Introduction: A Pattern Language v4

@September 26, 2024 11:30 AM (EDT) – @September 26, 2024 12:57 PM (EDT)

@September 26, 2024 5:15 AM (EDT) – @September 26, 2024 7:16 PM (EDT)

Copy with Edits

The One Thing

You are over-editing and over-writing. And that means you’re ready to move on from the Intro.

• Over-editing: The structure is getting too formulaic, so much that it takes me out of the current paragraph and dilutes its content (even when the language/voice is great). E.g., having the “Geometrically” sentence for every Element
• Over-writing: The first and final paragraphs of each Element sub-section are outside the scope of the Introduction — not in the sense that you can’t discuss the purpose of an Element there but that you’re going to lose your reader. With those intros and conclusions, those Element sections read like short chapters, which is something you don’t want. You’ll exhaust your reader. (I felt exhausted.)

Part 1

Part 2

Notes

• There's a missing claim here that I think you need to make in the first paragraph of section 2: Language has an architecture.
• Later in that section, you conflate language and architecture. First, show how they’re related.
• This rips:

An essay is a work of creative nonfiction fit for a single sitting, where an individual with a distinct voice expresses a unifying idea in a linear form.

• This is very good, very clear, very compelling:

Each is an independent plane of thought, a unique problem- space, its own dimension. Their concerns are singular, yet their decisions are all intertwined.

• Did you decide not to capitalize or do any special formatting for Dimension, Element, and Patter?
• Let’s discuss personifying the essay. I stumbled on lines like “An essay also wants to be located in its historical, cultural, and intellectual landscape.” There are definitely pros and cons to this choice. I’m torn.
• Don’t mention logos, pathos, and ethos in the “Elements of” section. Leave it at the higher level. “The title is about pathos,” e.g., really complicates the topic. It’s not fit for a one-paragraph overview.
• For the “Elements of” sections: Let these sections just be about the Elements. If you leave in the intro and conclusion paragraphs, it feels like a chapter.
• Maybe you need a little overview of each element at the start of each part of the book. The Intro can’t be the only time you speak on the Element level. It’s definitely too much to include in the intro.
• It could be a couple-paragraph blurb, on Form for instance, before you start the Story chapter.
• It feels formulaic for you to have the “Geometrically” sentence for every Element.
• Let your symbols/designs for each Element speak for themselves. You don’t have to explain them explicitly.
• There are many instances where you use vague metaphors/analogies to describe new concepts. This adds complexity and doesn’t aid understanding.

Geometrically, I see Spirit has a Venn Diagram (perhaps an overused form), but it signifies that in disparate things, there is a shared essence unifying them.

Story propels us forward, while structure orients us into the present. These two forces work together in a male/female relationship.

• Cut the “Patterns” section. This sentence is great, but you DO NOT NEED this section. Save the patterns for the chapters. Move this sentence up as the conclusion to the Elements section (considering "Elements of"s as sub-sections).

These patterns aren’t solutions, shortcuts, or hacks… they are fundamental questions that guide the essayist’s creativity.

References

Garner’s entry on “free rein”:

Watch out for nominalization (Purdue Owl).

“The compression of the thesis down into a short, compact name is the Title (3).”

• When you have the choice, use active verbs (”compress,” not “the compression”). The noun here makes the sentence weak and passive and confusing.
• My edit: “The Title (3) is a short, compact name for your thesis.”

“Cohesion (5.2) is about increasing the legibility of the thesis and themes throughout.”

• It’s also a problem if a noun would be more descriptive and natural as an adjective.

“Structure is about confusion minimization along the thrilling path that’s thrusted forward by Story (4).”

• My edit: “Structure is about minimizing confusion along the thrilling path put forth by the Story (4).”

“The elements of sound have a sense of oscillation to them; it’s about breathing, pulsation. In and out.”

• My edit: “Your sentences need to oscillate, to breathe, to pulse. In and out.”

Be prudent about how many “non-restrictive” appositives (Grammarly) you use. Sometimes, just choose the best one, rather than including both noun-phrases.

• Effective appositive:

“It all resolves in a closing sentence, a FINALE (6.3), which is a subtextual explosion, a delightful payoff for the reader to entice them to read another paragraph.”

• A distracting, redundant appositive:

“Behind a writer’s voice is an intangible Spirit (07), their authorial fingerprint, an essence that underlies every sentence."

• This is actually has two non-restrictive appositives describing “Spirit.”