"Language Crimes" and "A 'Bad Writer' Bites Back"

Summary:

In Denis Dutton's article, "Language Crimes", he argues that it is not required for academic books to be "graceful or elegant", and that for literature they don't really need strong or technical vocabulary.

At the beginning, Dutton explains that for every good writer that he sees, there are hundreds who are just bad,. There's even a contest in which they decide who's the wrost write. Dutton calls these writers an intellectual kitsch. He explains that, "These kitsch theorists mimic the effect of rigor and profundity without actually doing serious intellectual work." This means that the values and ideas are not genuine, they are borrowed. He then states that bad writers "hope to persuade their readers not by argument but by obscurity that they too are the great minds of age". They think that by using strong vocabulary they will be able to persuade their audience, and also they will sound smarter. But as Dutton explains, they only make themselves look like bad writers.

On the other hand, Judith Butler describes in her article, "A 'Bad Writer' Bites Back," that it is good to challenge common sense. She states that, "language plays an important role in shaping and altering our common or "natural" understanding of social and political realities. Butler wants people to go beyond wha'ts common, but the problem is that many of the scholars don't understand. As she explains, scholars should not criticize a writing as "bad", just because the topic is not usual. Instead, they "are obligated to question common sense, interrogate its tacit presumptions and provoke new ways of looking at the familiar world."

Synthesis:

Whenever I'm writing a paper, I always ask myself, "what do i need for this paper to be good?" I now that I need a strong thesis, good topic sentences, and a solid conclusion. It doesn't travel through my head that I have to use strong vocabulary. Because to be honest, I don't think it matters how smart your choice of words sound, as long as it's professional, and the requirements are met. I agree with Dutton. Using special vocabulary does not necessarily make it better. Sometimes it even makes it worst.

Butler believes that scholars criticize her work as bad because she writes about unusual topics. I disagree with her. If a writing is considered bad it has nothing to do with what she's writing about. I has to do with what is being writen, and how. For example, I could be writing about gay marriage. You might not agree with it, but that doesn't mean that it's automatically "bad". What matters is the conctent, and the way in which is being presented.