Epictetus delivered this burn over 1900 years ago.
Is that actually a burn? It depends on the context.
It's the same thing whenever I hear somebody say "I wish I could draw like that." You probably can, but it would take hundreds of hours of practice. Of course, people wish that there was some shortcut, so that they could get the skill without all the work.
Yeah but I feel like there's a million books been written since that time which point out how vapid this quote is. To write one must know what you want to say and how to convey it, do you really think it's better to just dive into a task unprepared and muddle through rather than learn first the structure and ideals behind such work?
I would say both. You need to learn by trying things out, making your own mistakes and finding a style. Then you get input from the outside world on why some peculiar structure make sense or just giving helpful tips. Then you try out more, apply those tips and see what works for you.
But you can read as much helpful input as you want, it won't be any good without you trying to apply it and practice.
At the end of the day, both are required. You need to study to be effective at what you're doing, but at the end of the day the only way words get on paper is writing. You'll also get more out of learning these structures and ideals trying to apply them after you have a bit of time just floundering, getting a feel for the actual task.
Yeah, came here to compare. Both are wrong. If you wish to be a writer, write. If you wish to be a good writer, learn something. Same with programming, except programming requires something to function so it's even worse in that regard.
"If you wish to be a writer, write."
Epictetus delivered this burn over 1900 years ago.
Is that actually a burn? It depends on the context.
It's the same thing whenever I hear somebody say "I wish I could draw like that." You probably can, but it would take hundreds of hours of practice. Of course, people wish that there was some shortcut, so that they could get the skill without all the work.
Yeah but I feel like there's a million books been written since that time which point out how vapid this quote is. To write one must know what you want to say and how to convey it, do you really think it's better to just dive into a task unprepared and muddle through rather than learn first the structure and ideals behind such work?
I would say both. You need to learn by trying things out, making your own mistakes and finding a style. Then you get input from the outside world on why some peculiar structure make sense or just giving helpful tips. Then you try out more, apply those tips and see what works for you. But you can read as much helpful input as you want, it won't be any good without you trying to apply it and practice.
At the end of the day, both are required. You need to study to be effective at what you're doing, but at the end of the day the only way words get on paper is writing. You'll also get more out of learning these structures and ideals trying to apply them after you have a bit of time just floundering, getting a feel for the actual task.
Yeah, came here to compare. Both are wrong. If you wish to be a writer, write. If you wish to be a good writer, learn something. Same with programming, except programming requires something to function so it's even worse in that regard.