Pedantry will not Save you

Those successful creatives in the world will know this (and by 'successful' I do not mean 'famous' nor 'wealthy'). Infecting like a cancer upon all creative pursuits, be it art or writing or anything else, the pedant works to elicit her unique from of mundanity. A particularity to exactitude is not pedantry; an eagerness to get things right is no bad thing. Pedantry is the drudgery of pseudo-creativity, the compulsion to the arbitrary, the adherence to grammar that sees a person forsake true self expression for the bland security of correctness. Those who are cursed with creative ineptitude, who cannot create with originality, must substitute their wanting talents with the tedium of pedantry.

All creative realms have their pedants; whether painters who insist on 'correct' ways to apply liquid colour to a surface, or writers who question syntax and accurate word usage. The pedant will not save you. You will never create great art looking through the eyes of the pedant.

Great art might not come easy, sure, but to venture on its journey is simple. To look for the correct and accurate is to move parallel to greatness; to walk with it but never touch it. One must never ask: 'am I doing it right?'; but ask: 'is this how I want to do it?' Only through the self can one create what is meaningful; only through perseverance of one's own realisations can one achieve (truly achieve). Before one asks: 'Is this grammatically correct?' one must ask: 'Is this sentence good? Does it say what I want it to say? Is it doing what I want it to do?' If not, change it; not because of grammar but because it's a lousy sentence. Take issue with your work because it is hackneyed and banal, not because is fails to meet a set of arbitrary rules. Change it, and move on.

Move on.

Over and out for now, guys!


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mother!

Image
There are many ways to tell a story, and stories can be allegorical, sure; but with the allegorical you can end up with a story that lacks internal logic. Characters might not follow any meaningful rules, instead being guided by a narrative outside of the story being told. Often they act completely out of character, and the only explanation we are given is that it is 'allegory'. This is the case with Aronofsky's mother! Allegory isn't necessarily a problem in storytelling, but if the viewer/reader is not aware of what being referenced the story can be perceived as confusing or unrealistic. If you were to watch mother! and not understand the (frankly glaringly obvious) references to Judaeo-Christian lore, the film would not make sense. You would end up with a story that is more surreal than anything else, something nonsensical in which the characters don't react to the events that have come before, who don't learn, who don't develop. Jennifer Lawrence plays...
Read more

Deadpool

Image
If I was a twelve-year-old boy I think I'd probably rank Deadpool as one of my top ten favourite films ever. It is a film clearly written by a teenage boy, perhaps fifteen or sixteen: how else can one explain the plethora of nob-gags and wank jokes?   This fixation on the penis is hardly homo-eroticism however, despite the constant jokes on ejaculation and anal penetration, although Deadpool himself in his pre-super-power days is decidedly camp and it appears to me this story is really a tale of him concealing his true gay self by fooling himself of his straightness by fixating on a woman. The film is certainly watchable. The characters are reasonably likeable and the film moves at a swift pace so that the easily-duped cannot reflect for a moment to realise the story is meagre and simplistic. The story basically goes: Deadpool gets super powers, he wants revenge on the guy who gave him super powers, he nearly succeeds but doesn't, then the bad guy kidnaps his love in...
Read more

The Running Man

Image
According to Stephen King, “Outlines are the last resource of bad fiction writers”, but The Running Man is a book that would have vastly benefited from some careful planning. This novel feels too much like an opportunity missed, in a number of ways. As the title alone suggests, what you’d expect to be a fast-paced, action-packed thriller is instead a wee bit plodding and pedestrian (more of a walking man). I wanted a tale in which the protagonist is attacked relentlessly from all sides, at all times: something fast and trilling and terrifying. The book is structured into one hundred sections, counting down form one hundred to zero (in fact that may be one-hundred-and-one sections in total). It’s the sort of literary device that might seem like a good idea in your head but in reality turns out to be tedious and cumbersome, and more of a hindrance than anything else. I couldn’t help thinking that much of what I was reading was mere filler to make up the numbers rather than important pl...
Read more