I'm definitely for differing views. You're a great writer too, but I agree with Snox that this review is kind of a mess and a little over the top at times

Album Rating: 4.0

inb4



im a smaty pants who knows what luculent means maybe mort is just sour he doesnt know this one unused word that nobody in normal conservation uses

If you judge someone for using words you don't know then it sounds like you're the douchebag, Gyro. And you are, we all know this, you're a cunt with no value.

Album Rating: 4.0

wow astral you seem like a lovely person telling people they have no value

"is there not an acceptable difference between literary and spoken vocabulary"

This is a great counter argument to what I said, and I agree that there is a difference, but (for me at least), some words are just so arbitrary - so outdated - that they only confuse the reader, who'd much rather get the scoop without needing a thesaurus on hand to review obscure words. If the writing is strong enough, you can usually infer through context what unknown words mean

Album Rating: 2.5

"also yeah fearthyevil point taken!!! it's an old flaw of mine that it takes ages for me to build up steam so i did resort to an easy conceit. i'll work on it oWo"



No problem, man. Didn't mean anything harsh by it and the review itself is pretty good thereafter. This thread imploded into a shitstorm though. I'ma grab some popcorn

very wholesome and productive chat we're having here

Snox is just struggling to come to terms with his undying love for me. It's okay man... I love you too

I'm not a lovely person, I'm abrasive at the best of times and avoid human contact.

Album Rating: 2.5

i use luculent irl. fwiw i think words exist on a continuum and have different connotations even if meaning is near-identical: i used luculent because it can mean shining/sparkly but also clear and well-expressed, and i wanted to capture the richness of her voice on that song

Album Rating: 4.0

This is a great counter argument to what I said, and I agree that there is a difference, but (for me at least), some words are just so arbitrary - so outdated - that they only confuse the reader, who'd much rather get the scoop without needing a thesaurus on hand to review obscure words.





id would like to second this. no problem with outdated language in some circumstances (im a phil student, go figure). but other times it just comes across as a tad pointless. either way tho i dont particularly care, this thread is just fun : )

Album Rating: 2.5

"and i promise i'm not being contrarian, though i may be impeded because of my unabashed love of Product. i know we all love a good view that differs from the norm on sputnik because that's what makes this website fun and cool to surf and browse"



I honestly wish this was the case when it comes to the site I mean.

Album Rating: 4.0

I'm not a lovely person, I'm abrasive at the best of times and avoid human contact.





then leave the site my dude. this is too much human contact for you obvs



dissapear into the bush perhaps?

Album Rating: 3.0

"I agree that there is a difference, but (for me at least), some words are just so arbitrary - so outdated - that they only confuse the reader, who'd much rather get the scoop without needing a thesaurus on hand to review obscure words."



that's quite fair, i think it's just that people end up having different conceptions of what a review is supposed to do - whether it should generally target the "average/common" reader, or whether it can come from a more "literary" perspective, etc.

Album Rating: 2.5

ok look we can all agree that my introductory lines were errant and i apologise but i think there are some interesting points that are better worth your vitriol

Way ahead of ya mort

"I agree that there is a difference, but (for me at least), some words are just so arbitrary - so outdated - that they only confuse the reader, who'd much rather get the scoop without needing a thesaurus on hand to review obscure words."


"that's quite fair, i think it's just that people end up having different conceptions of what a review is supposed to do - whether it should generally target the "average/common" reader, or whether it can come from a more "literary" perspective"

i think what gyro is getting at is one can be "literary," so to speak, without having to use what some may consider arcane or unusual, or overly convoluted language. hemingway being a somewhat freshman-lit example

I agree, clavier, but I do think it can be done in a more organic way. At the end of the day though, this isn't as big an issue as I'm letting on, just giving some honest feedback. I know Wines is a good writer, just didn't do it for me this time around

Good timing Rudy lol

"See, the original clause is that "the album begins before It's Okay to Cry""

It's not, though. That's not the original clause because that's not what he wrote. It's two separate sentences. You've just EDITED the sentence into something it wasn't intended to be -- and even then, your explanation for what it "actually" means makes no sense and you omit words for the sake of it, and don't at all reveal what the sentence is without the aside/paranthetical/dashclausething. Your further comments make me think you totally misunderstood the use of the dashes (which is a common one): which is cool, and I don't mean to sound rude, but you're wrong. Anyway, I'm sorry, this is a silly point, I hope you're going well.