The speaker recounts an argument with a university dean regarding writing clarity and organization. They emphasize the importance of writing being valuable and persuasive rather than just clear and organized. The speaker highlights the disconnect between a writer's thought patterns and a reader's interpretation, challenging traditional writing rules. They propose viewing text as a solution to a problem, emphasizing the importance of recognizing instability and providing benefits to specific readers. The speaker also discusses how different communities value pragmatic versus conceptual problems, influencing communication strategies.
Sure, here are the key facts extracted from the provided text:
1. The speaker had an argument with the dean of a prestigious U.S. research university about the importance of clear and organized writing.
2. The dean had brought the speaker in as a consultant to help improve writing on campus.
3. The speaker emphasized the importance of writing being valuable and persuasive, not just clear and organized.
4. The speaker pointed out that clarity and organization alone don't guarantee success in academia.
5. The speaker highlighted that the patterns of language used by writers may not align with those used by readers, creating a disconnect.
6. The speaker argued that writing should serve the readers' needs and create value for them.
7. The text discusses the challenges of writing, including the emotional and intellectual difficulties of adapting writing for readers.
8. The text criticizes the idea of strict stylistic rules in writing, stating that rules like avoiding passive verbs and using short sentences are false.
9. The text argues that writing should focus on addressing a problem and providing a solution, rather than following traditional structures like background to thesis.
10. Specific readers and their needs are emphasized as critical in creating valuable writing.
11. The text mentions that Nobel Prize announcements often have two different explanations, one for the public and one for experts, based on their different values and priorities.
12. The Swedish Royal Academy is mentioned as skilled in crafting these dual explanations for Nobel Prize announcements.