[DARISC]

Originally Posted by tabs

I have seen Van Gogh's work up close and he did have a frenetic style that seemed that he wanted to get it on canvas before he lost the vision of what he wanted to accomplish.

I've also seen, a lot, of Van Gogh's work up close; in NYC, LA, The Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam and a number of other places in Europe. While some of Van Gogh’s work is described as appearing frenzied by some, he painted with intense deliberateness which was definitely not uncontrolled (and certainly not sloppy). Nor were his visions fleeting, which is evident when looking at the body of his work, which is clearly not the manifestation of fleeting visions, but rather the evolution of a singular vision that is unique to the artist and defines his genius.

I don't care about a perfectly concise presentation, what I care about is the presentation of complex or abstract ideas in a coherent fashion. It is the idea that makes or brakes and not the sloppiness of the presentation.

Whether you care about it or not, concision is important when trying to present complex or abstract ideas coherently. Whether the idea “makes or breaks” is only obfuscated by sloppiness in its presentation.

There is a cetain superficiality to those that get hung up on the cleanness of presentation. In other words one has to look beyond the presentation and onto the idea that is expressed. The words are important and not whether they are spelled correctly.

There is a certain superficiality to those that get hung up affectation when making a presentation. In other words, if one has to look beyond a sloppy presentation to get to the idea that is expressed, the writer might be found to have sloppily formed ideas as well. The words are important (well, yeah!) and correct spelling is, uh…..nice?

..