good evening.

today i discovered something. there exist at least two people whose styles in writing are very strongly alike. so alike that i could not distinguish who wrote it without context, despite that style being extremely unique. they had both developed a nearly identical way of writing independently despite its extreme complexity.

it made me think about the way i write english. i have already thought about the way i write code, but i have yet to think about this for other types of art.

the way i write is very specific. each word is what it is for a reason and it is where it is because i want it to be there specifically and not somewhere else. the text resembles a flow of thoughts because it was made to convey my thoughts to you as directly as possible. a manual on how to think what i thought. but nonetheless a manual with little doodles inside because it would be extremely boring and unbearably dry otherwise. if a word is the best for specificity yet it is boring, it will not do. each unit of text must be a little bit new, the act of reading needs some tension; it must be tasty, and sometimes bitter.

the appeal lies in the thoughts And the expression. the expression should not be bland, but it should nonetheless teleport a thought from my past mind into your present one as freshly as possible. if the thought cannot arrive, the expression should still be tasty enough to be appealing. and if the expression is profoundly usual, the thought must make up for it.

a friend of mine described my words as small stones, each sharp yet none the same, arranged in a Set way for a Specific purpose, most glued in place and not slippery. all easy to see, forming shapes at every level, each as their own, and all as one.