|
|
|
|
|
by echelon
2222 days ago
|
|
It might be me personally, but I can't stand old, long-winded and effervescent writing. My eyes start to jump around in it, and I can't maintain focus. It makes me wonder how our writing and media will be perceived in a hundred or more years. Entire patterns of thought become antiquated as our communication wiring adapts to the ever increasing pace of society. Social media is driving dopamine hits from shorter and shorter forms of engagement. It's amusing to think that Harry Potter might one day read like an opaque relic. |
|
I think you are extrapolating a little too much from your personal experience. An obvious counterexample to our society trending to "shorter and shorter forms of engagement" is the rise of long-form podcasts and long-form independent reporting.
Plenty of people still enjoy literature and the way in which it can convey ideas that non-fiction does not. My impression is that you'd have the same reaction to more recent fiction by, say, Cormac McCarthy or David Foster Wallace. I'm not sure Harry Potter is exactly a fair comparison of a work that aims for the same register as Moby Dick. As far as I know, 19th century literature with a simpler prose style (for example Sherlock Holmes or Poe's short stories) is still entirely accessible to someone with basic reading comprehension.