Would you prefer to read a great story or a well written story?
 |
| Hello Mr Jefford |
That may seem like semantics but, as a self-publishing, occasionally careless writer, it’s a question I give a bit of thought, largely as I’m always torn between whether I should be spending more of my time editing or more time creating.
On the one hand, success as a blogger is often measured on output, and indeed my traffic numbers tend go increase proportionally the more I post. Yet, at the same time, I’m often appalled at my own writing after I read it back, and find myself editing my older posts nearly every time I view one of them.
When I think about some of the great wine writers in the world – and I’m particularly looking towards the likes of Andrew Jefford – I’m often in awe at the power of just one of their stories. I’m In awe at the sheer impact that a single, well written article can have, it’s resonance going beyond a single blog post to make it into a real talking piece.
At the same time, I also realise that by concentrating on just seminal writing (like what Jefford excels at), there is a chance we might be missing just as many stories that deserve to be told. Sure, said stories might not have as vivid imagery and a lyrical tone as Jefford’s article on Georgian wines, but by telling more stories, albeit not as prettily, is it possible to be as valuable a writer?
Obviously I’m naval gazing here, and blogger naval gazing at that (the worst kind!) but this question is an important one. Do you want well written, grammatically correct heart tuggers or are you willing to forgo a few apostrophes in exchange for more stories?
You might also like
12 Comments
What ships are you looking at? As you may infer, I would prefer grammatically correct writing irrespective of the content. That said, I do not support the proposition that you later return to edit and correct errors in an original post unless they are factual in which case the more professional option is to insert a correcting note, rather than change retrospectively the text. In short, leave your howler of "naval" as it is so readers understand my comments.
Hmm. Thanks for the pedantry, yet you haven't quite answered the question…
Having lived in that great naval town Plymouth, I do enjoy a bit of naval gazing. Now being a Queenslander I also enjoy some navel gazing..
To *really* answer your question, personally it's about balance. I appreciate the longer thought-out pieces take longer, more effort – whereas a shorter opinion piece or review can be put up relatively quickly.
Also I see it as an after-hours activity, it's not a full-time role, so maybe mistakes are more permissible.
Thanks Stu. I quite like naval gazing too. Always loved the boat show as a child.
Love the blog as is. I think about right re volume, insight and variety. Keep up the good work!
Your blogs a re good AG and what is a typo or two these days?
I'm with Stuart – it's about balance. As a reasonably pedantic type, I find that excessive and repeated grammatical or spelling errors leave me questioning the authority of the writer but even I can cope with one or two.
As long as content has a purpose and fits, then I think volume is irrelevant.
I would prefer to read great, interesting AND well written stories. Can I have my cake and eat it too, please?!
I enjoy the style of this blog, and especially your view on wine: I think you possess a kind of a European sensibility which I rarely can find in "New World" critics (the Elderton post is a great example; you listed many things that distract me from Barossa wine: lack of tannin/structure in a big wine, weird added acid). To make the point: as a wine geek, I mostly want to read about wines, great ones, problematic ones etc. There is no great story to tell for every day, not even for Jefford, and that's OK.
Cheers
I have been reading this blog for a couple of weeks. I do like a bit of background and a yarn however my interest is reading about wines and getting realistic appraisal and especially value. I am retired. I worked in sales and that involved lunches and of course wine. So it was a great way to hear a variety of opinions and taste a verity of wines. Your blog is giving me some information I have been missing.
I enjoy your writing style. Grammar and spelling are adequate. At least not a problem for me. Perhaps one of your critics of this aspect could volunteer to do a review before you publish.
Thanks everyone for the feedback.
I like your writing and your style it is some what Australian I guess, its just what you think and feel at the time it is off the cuff and no bull shit.
As a fellow typo-iste, I say we should do the best we can without a team of sub-editors to assist us in catching those last few grammatical errors. Certainly, I'd rather read a great piece with a misplaced apostrophe than a perfectly written piece of nonsense.