Several conversations yesterday—in the comments and privately—about "precriptiveness." Meaning, the effrontery of people telling you that you must do something a certain way. Because I'm about to put up a highly "prescriptive" post, I thought I should say a few words about this first.
I just can't see this as a problem here at TOP. To me, the antidote to precriptiveness is inherent in the situation. It's a blog. It's the Internet. You're here because you want to be. I have utterly no power over your life in terms of having meaningful leverage in any way, shape, or form, and you're not beholden to me in the slightest.
So how would it be objectionable for me to say "you must do this"? To me, it's deeply embedded in the very "contract" we have here that if I tell you to do something it's still up to you. I assume you're going to evaluate it and and quite possibly reject it. Or modify it to your own taste. This bothers me not at all—it's the way it should be. The fact that a few people will do exactly as I suggest in any given case doesn't mean that they weren't free to do otherwise.
Here's the funny part. If I actually had any power over you, I probably would never tell you what to do. I probably wouldn't feel like I had the right.
So the only way I'd ever get "prescriptive" in the first place is because I know it's just a suggestion and I assume everyone knows it is. I hope you'll take it that way.
If you don't, the next post could rub you the wrong way. You must not let that happen! (Little joke, that last, didja see that?)
Mike
Original contents copyright 2014 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Ctein: "I am pre-offended. (It's good to get a jump on these things.)"
Mike replies: My friend Dan Schley has a bumper sticker on his car that says, "I'm already against the next war."
Rob: "I think it is a real shame that you feel you have to say this."
Mike replies: I think it's important to address it. Because, really, the thing I most want to avoid is for any reader to feel uncomfortable or criticized, and "prescriptiveness" can do that. If people don't like hanging around here, then it's a loss for me no matter what the reason. It's important to me for people to know that where I'm coming from is not a stance of superiority or paternalism but of respect. Hopefully mutual respect!
Carl Weese: "For a long time I've been pointing out in workshops that a lot of people misunderstand The Zone System and turn it into some sort of holy procedure exactly because they take it to be prescriptive instead of descriptive. It doesn't say, 'you must place caucasian skin tones on Zone VI,' it says, 'caucasian skin tones will fall on Zone VI in a realistic representation.' This makes all the difference between using it as a helpful tool, or being restricted and frustrated by it."
How dare you tell me not to let that happen! I'll let it happen if I want to!
:)
Posted by: Craig | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 12:57 PM
from the early days of the internets, it was always puzzling that "IMHO" or "IMO" had to be added for the benefit (mostly) of the American participants. what else but the poster's opinion could it be? I remember that Brits would laugh at this stance. oh, the early 90s...
the wording above about a contract is very spot on... amazing that it has to be stated, as it feels more like the warning in hair dryers about not using them in the tub (full of water, I presume).
[The phrase "I thought to myself" always strikes me the same way. Who else can you think to? --Mike]
Posted by: kodiak xyza | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 01:06 PM
So...do you really mean you think it'd be good for all of us to do this thing (not yet posted as I type this)? In that case it's appropriate to state it prescriptively, even knowing that we actually each get to choose. You do say that if you had the power you wouldn't use it (which is frequently the sane choice).
Lots of people seem to mean it more strongly when they state something imperatively, and some people have gotten sensitized to that I guess. I avoid it myself except, consciously for effect.
[I think I mean that it would be good for you to do if it appeals to you and inspires and excites you. Otherwise you won't do it and you probably shouldn't. --Mike]
Posted by: David Dyer-Bennet | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 01:13 PM
I can't wait to see what happens next!
Posted by: Trecento | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 01:27 PM
Be Prescriptive
And
Carry On
Please
Posted by: Bob Dales | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 01:59 PM
So how would it be objectionable for me to say "you must do this"?
I think it's because of the attitude of telling people what they should do rather than making a suggestion of what they could do. You most likely didn't mean it to be taken as an order but some people are sensitive to this in the same way that you are sensitive to personal criticism of others on this blog. It's not too much harder to say, "you could..." or "I think..." rather than making absolute statements, even if they are not meant to be taken literally.
Posted by: Steven Palmer | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 05:40 PM
I'll take a generic version of your Rx.
Posted by: Sarge | Tuesday, 11 November 2014 at 07:21 PM
As the saying goes - I demand land rights for gay whales.
[That's a saying? --Mike]
Posted by: Michael Bearman | Wednesday, 12 November 2014 at 02:19 AM
“Actually, watching television and surfing the Internet are really excellent practice for being dead.”
― Chuck Palahniuk, Damned
as deads cannot exert influence on pre-deads, I would not worry.
Posted by: Marco | Wednesday, 12 November 2014 at 02:51 AM