/lit/ - Literature

>>20853005
I don't fully agree with him on the worksmanlike prose suiciding bit—It's a bit kneejerk for my liking. I just found it to be interesting that he wasn't a Boswell clone with his original argument.
Though I will say, worksmanlike prose can be a huge issue. Many who swear by it tend to use it as an excuse for their lack of charisma in the exact same way that a psued will bemoan anyone who "doesn't get it".
Take this piece by our aforementioned Boswell. It's bad. You don't need to be told that. You don't need to be told why. You already know. Reading through it is like staring a past-her-prime tranny in the mug. It's not a women. It's not a human. It's an Adam's apple. It's a drooping eye. It's thinning hair. It's skeletal hands that could palm a watermelon. The errors distract from the whole until they become the whole.
The interesting thing though, is that our writers on the exact opposite spectrum suffer from the exact same issue. Bucksneed agonizes over each and every word, not with flow or charisma in mind, but with the crippling fear that his facade might fall if he uses a two syllable word. In doing so he throws away every intention of being charismatic or entertaining. Every time he decides that he would rather posture over entertain is another millimeter to the five-o'clock shadow.
You are an entertainer. Be entertaining. It's your only job.