Quote:
Originally Posted by Kasper Hviid
B E . A . D I P L O M A T
When I try to express an opinion on something, I always forget that I should try and win the critical readers heart - not try to attack him with aggressive paroles. [...]
|
That really depends on your objective. Being blunt and deliberately provocative can actually generate discussion (and, incidentally if often not accidentally, publicity). I could point you to various authors on the 'net who I believe do this quite deliberately (if I was wanting to be provocative
).
If you write a piece where everything is "it seems" or "in some circumstances", then there is less chance the reader will take much notice, because the chances are that "in some circumstances" you are right. But if you say "it is", and "every time" then you challenge the reader to find exceptions, and in doing so you gain their participation.
One of the forum members has a signature line to the effect that people only want to read things that confirm their own prejudices, but I don't think that's true. People like to read opposing views that they feel they can negate ... and so continue to confirm their own prejudices in a more active way.
By writing in absolutes and using provocative analogies, you gain attention from both those that are interested (and perhaps tending to agree) as well as those who disagree with you. (Of course, it can also backfire.)
You can see this with David Nicholls example. I have no idea if he was intending to be deliberately provocative, but he has certainly generated participation here. There is just enough truth in his analogy to make most people sit up and look at what he said, and enough exaggeration to offend some sensibilities such that people feel they have to respond (no one likes to be called a thief, and he has effectively just placed that label on a large part of the population - if not in book stores then in other, similar, ways).