Talk:A Heart's Desire/@comment-31077845-20170214070417

Bro, I won't go flaunting my credentials in regard to my abilities when it comes to language, but I'll say I promise I know my vocab words (even some that aren't in english!). However, the terms here seem less like they're selected in order to actually further the story and more as a method of trying to confuse the often easily confused populace of this site into saying "Those are complex sounding words and I have no idea what's going on...I guess this must be a good story!". The word choice doesn't really don't add to the work, I guess it flows...ok,  but still when you take away the unnecessarily ornate vocabulary and, at least in my mind, awkwardly pretentious metaphors you're left with a story that, on its own merits, isn't terribly remarkable. If the criteria for good literature was just confusing people anyone could be a incredible author, as even those with fairly unremarkable skills in writing come up with a few flowery metaphors and randomly highlight words before replacing them with more obscure synonyms from a thesaurus.

...Then again as I'm writing "If the criteria for good literature was just confusing people..." my mind drifts back to James Joyce's "Ulysses" and the fact people are still talking about it after all this time, and I'm fairly certain 80% of people who cite that as a landmark piece of literature have no damned idea what almost any of it means. Then again that's less them thinking being confusing equates to being good and more no one in the world of literature wanting to stand up and say "Hey uh...I know you guys claim this stuff is amazing, but it mostly looks like a bunch of intentionally dense, confusing drivel to me." and risk being laughed at and called an uneducated philistine.