My rough movie/online analogy

Subject: My rough movie/online analogy
From: Mark Levinson <mark -at- SD -dot- CO -dot- IL>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 10:16:51 IST

> It's also easier to make a book from a movie

Your other points were well taken, but I can't quite understand this one.

** You made that remark privately, but if my analogy was
unclear to you, doubtless it was unclear to others as well.

What I meant is that a movie already provides you with a subset of
what a book can present (action and dialogue) just as online help
provides you with a subset of what a book can present (chopped-up
explanations), whereas a book has a lot of complexity that you
need to rework or discard in order to film or to (ahem) online the book.

So it's easy to novelize a film or to put online help
into a binder... but unless the writer puts in some extra effort,
the results aren't as good as a book that is conceived as a book
in the first place.

OK, the analogy is rough. To anyone tempted to make a comment
like "Yeah, so how would you novelize the last shot of CITY LIGHTS?
The zither from THE THIRD MAN? Lighting? Angles? Dissolves?"
I concede the point, in the interests of sticking to technical writing
as the focus of discussion.

Mark L. Levinson | E-mail: mark -at- sd -dot- co -dot- il
Summit EDA Technologies | Voice: +972-9-507102, ext. 230 (work),
Box 544 | +972-9-552411 (home)
46105 Herzlia, ISRAEL | Fax: +972-9-509118
"Graphics are especially useful for drawing readers into the book."
- STC Intercom

Previous by Author: Online/print
Next by Author: The long arm of the taxman
Previous by Thread: politeness study
Next by Thread: Re: My rough movie/online analogy

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads