The Immorality of Writing Badly

Published on www.aussiecon.net, September 2006

Alain de Botton in his recent book How Proust can Change your Life points out that "An effect of reading ... is that once we've put the volume down and resumed our own life, we may attend to exactly the things which the author would have responded to had he or she been in our company." As Huxley put it in Brave New World, "You read, and you're pierced."

Yes, he is talking about literature, but the more general point he is making is that what we read affects us. One implication of be Botton's observation is that writing is not a morally neutral activity. When we write, we produce a text which will deeply affect the reader. There are strict laws governing the production of food stuffs which demand that the label show all the ingredients. The aim is that the consumer may accurately ascertain the likely effect the consummation of the food product in question will have on his or her constitution. There are no such laws governing the production of the written word and yet language in its written form jeopardizes the welfare of the recipient in exactly the same way as the consumption of food.

I'm not suggesting we pass laws to warn readers of the potential harms which lie hidden in the articles, books or short stories they are about to read, but I am suggesting that authors consider carefully the likely effect their outpourings will have on the hapless reader who, either by choice or compulsion, reads their works.

Furthermore, my concern here is not great works of literature. I am not concerned about whether or not Sons and Lovers corrupted a generation and marked a significant decline in public morality or whether or not Oscar Wilde planted a seed of superficial cynicism which was never to be eradicated from the mind of the English speaking public, or whether or not Bertold Bretch was a visionary realist or a morally corrupt disparager or all that is worthwhile in the human soul. No. My concern here is the uncounted mass of authors who sit at their keyboards in offices all around the world, hardly aware of the fact that they are authors at all. Lawrence, Wilde and Bretch were no doubt aware that their works would be read and would influence their audience. But far more insidious is the author who never considers his audience, and therefore writes in a moral vacuum.

Take for example the bureaucrat who wrote the follow passage: "For the purposes of this document, the definition of an event is 'a significant gathering of people, who are either: a) members of the university or b) not members of the university or c) a mixture of people, some of whom are members of the university and some of whom are not'"

I suggest that the author of this passage, which says that an event is a gathering of people, did not consider the effect he would have on his audience. For me, the effects of reading such as passage are as numerous as they are depressing. Firstly, I feel a rising sense of resentment that, by reading this passage, I have been forced to spend a small (but to me significant) period of my life deciphering something which I expected to be meaningful and which was in fact not. It's a little like unwrapping a Christmas gift and finding within it nothing but straw. I discard the entire document at my peril because hidden within it's cotton wool padding could very well be a gem of information which will prove to be invaluable. However, it seems such gems are very rare and appear just frequently enough to keep one reading, ever hopeful of find another of fearful of missing the next.

The cornerstone of our judicial system is the writ of habeas corpus by which one can petition an unlawful imprisonment. But being forced to read an extended passage of meaningless verbiage because one fears that by not doing so one may miss a single vital piece of information is akin to being imprisoned in a text against one's will. Perhaps we need a writ of habeas animus to protect the unlawful detention of the soul.

Furthermore, by reading such an exquisite passage of bureaucratic mumbo jumbo, I sense that I have been exposed to the most trivial, the most mundane, the most nit picking, unimaginative, uninspiring, dispiriting, mean hearted and mealy mouthed aspect of the human condition. And it leaves a bad taste in one's mouth. Sure, it's not so bad to just read a sentence or two of such trivia, but consider for a moment the hapless clerk whose lot it is to read such stuff for a living. He has no choice in the matter. For good or ill he must read the documents which cross his desk. His mind and soul are exposed to the whim of the bureaucratic author for the duration of the working day and the working year. We would consider it immoral tie down such a person and force feed him nothing but junk food. We should consider it similarly immoral to force him to read bureaucratic verbiage which does his soul ill and dulls his mind.

If de Botton is correct and the material we read does affect us, it is a terrible thing to be exposed to such mind numbing, mind jumbling prose.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Study Shakespeare?

Published in  Sydney's Child,  August 2003 Many of us have mixed feelings when we think of studying Shakespeare at school. Such recollections can range from the depths of boredom and anguish to the heights of sublime joy and intellectual awakening. But regardless of our opinion of Shakespeare, we speak his language everyday. It is estimated that Shakespeare added around 1500 new words to the English language. Whenever we use our mind’s eye, to find method in someone’s madness, as they eat us out of house and home, because we thought they had a heart of gold and a spotless reputation but we were actually living in a fool's paradise; whenever we decide that discretion is the better part of valour or detect something in the wind; whenever we remark that brevity is the soul of wit, that  love is blind or caution someone that all that glistens is not gold or advise someone to be neither a lender nor a borrower;  from the salad days of youth, throu...
Read more

K Means Clustering

Image
K means Clustering is one of the simplest and most commonly used unsupervised clustering algorithms around. The general approach is as follows: Choose k centroids randomly. Calculate the distance from each point in the dataset to be classified to each centroid. Assign each point to the nearest centroid. Calculate the centroids of the resulting clusters. Repeat until the centroids don't move too much. Here is some R code which  generates a data set and implements the algorithm. Click here to see the animation. ########################################### # R code to implement k means classification ########################################## # NB - to make the animation - make sure you have ImageMajick installed from http://www.imagemagick.org/ ##########################################   # initiate libraries library ( animation )   # set working directory setwd ( 'C:/Users/RF186004/Desktop' )     ######################################### ...
Read more

Welcome the Edupreneurs

Published in Policy Magazine , Spring, 2005. A footnoted version of this essay is available on request. At the beginning of Pierre Boulle’s classic novel The Bridge Over the River Kwai, the commanding officer of the British prisoners-of-war, Colonel Nicholson, asks his Japanese counterpart, Colonel Saito, to reconsider his command that the British officers work alongside the other ranks to construct the bridge. Unbeknown to Nicholson, Saito has a deep seated antipathy to anyone questioning his authority. In a paroxysm of rage he beats Nicholson senseless and inflicts a punishing work regime on the rest of the prisoners. Saito’s reaction reminds me, in vehemence if not in kind, of the response of the education bureaucracy whenever the words “profit” and “education” are mentioned in the same sentence.  Teachers’ unions in particular are vehemently opposed to “edupreneurs”,   companies which wish to provide service for pr...
Read more