Post History
When someone says that writing is good or bad, better or worse, is it merely a way to talk about whether something is popular, or interesting to you? Or is there more to it than that? Compare the...
Question
text-analysis
#4: Question reopened
by
Mark Baker
·
2020-02-15T14:05:22Z (about 4 years ago)
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T13:13:39Z (over 4 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/48907 License name: CC BY-SA 4.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
Jedediah
·
2019-12-08T13:13:39Z (over 4 years ago)
When someone says that writing is good or bad, better or worse, is it merely a way to talk about whether something is popular, or interesting to you? Or is there more to it than that? Compare the two passages: > Where dips the rocky highland > Of Sleuth Wood in the lake, > There lies a leafy island > Where flapping herons wake > The drowsy water rats... > -From "The Stolen Child", by W. B. Yeats and > The dog saw a frog > On a log in the bog. I'm less interested in why Yeat's poem is technically better (unless your argument is that technical quality is the only objective measure of quality in writing). Rather, is there writing that is better or worse? Is it possible to quantify such a thing? (Obviously, this will be seen by some as primarily opinion based - since I'm asking what exactly opinions are or should be based on.)
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2019-11-11T18:32:31Z (over 4 years ago)
Original score: 0