I’ll resurrect my simile by stating that when I clicked the “ StyleWriter 4.0” link, a page opened that left me with a feeling not too dissimilar to entering a pretentious church. Immediately I could see that the StyleWriter program is the company’s bread and butter. I checked out Editor Software’s home page, here.
#Stylewriter 4 open office software
The program’s help tab had an “About StyleWriter” link that opened a pop-up that read “StyleWriter 4.0 Basic, Release 2.02, © 2010, Editor Software LTD” Recently, while browsing a buddy’s cache of editing software, I came across a product that left quite an impression on me. In response, I’ve discovered that a good shift in one’s paradigms can be a most valuable commodity. Stupid things like misspelling my own name, wrong class number, I’ve even forgot to insert a bibliography once, have all occurred. I’ve always been the type of writer who suffers from “Forest-for-all-the-trees Syndrome.” I’ve stared at projects so long I’ve missed grievous errors. My argument being, if we don’t put “faith” in the software, but use it regardless, then its actual purpose can be observed. Think about it is not the central philosophy of writing to exceed boundaries? Therefor we cannot discount any approach because doing so would establish boundaries. Perhaps my simile is too melodramatic, so let me reduce the scope: anything that forces you to break from linear thought, and create abstract solutions, is beneficial to the mind, and therefore, the writer. I use both to inspire myself and, in turn, foster shifts in my paradigms, but I don’t put faith in either. Contrarily, I use them, learn from them and truly attempt to understand them. However, having this opinion of religions, as well as editing software,does not mean I must either. And, just like religion, all their claims, marketing slogans, and promises amount to a big pile of jack. Eachoffers magical results and a tried-and-true system ensuring the writer will benefitfrom the magic. For a writer, approaching editing software, or any software that aids writing, can be akin to approaching humanity’s various religionsĪlong life’s journey, if we agree to compare writing to being human, then humanity’s religions would be paralleled by writing’s equivalent, editing software. Editing software is stigmatized by a small number and the rest tolerate its existence and quietly denounce its claims. Yet, I use them and each time I do, I feel like I’m lying to myself, or being dishonest. Deep inside, I have no faith in them, and for the better part, agree with the criticism against them. In my quest to evolve as a writer I’ll admit, with some embarrassment, that I have always been a sucker for editing software. A writer not only has responsibility, but an unspoken, sworn duty to relentlessly evolve and, if need be, sacrifice all else. I’ve also had the same opinion of writers, but with more severity. It’s always been my opinion that stagnation is the bane of humanity.