:D
discussion:
I thought it an interesting challenge. What sort of criteria would one use when evaluating the worst possible (NORMIE/NPC/SOY) novels"?
The assumption I made is that we are looking at truly terrible story writing. What makes a piece of story crap? Is it primarily contorted grammatical structures? Hackneyed use of pet expressions? Overly self-absorbed construction? Or is it lame content? Dumb plots, insipid characters, immature conceptualization?
For decades, my personal signature line for non-business, non-activist emails has been "form, content, message".
From the viewpoint of linguistics, one can see three broad elemental areas formulating language: you have the form in which the ideas are expressed(e.g. phonology, phonetics, morphology, etc), you have the content - the ideas and information itself (e.g. semantics) - and you have that which combines and fuses the two together (e.g. grammar).
The fusion of the form and the content, the external visible (audible) expression plus the internal, invisible (inaudible) information = the message, the meaning.
True crapolistic excellence would naturally require a necessary devolution (!) of quality in each of these areas, brought together in an uninspired concoction of moronic pathos and intellectually lame ideas.
Ah, one can only dream..... Some day!
:D
discussion:
I thought it an interesting challenge. What sort of criteria would one use when evaluating the worst possible (NORMIE/NPC/SOY) novels"?
The assumption I made is that we are looking at truly terrible story writing. What makes a piece of story crap? Is it primarily contorted grammatical structures? Hackneyed use of pet expressions? Overly self-absorbed construction? Or is it lame content? Dumb plots, insipid characters, immature conceptualization?
For decades, my personal signature line for non-business, non-activist emails has been "form, content, message".
From the viewpoint of linguistics, one can see three broad elemental areas formulating language: you have the form in which the ideas are expressed, you have the content (e.g. phonology, phonetics, morphology, etc)- the ideas and information itself (e.g. semantics) and you have that which combines and fuses the two together (e.g. grammar).
True crapolistic excellence would naturally require a necessary devolution (!) of quality in each of these areas, brought together in an uninspired concoction of moronic pathos and intellectually lame ideas.
Ah, one can only dream..... Some day!