A helpful exposition of an excellent author’s craft

[EmilyMiller]

Painting with Soft Brush-strokes by @onehitwanda is an essay that made me think about my own writing differently. May I recommend it to you all.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Well, that was an interesting read. I liked it, and I believe it would be a great topic for discussion. But with the risk of being booed off the forum, I can't say that I agree with everything she said in her essay. It was really good and insightful, but also a bit subjective. And I say this with all the love I have for Wanda.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Well, that was an interesting read. I liked it, and I believe it would be a great topic for discussion. But with the risk of being booed off the forum, I can't say that I agree with everything she said in her essay. It was really good and insightful, but also a bit subjective. And I say this with all the love I have for Wanda.

I’m not sure it was meant to be 100% didactic, more outlining her approach. I don’t want to ape her style, even if I could, but it was very thought-provoking.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I’m not sure it was meant to be 100% didactic, more outlining her approach. I don’t want to ape her style, even if I could, but it was very thought-provoking.

I understand. I now see that she specifically said it wasn't a "How to", yet I somehow thought it was.
Regardless, it's an insightful read and great material for discussion.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Well, that was an interesting read. I liked it, and I believe it would be a great topic for discussion. But with the risk of being booed off the forum, I can't say that I agree with everything she said in her essay. It was really good and insightful, but also a bit subjective. And I say this with all the love I have for Wanda.

I think a topic like word choice calls for subjectivity. The meanings of words are subtly shaded by our backgrounds and experiences.

Wanda uses the metaphor of brushstrokes, and does so eloquently.

The metaphor that works of me is that of a stone wall.



You see them all over New England, especially along the edges of farm fields, created from the rocks so laboriously dug from the soil. Over the years, they developed from rough borders into works of art. Most of them are assembled with no mortar, no framing or wiring to shore them up. Stonemasons will painstakingly choose each stone to fit between and complement its neighbors, to bear the weight of those above it, while relying on those below to give it the support it needs.

Some of the stones are plain, you wouldn't look twice at them in the field or on the shore. Others are exquisite in shape and color and texture. But both plain and grand join together to create the whole edifice, one which performs the structures function with style and grace.

 

[MelissaBaby]

A gold star for the first person who can explain when to use "stone" and when to use "rock."

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I think a topic like word choice calls for subjectivity. The meanings of words are subtly shaded by our backgrounds and experiences.

Yeah, I already corrected myself, sort of. I thought it was a how-to, but it wasn't; it was an exposition of her writing style.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

A gold star for the first person who can explain when to use "stone" and when to use "rock."

Well, duh! The thingie gets rock-hard, not stone-hard! Easy peasy, lemon squeazy.
Now, where's my gold star?

 

[FrancesScott]

A gold star for the first person who can explain when to use "stone" and when to use "rock."

I may be wrong, but to me stone suggests a smaller quantity of rock. One that has either been quarried or eroded down to size. Stone is a type of rock. But mountains are made out of rock, not stone.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Well, duh! The thingie gets rock-hard, not stone-hard! Easy peasy, lemon squeazy.
Now, where's my gold star?

We only have your word for that.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I may be wrong, but to me stone suggests a smaller quantity of rock.

And this is why no one says stone-hard.
Damn, I'm on a roll!

 

[MelissaBaby]

I may be wrong, but to me stone suggests a smaller quantity of rock. One that has either been quarried or eroded down to size. Stone is a type of rock. But mountains are made out of rock, not stone.

Good guess, but the existence of Stone Mountain, Georgia disproves your theory.

 

[MelissaBaby]

And this is why no one says stone-hard.
Damn, I'm on a roll!

And gathering no moss.

 

[FrancesScott]

Good guess, but the existence of Stone Mountain, Georgia disproves your theory.

Mount Bear in Canada isn’t made of bears.

I may well be wrong, as I admit in my post, but surely not for the reason you provide.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Mount Bear in Canada isn’t made of bears.

I may well be wrong, as I admit in my post, but surely not for the reason you provide.

You were correct that a stone is a type of rock, but it's not about size, per se.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

but it's not about size

 

[FrancesScott]

You were correct that a stone is a type of rock, but it's not about size, per se.

Some people use stone to mean rock hewn by humans. But then other people talk about stones found in rivers that have been shaped by nature.

 

[Rob_Royale]

Less than two hours to derail the thread.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Some people use stone to mean rock hewn by humans. But then other people talk about stones found in rivers that have been shaped by nature.

That's it, basically. A stone is a rock that has been altered, such as river stones that have been smoothed by the water, or more often, by being put to use for a specific purpose.

I think the best example of the difference is that if you write of a "stone wall" most readers will picture something like I pictured, but if you write "rock wall," they will most likely picture a cliff.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Less than two hours to derail the thread.

I don't think it's derailed. I brought up the difference between using stone and rock to illustrate the way words that are nearly synonymous still have subtle gradations of meaning.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

That's it, basically. A stone is a rock that has been altered, such as river stones that have been smoothed by the water, or more often, by being put to use for a specific purpose.

I think the best example of the difference is that if you write of a "stone wall" most readers will picture something like I pictured, but if you write "rock wall," they will most likely picture a cliff.

To be serious for a change, I don't entirely agree with you. There's more to it than that. Every rock we can see has been altered and eroded by forces of nature, wind, rain, waves, and even humans who cut through the rock to make a road but still leave rock behind.

Stone is also something that has a definitive size, regardless of whether it's small or large. Rock doesn't.

 

[FrancesScott]

That's it, basically. A stone is a rock that has been altered, such as river stones that have been smoothed by the water, or more often, by being put to use for a specific purpose.

I think the best example of the difference is that if you write of a "stone wall" most readers will picture something like I pictured, but if you write "rock wall," they will most likely picture a cliff.

That’s what I meant when I said:

“One that has either been quarried or eroded down to size.”

I maybe should have been more expansive.

 

[MelissaBaby]

To be serious for a change, I don't entirely agree with you. There's more to it than that. Every rock we can see has been altered and eroded by forces of nature, wind, rain, waves, and even humans who cut through the rock to make a road but still leave rock behind.

Stone is also something that has a definitive size, regardless of whether it's small or large. Rock doesn't.

It's not just a matter or alteration, it's altered for a purpose.

I'm not sure what you are saying about size. There are stone statues (have you ever heard anyone say "rock statue?") that are massive, such as the Easter Island Moat, or the giant Buddha statues found in many places in Asia.

 

[XerXesXu]

To be serious for a change, I don't entirely agree with you. There's more to it than that. Every rock we can see has been altered and eroded by forces of nature, wind, rain, waves, and even humans who cut through the rock to make a road but still leave rock behind.

Stone is also something that has a definitive size, regardless of whether it's small or large. Rock doesn't.

Stones are frequently formed by fruits. Rocks usually have the names of once popular seaside resorts running through them.

How is a 'mot juste' formed? Anyone?

 

[EmilyMiller]

I don't think it's derailed. I brought up the difference between using stone and rock to illustrate the way words that are nearly synonymous still have subtle gradations of meaning.

I brought up an interesting point
You went off on a tangent
They derailed the thread

FWIW Wanda’s essay is about choice of words, so all fine by me.