There are issues of concern, which have been apparent, for a while. Not everyone has spoken up, immediately, about such, or taken action, about such — myself included.
There are matters, newly becoming apparent, newly realized as compelling, and newly becoming obvious as being actionable.
Now, in order to present action, about a thing, one may need to employ a certain manner of normative discourse — enough that people, in any part, would be able to understand the issues of concern, and to understand oneself, about the matters.
To the Point
If one would communicate, such that the communication would be made as text — whether transported, then, over the internet or as printed writing — it may be of some help, to ever read upon some works, about formal, non fictional, and not expressedly poetic writing.
Here are two significant handbooks, also references, for such, which I know of:
In the text/more: Some commentary, about emotive, evocative writing, and then more discussion.
Technic and the Reader's Interest
Of course, those references are of a more technical manner of writing, not expressedly journalistic. Any topic might befit a formal, possibly succinct manner, of the writer, however.
Might it be thought as if it was a fact, that if one would write so formally as this, then one might bore the reader. Maybe that would not be such a fact.
Whether or not it is, one writes how one writes; another might ask, plainly, if something did not make sense.
Onto: Evocative Writing
Now, regarding emotive qualities in writing, I suppose that such might be said to be a matter of "character", however one would be focused, considering, at the moment.
In regards to some noticably significant, existing writing: There are some particularly evocative, written texts of religious works — some, which one may be already familiar with and dearly appreciative of; perhaps anyone might read such, anew.
I'll constrain this upon the Christian Bible.
I, myself, have read the book of Proverbs, at times — Proverbs, any/most of which (as I know of it - one NIV Bible was probably something of a minor reference, there) were written of David's son, Solomon.
The Psalms of David (most of which constitute the Psalms in the Christian Bible, as I know of it) the Psalms, as such, are possibly more evocative, possibly less "hard nosed", and possibly more illustrative than the Proverbs.
In this serious, immediate day, however, when I would think as not to intend to wail about the states of things, the Proverbs may seem to serve to hold my attention, somehow more than might the Psalms, at a moment.
Either might serve to catch a person's attention, and to hold a person's interest, dearly, in consideration.
One might even wonder if some blues songs would be — possibly, in any made not quite about the rock and roll, and possibly of some more social concern — something like the Psalms, some blues.
"Then There was Thought No. 12"
[Ed. note: The following sections were written, in gradual updates, as revisions upon this one journal entry. I've tried to separate the whole body of it into some managable portions. "Do skip ahead, if you find as you should."]
Well, as of 2004, the Library of Congress has selected a new Poet Laureate, Mr. Ted Kooser
I did certainly hear him commenting of something, in one interview that was made to him — I recall not the place of it.
The matter: Revision.
Sometimes, there are a great many revisions, put into the making of a thing — possibly, quite like as the fact that there are many rehearsals, before a stage play would be, finally, produced to the public.
In a manner, in writing, there may be many revisions, made in the production of a work — any work, even a journal entry, when there would be time, known for it — such a number of revisions that might seem terribly tedious to reagard, but for one's own interest in revising the thing, changing some words around, reviewing it, seeing how it sounds, at some distance, then changing some more of it, and ultimately, finishing it, done.
I suppose, one has to be willing to revise one's work.
There may be a manner of some stubbornness, there, sometimes involved in a non-revision. I know this: Plainly, I'm stubborn. There may be a manner of immediacy involved, furthermore, if one would be not willing to stop aside and revise a thing.
Sometimes &madsh; in the furthemore, here — there are things that are more immediate, more compelling, and less inviting of time to revise — like as a manner of photojournalism, perhaps. The writer puts the word to the page and sends it on.
Regardless, a written expression, when intended as meaningful, must serve to make sense, ultimately, to someone.
Maybe we — any person, of all and every people — we don't all manage to make sense of everything, in every, at once. Fine enough. The day continues — and likewise does the night, on the other half of the world.
"Thought # FFAE830DF"
Well, there is something about long description, which may serve to really shake off an impatient reader.
How can I explain, then, that it may be regarded as a matter of strategy? and/or pscyhology ... taking time to wholly express the thing, not always/only in bullet-list points.
Here it might be: Say that A_ VonSithian is running along, "scouting", maybe even "sniping" on what your are writitng — whether or not you're hearing the response, made of it — whether or not responses on you, per se, but possibly on what A_ would think as if you represented — the objectifiation of person being a possible matter, there — and the thing has been written, shortly, clearly. Yet, yet yet, there begins the question, here, "How would one express a thing and expect it to be meaningful to any broad audience, then?"
(Tangentially: There is something to say about attention to "audience", but really, attention to persons, whom would happen to have been around oneself, or something.)
(stifling a place of comments about drifters and/or grifters, not all of whom are the other. But to say, "You ever hear of a gun-slinging loner, in company, in the older wild west? Go check on Billy the Kid, there.")
I mean, it is the style of the thing — style enacting, possibly, quite an inherent, psychologcal response of a person.
"Not everyone raises a revolver in response, then."
Of the Commercial Productization of "Style"
Agencies might expend kaboozles of $$$$, trying to mechanize the stylistic contraptions of their productions. I do think, they are quite wasting their time. I do not intend to derive any profit from them, for it. I have not forgotten the phrase, sell-out, or the threatening sense of loss that might ever echo upon a real form of it.
But for that they may wind up wasting our tiem and place, in what plasticization of "their products", and then in what glutting of "the market", I may otherwise say, alone and flatly, "Let them waste their $$$$E+06 how they will." (I will not begin, here, aobut "marketing".)
A person, whom intends to make a thing meaningful — whom understands the thing, in any significant part, in its origin, and whom is, therefore, capable of making the thing meaningful , for which the understanding would be enough — whom would not be thwarted from it, then, will make the thing meaningful; it really needs no "test marketing", to prove it.
and it really does not occur without confidence, in enough-measure, at the origin.
Back to the Contemporary Now
It is the thwarting — sets a writer's blood to boil, ever — it is the thwarting, the Orwellian pretense, "excused" of themselves, where-away-from I will set myself aside, forever, away from this present US Executive.
I mean it not as divisive.
There is no revolution occurring, none that need occur, where we will proceed, but simply, upon sense. Not in haste do we need to procceed, then.
I will end this with one token phrase — or not will I end it, the thing being later expanded upon — and may it be enough to reckon upon, this phrase, if you would know, in each, the words of it: Sovereign reason.
It is the preservation of sovereign reason, wherefor the laws, ensuring the sovereignty and the freedom of the press and of the entire media and of the entire artisanal body have been established, have been set, have been made and resolved, in centuries long-going.
If we will not stand for that they would be removed from the body of the legislative and judicial precedents, of this one nation, then may we have a reasoning nation to live our days within, years on-going.
If we would capitulate, or if we would rush and fail, in ultimate, failingly, if that would be the end of it: Mark me as an expatriate, then; it would be a necessity, then, that I would be checking myself out of this nation. Would I visit, ever, but would I be utterly glad to be clear of here, in final, permanently.
Mexico, for one, is somewhat near to here, where I live. I cannot approach there, however, if would be thought "An American Conquistadore in Mexicali".
and langauge, you know, is another thing.
likewise, knowing enough of the contemporary, real, cultural fabric of an area.
For example: Mexico has a Congress, also. Here's reference to some English-language info, about such: Mexico's Cámara de Diputados and
Mexico's Cámara de Senadores.
(The Senator's site, at least — linked from there — has an English translation of it. Simply upon their photos list, at their site, then, one might begin to know more, regarding the political parties of Mexico. One might even take private notes, about it — for which, I've been using DocBook (SGML, also available as XML), myself.)
(One first reference, formal, across the Mexico congress and the congresses and other parliamentary bodies of all nations: The IPU parliamentary database, named Parline.)
and here, it is done, final.