Comments on: The right to write http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/ A wide-angle view of architecture, urban design and life in Wellington Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:14:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: rondo http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3294 rondo Mon, 15 Sep 2008 23:45:23 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3294 You're probably bang-on right about the Listener Robyn, which is why Black's tawdry gossip column has moved to the place formerly taken by Bradford's Hollywood. But, while i ignore those irrelevant 'opinion' pieces, I do still find that it is a valuable source of info on book and film reviews. The media I am more concerned about though, would be the Dominion Post, which is getting more anorexic in terms of news every day, and seems to have recently reinvested itself as a cover sheet for double-spread supermarket advertising pages. It's absolutely appalling. The world section is now just one and a quarter pages of actual world news, with the rest being adverts and letters etc. And even their actual 'news' pieces are all bought in, not from AP, but from irrelevant syndicated right-wing (fascist) Murdoch-style papers, presumably associated with Fairfax. Most of the time the 'style' pieces are brought (or bought) straight in from London or LA, neither of which would appear to be useful or relevant to Wellington's southern hemisphere seasons, while all the items on foreclosure on houses, mountain lions living in abandoned McMansions, and such articles are pretty damn irrelevant to us in Wellington. You’re probably bang-on right about the Listener Robyn, which is why Black’s tawdry gossip column has moved to the place formerly taken by Bradford’s Hollywood. But, while i ignore those irrelevant ‘opinion’ pieces, I do still find that it is a valuable source of info on book and film reviews.

The media I am more concerned about though, would be the Dominion Post, which is getting more anorexic in terms of news every day, and seems to have recently reinvested itself as a cover sheet for double-spread supermarket advertising pages. It’s absolutely appalling. The world section is now just one and a quarter pages of actual world news, with the rest being adverts and letters etc. And even their actual ‘news’ pieces are all bought in, not from AP, but from irrelevant syndicated right-wing (fascist) Murdoch-style papers, presumably associated with Fairfax. Most of the time the ‘style’ pieces are brought (or bought) straight in from London or LA, neither of which would appear to be useful or relevant to Wellington’s southern hemisphere seasons, while all the items on foreclosure on houses, mountain lions living in abandoned McMansions, and such articles are pretty damn irrelevant to us in Wellington.

]]> By: Robyn http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3292 Robyn Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:51:28 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3292 The Listener has reinvented itself as a weekly rag for middle-aged people concerned about their investment properties, expanding waistlines and wrinkles. It says nothing to me about my life. The Listener has reinvented itself as a weekly rag for middle-aged people concerned about their investment properties, expanding waistlines and wrinkles.

It says nothing to me about my life.

]]> By: M-D http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3291 M-D Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:04:44 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3291 lgm - exactly... which is why creating 'spaces' as a speciality of architects is a fairly bold claim (it is a speciality of good architects...) - creating buildings is much closer to the truth... Same goes for journalism - their speciality is in writing the news, not in good writing per se ...but remember also that Black is writing as a columnist - which I fear is something akin to what a journalist might scrape from the sole of their shoe... Does anyone still read the Listener anyway? I recommend using Google reader (or equivalent) to collect all of the rss feeds from websites and blogs that are actually relevant and meaningful to you... you can eliminate all of the dross that is a feature of NZ 'journalism' and focus on what really matters for you. Magazines and newspapers really are relics of the past... lgm – exactly… which is why creating ‘spaces’ as a speciality of architects is a fairly bold claim (it is a speciality of good architects…) – creating buildings is much closer to the truth…

Same goes for journalism – their speciality is in writing the news, not in good writing per se

…but remember also that Black is writing as a columnist – which I fear is something akin to what a journalist might scrape from the sole of their shoe…

Does anyone still read the Listener anyway? I recommend using Google reader (or equivalent) to collect all of the rss feeds from websites and blogs that are actually relevant and meaningful to you… you can eliminate all of the dross that is a feature of NZ ‘journalism’ and focus on what really matters for you. Magazines and newspapers really are relics of the past…

]]> By: Robyn http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3290 Robyn Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:55:40 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3290 lgm: Understanding will happen, eventually. Maybe not us but our kids. I guess one problem is that while scientific writing is easily identifiable as "not for you", other writing might not be. Especially if it's doesn't use a lot of slang or jargon and seems like something you might ordinarily read. lgm: Understanding will happen, eventually. Maybe not us but our kids.

I guess one problem is that while scientific writing is easily identifiable as “not for you”, other writing might not be. Especially if it’s doesn’t use a lot of slang or jargon and seems like something you might ordinarily read.

]]> By: lgm http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3289 lgm Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:36:55 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3289 good point Robyn - I absolutely agree - but do you think, in this age of plurality where we come across writing written for audiences that we aren't apart of, that a new understanding and respect for the diversity of writing might emerge? I certainly don't expect to fully understand a biochemist's or engineer's writing, and acknowledge my complete lack of specialist knowledge in these areas. I'd like to think I wouldn't accuse them of bad writing because of my own limitations in their disciplines. I guess it's the lack of self-awareness displayed in this situation and the inherent desire for a one-size fits all approach. M-D - no doubt architecture is like any profession - there are some hopeless ones and some good ones - hence the spatial consequences!! good point Robyn – I absolutely agree – but do you think, in this age of plurality where we come across writing written for audiences that we aren’t apart of, that a new understanding and respect for the diversity of writing might emerge? I certainly don’t expect to fully understand a biochemist’s or engineer’s writing, and acknowledge my complete lack of specialist knowledge in these areas. I’d like to think I wouldn’t accuse them of bad writing because of my own limitations in their disciplines. I guess it’s the lack of self-awareness displayed in this situation and the inherent desire for a one-size fits all approach.

M-D – no doubt architecture is like any profession – there are some hopeless ones and some good ones – hence the spatial consequences!!

]]> By: Robyn http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3288 Robyn Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:25:55 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3288 The other thing to consider with any sort of writing is the intended audience. Newspaper articles will have a very broad audience, but an architect writing about a planned building for a client will be writing for a much smaller audience, with a different style. And this in turn brings me to Clay Shirky's book "Here Comes Everyone" about the internet and stuff. One of the things he notes is that the internet makes available the sort of writing that previously was only available to small audiences - a teenager's friend reads her note, a group of scientists peer-review a paper, engineers read an description of a new dam. Now all these things available online to be read by people who won't understand them, will find the subject boring and will wonder why someone would spent so much time writing something that this person happens to have no interest in. So could it be that Joanne Black found this piece of architectural writing offensive simply because she was not the intended audience? It wasn't written for her so when she reads it, she has trouble understanding it. The other thing to consider with any sort of writing is the intended audience. Newspaper articles will have a very broad audience, but an architect writing about a planned building for a client will be writing for a much smaller audience, with a different style.

And this in turn brings me to Clay Shirky’s book “Here Comes Everyone” about the internet and stuff. One of the things he notes is that the internet makes available the sort of writing that previously was only available to small audiences – a teenager’s friend reads her note, a group of scientists peer-review a paper, engineers read an description of a new dam. Now all these things available online to be read by people who won’t understand them, will find the subject boring and will wonder why someone would spent so much time writing something that this person happens to have no interest in.

So could it be that Joanne Black found this piece of architectural writing offensive simply because she was not the intended audience? It wasn’t written for her so when she reads it, she has trouble understanding it.

]]> By: M-D http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3287 M-D Mon, 15 Sep 2008 04:09:18 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3287 “M-D – you are obviously not going to the right spaces by the right architects….”

That is the point isn’t it – most of what is experienced in the name of architecture is spatial mediocrity – you do have to go to the right spaces by the right architects, and I find them few and far between…

]]> By: mobsta http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3286 mobsta Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:24:42 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3286 M-D - you are obviously not going to the right spaces by the right architects.... lgm - I'm not sure that jouranalism is being held up as a gold standard. The writing in the DomPost and The Hearld borders on trashy tabloid fodder at times. Who cares that Britney's dog's leg got caught in the car door? arrggghhhh.... M-D – you are obviously not going to the right spaces by the right architects….

lgm – I’m not sure that jouranalism is being held up as a gold standard.
The writing in the DomPost and The Hearld borders on trashy tabloid fodder at times.
Who cares that Britney’s dog’s leg got caught in the car door? arrggghhhh….

]]> By: lgm http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3285 lgm Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:10:49 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3285 why is journalism held up as the "gold standard" of writing? I doubt very much that journalistic training is a guarantee of writing excellence - surely it's just one way of writing ... and yes more passion and poetry why is journalism held up as the “gold standard” of writing? I doubt very much that journalistic training is a guarantee of writing excellence – surely it’s just one way of writing … and yes more passion and poetry

]]> By: M-D http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3284 M-D Sun, 14 Sep 2008 21:01:40 +0000 http://eyeofthefish.org/the-right-to-write/#comment-3284 "Anyway, it occurs to me that architects are not writers. Their training and speciality is creating spaces." ...if only there was more convincing evidence to prove the latter statement to be accurate... “Anyway, it occurs to me that architects are not writers. Their training and speciality is creating spaces.”

…if only there was more convincing evidence to prove the latter statement to be accurate…

]]>