|
|
|
|
|
by 0xdeadbeefbabe
3011 days ago
|
|
Are rewrites supposed to destroy the soul of the original idea? That's what mine do. Do you have any tips for that? Edit: Why's poignant guide to ruby would be hard to rewrite imho, I'm guessing it would be hard for him to rewrite too. |
|
No. They are supposed to distill, crystallize, and intensify it.
> That's what mine do. Do you have any tips for that?
You may be editing by imagining a hostile reader. That tends to force you to be defensive, remove things that are potentially disagreeable, add lots of hedges, etc. All of that waters it down.
Some amount of that can be important — accuracy matters and it's good to address the questions and concerns likely to come to the reader's mind. But I think it's still important to presume a good faith, charitable reader, and write for them.
> Edit: Why's poignant guide to ruby would be hard to rewrite imho, I'm guessing it would be hard for him to rewrite too.
It's a common mistake to assume that writing that reads as effortless and spontaneous was written that way. I don't know about _why, but many writers whose writing is noted for flowing naturally get there by painstakingly honing and refining those words over innumerable drafts.
It takes a lot of work to make it look easy.