HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
June 4, 2006 Writers as creators are an interesting ilk. Some (too vague, ambiguous) tend to be sensitive; others (still too vague) seem (too passive) to be insensitive (a statement of the obvious). I can only assume since I have no empirical data to back up my belief that those writers who possess sensitivity don’t last long in the world of journalism or Internet magazine writing. A heart in this business will get you into trouble (a generalized statement based on writer’s own belief). Putting your heart into your work means, you’re setting yourself up for what is generally referred to as “heartbreak.” I admire writers that shoot from the hip and shoot straight. They are eloquent in their presentations and usually very thorough in their gleaning of information. They spare no words (succinct is the word I believe). They take no captives. The jugular vein of news is their target and “damn the torpedoes…full speed ahead” is their motto, their shibboleth if you will. I write so rarely on U-K because I am so overcome with awe. I feel like the lion in the “Wizard Of Oz.” The writing has become so superior I can only imagine the massive amount of gray matter being grown by the rapid lengthening of nerve synapses. When I read the articles by so many geniuses I feel like a grain of sand on a beach of intellectualism. I feel so small after I’ve visited this site I can barely reach my keyboard to type my insignificant ramblings, or drool (whichever you prefer). In two years, should I live that long, I will retire from my real job and I can only assume (there you go again, Stan) I will have more time to improve my writing in order to meet the high caliber of journalistic discourse presented daily at Useless Knowledge. Believe me, there is nothing useless about this site. Useless is such a subjective word, don’t you think? The unique thing (my opinion…I own it) about this site and other sites offering amateurs a chance to air out their undies so to speak is that most of what is accepted is editorial comment, not on-the-spot journalism. Unfortunately, amateurs (like myself) don’t have the money to fly over to Baghdad and interview witnesses of the Hidatha massacre and we don’t have the time to stand around the chambers of Congress digesting the immigration debate. So, generally we try to throw some interesting stuff (not a real professional word, Stan) together and give our take on the world around us. Hence, we are amateur critics, skeptics, editorialists, and all-around insensitive word-gropers.
By the way, you may have noticed I’ve tried to place my passive and generalist ideas in parenthesis so those of you wishing to critique this dribble will have an easier time of it.
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
