When reviewing my article “I am a Writer”, I noticed something written at the end. I question you if your writing is perfect.
What does “perfect” mean?
Is there even such a thing?
The point of communication is to, well, communicate. So, if through punctuation and proper enunciation of words the message is delivered… did communication occur? Would this mean that following the written language rules is unnecessary, so long as the efforts result with a clear channel of understanding. Now I could reference all these fancy textbooks I have read, and giving credit to my local College (now University!) for the training and guidance I received while paying tuition and other related expenses of higher education; I will save you the academic rigor and jargon. Quite simply consider:
If a goal of communication is understanding, does it really matter how we get there?
Does “perfect” always have to mean following the rules set forth? Now, we could say the rules are there for a reason, or because they are true. I give credit to the notion that organization functions better than chaos, but that is only when there is a goal to be achieved. Wouldn’t you say chaos can be really fun sometimes, maybe the unpredictability is refreshing.
Here is another quest for you, take notice of the words people could have said but didn’t. As a writer (or reader) do you think you know where something is going but it’s not as expected? Does this make you a better writer, sidestepping the obvious and choosing the unusual presentation of your idea because maybe, just maybe, that is part of the message itself?
Notice the details, are they intentional? I hope my readers don’t view my work as careless or sloppy, quite the contrary… provoking thought is my goal. Read along as we explore. examine. everything.
Next stop: tbd