votes...NO BRENT*

Nox

Its because often times people use language of great complexity to make a bad Idea seem more apealling.

I don't even know what verbose means...

Those "verbose" writers of the past were using the current language usage that was normal speak for their time periods. These are new times and we don't use all of the same phrases and mannerisms they would in the past.

Ask a more highly educated person about these authors and they (or I) will tell you that they love these books, but to the lesser educated it might be too much effort to translate it into more modern terms.

Books, music, and art continuously go in and out of style, as these books are unpopular today, in the future at some point they will be loved and read again.

The world will not end because people don't like a certain literary period.

quote:

---

Its because often times people use language of great complexity to make a bad Idea seem more apealling.

---

Das Kapital?

Of course, it's also true that people use language and rhetoric of great simplicity in order to make their ideas seem honest and logical, and to understate the significance of problems generated by an idea.

Verbose is the use of more words than needed...Such as Brent's post. And Brent if you want to try an look refined and educated for this new image. Here is a hint; use proper english and double check everything before you post. For example there is no such word as oftener. Your post doesn't seem to be precise and hit on any point whatsoever, it tends ramble and not get to the point. How it is said or written is not so important anymore, as long as it is understood. There are enough barriers in communication as it is...

[This message has been edited by stormybaka (edited 09-28-2002).]

nah nah nah nah nah brent got in trouble!!

ThoughtCrime?

Actually, oftener is a word. It's not one in regular use, but it is a word. Nowise and timocratic are similarly obsolete. He did misspell "surprass" (surpass), though. There are several grammatical errors in his post, as well.

Please don't interpret this as support for Brent. He is a horribly insecure young man.

Doublethink?

No, I won't take it that way, but if oftener is really a word. Damn. It sounds stupid and I haven't seen it anywhere, not even in the dictionary. nowise and timocratic are words. But I am certain oftener is not. His grammar is horrid.

Brent takes pride in the obsolescence of his vocabulary.

quote:

---

Originally posted by stormybaka:
Verbose is the use of more words than needed...Such as Brent's post. And Brent if you want to try an look refined and educated for this new image. Here is a hint; use proper english and double check everything before you post. For example there is no such word as oftener. Your post doesn't seem to be precise and hit on any point whatsoever, it tends ramble and not get to the point. How it is said or written is not so important anymore, as long as it is understood. There are enough barriers in communication as it is...

[This message has been edited by stormybaka (edited 09-28-2002).]

---

LOL. My post lacks long words, it is to the point, and it is simple.

Oh, and, LOL, oftener is a word.
http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=oftener&r=67

An experpt from Frankenstein by Mary Shelley:
She sometimes begged Justine to forgive her unkindness, but much oftener accused her of having caused the deaths of her brothers and sister.

An experpt from Little Dorrit by Charles Dickens:
Therefore Mr Henry Gowan would have clouded Clennam's mind, and would have been far oftener present.

An excerpt from Our Mutual Friend by Charles Dickens:
Oftener and ever oftener, it came stealing over her; darker and ever darker, like the shadow of advancing Death

An excerpt Great Expectations by Charles Dickens:
In the meantime Mr Pocket grew greyer, and tried oftener to lift himself out of his perplexities by the hair.

An excerpt from On Liberty by J S Mill:
It is also often argued, and still oftener thought,...

I could go on, and on, and on. I won't.

I was not imitating any writers in particular; I was attempting to show people a form of writing that resembles pretentious verbosity by definition. You have obviously missed the point, thinking that I was attempting to write well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by FuckOffandDie:
Brent takes pride in the obsolescence of his vocabulary.

---

And grammar.

quote:

---

Originally posted by stormybaka:
No, I won't take it that way, but if oftener is really a word. Damn. It sounds stupid and I haven't seen it anywhere, not even in the dictionary. nowise and timocratic are words. But I am certain oftener is not. His grammar is horrid.

---

I do not think it was that bad, considering how quickly I slapped it together.
And you should know, on account of my use of archaic words, that I also use archaic grammar and punctuation.


[This message has been edited by Brent (edited 09-28-2002).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by stormybaka:
No, I won't take it that way, but if oftener is really a word. Damn. It sounds stupid and I haven't seen it anywhere, not even in the dictionary. nowise and timocratic are words. But I am certain oftener is not. His grammar is horrid.

---

You are obviously unacquainted with great literature--thinking that oftener is not a word! The best laugh I had all day!

I don't want my newspaper to read like a Faulkner novel. I don't want my pleasure reading to read like a newspaper. Different styles suit themselves to different applications. A book for mass consumption must be suited to the taste of the masses. Needless verbosity is out; Brevity is in.

quote:

---

Please don't interpret this as support for Brent. He is a horribly insecure young man.

---

Are you sure he is young? He sounds like a 35-year old who got beat up a lot in high school...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atheist Mantis:
Are you sure he is young? He sounds like a 35-year old who got beat up a lot in high school...

---

I am 14.

quote:

---

I am 14.

---

but you get beat up still, don't you?

quote:

---

thinking that oftener is not a word! The best laugh I had all day!

---

Someone needs to get out more

quote:

---

Originally posted by Atheist Mantis:
but you get beat up still, don't you?

---

Yeah.