The Best, The Bad and The Mediocre


I'm going to write some academic shit, and it's the most difficult thing to do. Academic writing is both a creative process and a bureaucratic procedure. You need to make your writing engaging but not to the point of melodramatic. You need to make your writing accountable to academic standards but not to the point of boring. It is an interesting middle ground that I always try to seek and, most of the time, failed to reach.

Some people do believe that truth does not necessary lies in the middle. That a middle-centric paradigm is stupid and has simply become a somewhat unreachable yet desired nature of mankind. I'm kinda agree to this idea. What's the point of positioning yourself in the middle and become forgettable? The worst kind of writing is not the one that is so bad that everyone in the class will laugh out loud when they hear you reading it. The worst writing is the one so bland that it fails to gain any traction from the audience beside the obligatory-clapping hands in the end.

Being bad is always preferable to being mediocre. But no one would ever strive to become bad. People will always strive to become the best and in that process, most people will just simply produce one mediocrity after another. While it is suck to become mediocre, it is only due to the abundance of mediocrity that the best can truly become "the best." After all, if everything is the best, then nothing is. That might be the one and only pride that mediocre people are entitled to, that is if they even care about quality in the first place.




Comments

Popular Posts