A couple posts ago I shared content from a handout given by Adam Schrager, WISC-TV. He quoted Mark Twain for saying “I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.”
That quote was actually written by Blaise Pascal. Not Mark Twain.
There’s an entire faction of study that seeks confirmation of who said what in the history books. It’s all fascinating of course; it’s something I love about famous quotes, but it makes me wonder why any journalist would consider using a respectable quote from the past to strengthen their writing.
Couldn’t Schrager have just said, “it’s worth taking the time to make a letter shorter.” Schrager is already a credible source to be making that statement. Why credit someone else? Especially someone who never even said it.
Even when considering using quotes that are verified, perhaps any Winston Churchill quotes. They are all solid. They are all persuasive and informative. Certainly many of them pack a punch. But still, could you not write it better? Could you not angle it in a way that is more comprehensible for readers of this time and accept the credit you deserve for stating it in such a way?
We can’t keep living in the press of the past, no matter how well spoken people were at the time. And, quite plainly, if I wanted to read what Winston Churchill, Mark Twain, or whoever is wrongly attributed to a famous quote has to say, I’ll pick up their books.
But when I pick up your writing, I want to read your writing.
/rant
