Parish
New Contributor Falls Flat
RECEIVED Wed., Jan. 2, 2013
Dear Editor,
Re: “Pole Position” [the Arts, Dec. 28]: I was looking forward to reading this article and finding out all the cool happenings at Brass Ovaries, but the author's overuse of "I" coupled with the overlong introduction about the author's thoughts on herself made this piece unreadable. The Chronicle often benefits from the quality writing of authors who know how to bring life to the descriptions of their first-person experiences without drowning us in special-snowflake sauce. I understand crapping on a new contributor's submission is a jerk move, but I can't see how substandard writing will help sell the readers on a new experience.
The blog article titled "Who the Hell Is This Kaci Beeler, Anyway?," [All Over Creation Arts blog, Dec. 28] (which gave a broader idea of the relevance of Ms. Beeler) succinctly summed up my confusion. Why should the reader be concerned about her personal epiphanies or whether she'll have the time for her new hobby? Good writing puts the reader in the story. Good writing does not make the audience feel like they're reading Facebook statuses. I hope this is only a minor misstep in editing or article selection and not a pattern of negligence on the part of the Chronicle.
Re: “Pole Position” [the Arts, Dec. 28]: I was looking forward to reading this article and finding out all the cool happenings at Brass Ovaries, but the author's overuse of "I" coupled with the overlong introduction about the author's thoughts on herself made this piece unreadable. The Chronicle often benefits from the quality writing of authors who know how to bring life to the descriptions of their first-person experiences without drowning us in special-snowflake sauce. I understand crapping on a new contributor's submission is a jerk move, but I can't see how substandard writing will help sell the readers on a new experience.
The blog article titled "Who the Hell Is This Kaci Beeler, Anyway?," [All Over Creation Arts blog, Dec. 28] (which gave a broader idea of the relevance of Ms. Beeler) succinctly summed up my confusion. Why should the reader be concerned about her personal epiphanies or whether she'll have the time for her new hobby? Good writing puts the reader in the story. Good writing does not make the audience feel like they're reading Facebook statuses. I hope this is only a minor misstep in editing or article selection and not a pattern of negligence on the part of the Chronicle.
Heidi Buckner
