[type_enthusiast]

I guess this is subjective. But to me, there's a distracting amount of purple prose.

Prose has a function, which is to tap into metaphor in order to help words describe a sensory experience that's otherwise difficult for words to capture.

The article does have that kind of prose. But it also has plenty of prose for prose's sake. Prose for prose's sake – especially in journalism – is self-serving. It obfuscates the point, for the sake of prose (and ultimately, for the author's own satisfaction with himself).

Edit: that being said, I liked the article overall and I think the author did great at choosing an interesting subject and pretty well at writing about it. I certainly couldn't do better.

[type_enthusiast]

I'm going to provide some examples of what I'm criticizing here – it will likely double my downvotes, but I want to be specific as long as I'm dissenting. This is just honest and well-meaning criticism, and I'd appreciate similar criticism about my own writing. I originally replied to a comment that said simply "that is some fine writing" and I don't necessarily agree. There majority of it is well-done, but to me, the early prose made it difficult to read further.

> some of the things in this sprawling realm of clutter might have come from another galaxy, like the ballistic cartridge for the table saw. If you accidentally touch the blade, it senses electrical conductivity and retracts. It’s gone so fast that it can’t cut you. It’s all part of the magic of this place of transformations.

This is just a SawStop, but the author describes it as evidence of the otherworldliness of the subject. Why? There's a bill to make this mandatory in table saws. It's not otherworldly.

> The room lit up to an intensity such that Sam was cast as a silhouetted troupe of antic spiders dancing on the walls and floor and ceiling, sparks flying around him like a cracked nest of hornets and in his hands a burning blue hole at the center of things.

The author is describing aspects of welding with mixed arthropod metaphors. To me, it comes off as pretentious more than descriptive.

On the other hand, I like how this paragraph starts out:

> Sam is afraid of some of his machines in the way that the lion tamer is afraid of his cats. You are confident. You know your skills. You have been doing this a long time. But you know that wild animals are always wild animals, and a false gesture, perhaps an unexpected noise, could set in motion events that could not be stopped.

This metaphor is effective to me and is descriptive in the way the author intends. Maybe gets unnecessary towards the end. But right afterwards:

> Sam is harnessing powers that few of us ever encounter in our lives. He’s directing them in order to reach down inside of this deck of tarot cards and transform the very atomic nature of its being. He’s doing what sorcerers do: magic.

What? This isn't even referring to a particular skill or act. Just the use of shop machines. I don't doubt that Sam is exceptionally skilled, but using "magic" to "transform the very atomic nature" of the metal – especially when we're not talking about a particular act which sets him apart – is a strain for my imagination.

In my opinion, in a journalistic writing, this kind of fluff distracts from the subject and makes it difficult to read and/or take seriously. That's just my opinion – but I was replying to an opinion that it's "fine writing." If there's room for one, there's room for the other.

[Animats]

> I guess this is subjective. But to me, there's a distracting amount of purple prose.

Yes, there is. Most of what he's describing is ordinary metalworking. He gets rather worked up about a belt sander. Which is strange, because the author has written several good books about survival and air crashes and has spoken at Los Alamos.[1] He can't be that naive about basic industrial technology.

Or maybe he can be. It's possible, in America today, to grow up without ever using a tool more complex than a screwdriver. This is a problem.

[1] http://www.laurencegonzales.com/bio.html

[Kon-Peki]

If I'm reading it correctly, the knifemaker is the brother of the author's son-in-law. So this is kind of a family thing taking place in public; one family member creates a work of art that is excessive for its intended use, and the other family member responds with a work of art that is excessive for its intended use.

In both cases, the person is doing it because they can, not because they should. I'm not bothered at all; if this was supposed to be a news story it may be a different case.

[Foreignborn]

Great critique, thanks for sharing. These are good examples of supporting and detracting from the subject of the writing.

[sevensor]

Right there with you, and I’m surprised I had to read this far down the thread to find somebody pointing it out. My high school English teacher, who was of the old school, would have written in the margin, “elves of fire? Give me a break!”