The Future of Longform Writing Still Matters

Dess Dermondy rock music

Dess Dermondy blog home page

The future of longform writing will not be decided by whether people can still focus. It will be decided by whether writers give them a reason to focus in the first place.

That distinction matters because the usual story is too simple. We are told that short video, feeds, alerts, and machine-made text have destroyed the reader's patience. Yet people still spend hours with a novel, a difficult interview, a strong album, a documentary, or a conversation that refuses easy answers. Attention did not disappear. It became more selective.

Longform writing has always asked for a small act of trust. A reader gives a writer time, and the writer must return something more substantial than information arranged into paragraphs. The piece has to carry a mind at work. It has to make an observation feel larger without making it vague. It has to leave the reader with language that stays in the room after the screen goes dark.

The future of longform writing depends on judgment

The internet has made publishing cheap and abundant. Anyone can produce a thousand words before lunch. Artificial intelligence can produce several thousand more, in a voice that sounds competent from a distance. This changes the conditions of writing, but it does not erase the difference between language that fills space and language that has been lived with.

A serious essay does not earn its length through volume. It earns length through judgment. The writer decides which detail reveals the larger pattern, which argument needs resistance, and which sentence must remain plain because plainness is more honest. Those decisions come from taste, memory, reading, failure, and an awareness of what cannot be known from a quick search.

This is where generic writing weakens. It often has a shape before it has a thought. It announces a problem, offers tidy sections, and finishes with a confidence the subject never deserved. Readers may not describe the flaw in those terms, but they feel it. They sense when no one has risked an actual point of view.

The longform writer of the coming years will need to be more recognizable, not less. A distinct voice will matter because information will become easier to obtain and harder to trust. People will look for writers whose standards they can learn: what they notice, what they refuse to simplify, where they admit doubt, and how they make meaning without turning every experience into a lesson.

Stop confusing length with depth

Long pieces can be empty. Short pieces can be piercing. The question is not whether a work has 500 words or 5,000. The question is whether its form matches its subject.

A review of a record may need restraint. A personal essay about grief, ambition, loneliness, or the slow formation of character may need room to breathe. Cultural criticism often needs both: enough evidence to avoid shallow opinion and enough compression to keep the argument alive. Writers should stop treating length as a badge of seriousness. A long article that repeats itself asks the reader to pay for the writer's lack of discipline.

Depth comes from pressure. An essay gains pressure when it places an easy belief beside an inconvenient fact. It gains pressure when the writer follows an idea past the point where applause would be guaranteed. It gains pressure when a personal scene opens onto a wider human question without pretending one person's life explains everyone else's.

This is why structure still matters. The reader needs to feel movement. A piece can begin with an ordinary moment, then widen into criticism, then return to the individual changed by what has been seen. That movement gives reflection a body. Without it, even intelligent prose can become a pile of observations.

Write for readers who want more than a take

The modern feed rewards the take: a clean statement, a quick reaction, a position displayed before the thought has matured. There is a place for brief writing. A sharp sentence can interrupt numbness. But the take has limits. It rarely shows the reader how an idea was formed, what it costs, or what might challenge it.

Longform can do that work. It can record a mind revising itself. It can show why an old song returns during a difficult season, why taste is connected to self-respect, or why young people often mistake constant exposure for direction. These subjects do not need inflated language. They need patience and an honest eye.

For writers, this means refusing the false choice between accessibility and seriousness. Plain language does not mean thin thinking. Some of the hardest truths arrive in direct sentences. The reader should not have to fight through decorative fog to reach the point. But the point should be worth reaching.

A useful test is simple: after reading the piece, can someone name the question it was trying to answer? If they cannot, the writing may have had mood without direction. If they can, but the answer feels obvious from the opening line, the writer may have confused certainty with insight.

Use technology without serving it

New tools will shape the future of longform writing. Research is faster. Editing support is easier to find. Transcription, organization, and archival work can take less time than they once did. For independent writers, that can create more room for reading, interviewing, thinking, and revision.

But convenience has its own appetite. When every stage of writing becomes easier, writers may publish before their ideas have settled. They may mistake speed for momentum. They may let a tool smooth away the peculiar turns of phrase that made the work feel personal.

The right question is not whether a writer uses technology. The question is where the writer keeps authority. A tool can gather material, identify repetition, or help organize notes. It cannot decide what deserves moral attention. It cannot know which memory still carries heat, which silence should remain, or why a sentence feels false despite being technically correct.

A writer should use every useful instrument and still protect the private stages of thought. Read without announcing it. Take notes that do not need an audience. Let an idea survive a few days of doubt before giving it a public form. Much of what gives longform its force happens before the draft becomes visible.

Build a practice, not a content stream

The language of content has trained writers to think in units of output. Post often enough. Keep the audience warm. Say something before attention moves elsewhere. That discipline can help a working artist stay present, but it can also turn every thought into raw material for immediate display.

Longform needs a different rhythm. It needs accumulation. A writer may spend weeks noticing one subject from different angles: a line in a song, an argument between friends, the strange performance of identity online, the gap between wanting to be seen and wanting to be understood. The final essay may look calm, yet it carries all that private accumulation beneath the surface.

This does not require isolation from readers. It requires respect for them. Readers who come to serious work do not need constant noise. They need evidence that the writer has taken their attention seriously. Publish less often if the work becomes sharper. Publish often if the pace does not flatten the thought. It depends on the writer's subject, energy, and standards.

For a personal publishing space such as Dess Dermondy, that standard can become a relationship over time. The reader returns because the work does not pretend that culture is separate from character. Music, taste, friendship, ambition, and self-knowledge all reveal how a person meets the world. A good essay makes those connections visible without forcing them.

Let the reader do some work

Longform writing should not explain every feeling into submission. Readers deserve room to think beside the writer. A final paragraph can leave a door open. An image can carry more than a paragraph of instruction. Ambiguity is not an excuse for confusion, but it can be a form of respect.

The strongest writers will keep making work that asks for attention and repays it with companionship. They will resist the urge to sound certain when the subject calls for humility. They will choose sentences with enough weight to survive the week they were published in.

Write as if someone will return to the piece years from now, during a quieter hour, looking for more than a take. Give that reader something real to return to.

Artistic Integrity in Music Comes at a Price

Dess Dermondy blog home page

Dess Dermondy rock music

Artistic integrity in music means making work you can stand behind after the applause, the numbers, and the noise have passed. It does not mean refusing success or treating every compromise as betrayal. It means knowing what must remain yours.

That distinction matters because music is made under pressure. A songwriter may need rent money. A producer may answer to a label. A young artist may fear that one strange, honest song will make listeners leave. The public often talks about authenticity as if it were a personality trait. More often, it is a series of difficult decisions made when there is something to lose.

Define artistic integrity in music

Integrity is not purity. No musician creates outside influence, commerce, technology, fashion, or audience expectation. Every artist learns from somebody. Every recording involves choices about sound, presentation, timing, and access. The question is not whether outside forces enter the work. They always do. The question is whether the artist still directs the work from a recognizable inner center.

A musician with integrity can change styles, collaborate with writers, use popular forms, and seek a large audience. Change is not hypocrisy. Repetition can be more dishonest than reinvention when an artist keeps reproducing an old version of themselves because it sells.

The real failure begins when the artist loses the ability to say no. A chorus gets simplified because it asks too much of the listener. A lyric gets cleaned up because it may disturb someone. A whole persona gets built around what can be marketed, even when the person inside that persona has gone silent. At that point, music becomes less an act of expression than an act of compliance.

See the pressures clearly

The pressure to compromise rarely arrives as an obvious demand to betray yourself. It often sounds reasonable. Make the intro shorter. Use the familiar beat. Write another song like the one that performed well. Post more of your life. Give people a version of you they can recognize in one second.

Some of this advice may be useful. Craft benefits from discipline, and artists should not confuse vagueness with depth. A song can be personal and still need editing. An album can be demanding and still need shape. Integrity does not excuse laziness, poor rehearsal, or contempt for the audience.

Yet there is a point where advice stops serving the work and begins replacing it. That point differs from artist to artist. For one person, it may be a demand to remove a rough vocal that carries the song's emotional truth. For another, it may be the expectation that they remain trapped in a genre, image, or old pain long after they have outgrown it.

The hard part is that approval feels like evidence. Streams rise. Comments multiply. A room reacts. None of these things prove that the music is false. They do, however, create a temptation to let approval become the only measure of value. An artist who depends entirely on reaction gradually writes toward reaction. Soon they may no longer know what they wanted to say before the feedback arrived.

Separate craft from compliance

Artists often defend every first impulse in the name of authenticity. This is a mistake. The first impulse may contain the living nerve of a song, but it may also be unfinished. Revision does not damage integrity when it makes the intended feeling clearer.

Think of the difference between sharpening a sentence and changing its meaning. A producer who helps a singer find a better melody may be protecting the song. A producer who removes every unusual interval because it might confuse a playlist is making a different kind of intervention. One serves the work. The other serves a prediction about consumption.

This is why artists need language for their own standards. “I just know” can be true, but it becomes fragile when the room pushes back. A musician should be able to explain, at least privately, why a choice belongs in the song. Is the distortion there because it covers weak playing, or because the song needs abrasion? Is the silence before the final line empty, or does it create the space where the line can hurt?

Clear answers do not make the work less intuitive. They give intuition a spine.

Accept the cost

Artistic integrity in music has a cost because it limits available choices. An artist may lose a quick opportunity by refusing material that does not fit. They may take longer to find an audience. They may disappoint people who preferred the earlier sound, the easier image, the more predictable version.

There is grief in this. A musician wants to be heard. Wanting recognition is not shallow; music is made to leave the private room and enter another person's life. But being heard by everyone is a different ambition from being understood by the people who can meet the work where it stands.

The market rewards clarity of category. It wants the listener to know what they will get before pressing play. Serious artists often make trouble for that system because a real body of work changes as a person changes. The listener who asks for the same song forever may be asking the artist to remain emotionally still. Few human beings can do that without paying for it.

Nietzsche wrote about the danger of living by borrowed values. The thought applies here without turning music into a lecture. An artist who borrows every standard of success will eventually borrow their taste as well. They will begin to call a song good because it resembles what has already been rewarded. That is how a living sensibility becomes secondhand.

Build conditions for honest work

Integrity survives better when it has practical support. Artists need some distance from constant judgment. They need trusted collaborators who can criticize the work without trying to remake the person. They need time to make bad drafts in private.

This may also mean setting limits around audience access. A musician does not owe every listener a constant explanation, an immediate response, or a permanent window into their daily life. Familiarity can create loyalty, but too much exposure can turn the artist into a character who must perform even when no music is being made.

Money complicates everything. Most musicians cannot afford to reject every paid opportunity, and they should not be shamed for taking work that keeps them afloat. The better question is whether a particular job leaves room for the work that matters most. A session, a commercial assignment, or a popular collaboration can fund more personal music. Trouble starts when survival work consumes the artist's imagination and becomes the only voice they are permitted to use.

Small habits can protect that voice. Keep notes before reading comments. Save the early demo that made you care about the song. Ask collaborators what they hear, then decide what belongs. Return to the music that first taught you what honesty could sound like.

Let the work change you

Integrity is not a fixed identity. If an artist treats their past self as a law, they become a curator of their own decline. The point is not to preserve a brand of sincerity. The point is to remain answerable to the truth of your present perception.

That can lead to music that confuses people at first. It can also lead to failure. Some honest records do not work. Some experiments reveal limits rather than new possibilities. But failure made in full consciousness has more dignity than success achieved by abandoning the question that made you create in the first place.

Listeners have a role here, too. We claim to want original artists, then punish them for becoming unfamiliar. We praise vulnerability, then demand access without boundaries. Better listening requires patience. It asks us to hear an artist's change as a human fact rather than a breach of contract.

Make the song that remains meaningful when you are alone with it. Then do the harder work: revise it, record it well, and let it meet the world without handing the world the right to decide who you are.

A Guide to Creative Self Expression That Feels True

Dess Dermondy blog home page

Dess Dermondy rock music

Creative self-expression begins when you stop trying to sound interesting and start paying accurate attention to what has marked you. This guide to creative self expression offers a practice for turning private experience into work with shape, feeling, and conviction.

Most people do not lack ideas. They lack permission to take their own reactions seriously. They hear a song that unsettles them, notice a strange silence at dinner, feel envy toward someone whose work seems freer than theirs, then move on without studying the feeling. That is where much creative material is lost.

Expression is not a personality display. It is the patient act of giving form to what you have seen, felt, and thought before it disappears into routine. A poem, a photograph, a guitar phrase, an essay, a sketch, or a short film can all begin there. The medium changes. The demand does not: tell the truth with enough discipline that another person can recognize it.

Start with observation

Pay attention before you try to produce. Carry a notebook, use a notes app, or leave voice memos for yourself. Record details that resist easy explanation: a phrase overheard on a bus, the look of a room after an argument, the pressure you feel when everyone around you agrees too quickly.

Do not turn every observation into content. Let some of it sit. A good note is often incomplete because life is incomplete when it first reaches us. You may write, “He laughed before he answered,” and not know why it matters for months. Later, that small detail may become the center of a character, lyric, or argument.

Accuracy matters more than intensity at this stage. Young artists often force grand feeling because they think art must announce itself. But a plain image can carry more force than a dramatic statement. The chipped paint on a childhood bedroom door may say more about time and loss than a page of abstract declarations.

Ask yourself three questions when something catches your attention: What happened? What did I feel? What meaning am I tempted to assign to it? Keep those answers separate. The distance between fact, feeling, and interpretation gives your work room to breathe.

Separate expression from performance

Creative work becomes thin when every sentence waits for approval. You begin choosing ideas because they appear impressive, familiar, or safe. Soon, the work may receive polite praise while leaving you strangely absent from it.

Expression asks, “What do I actually think?” Performance asks, “What response will this get?” Both questions have a place. If you publish, play live, or show work publicly, you must consider an audience. But the second question cannot lead every decision. If it does, your voice becomes a collection of borrowed gestures.

This does not mean public work must be a confession. Privacy is part of artistic intelligence. You can write from experience without reporting every fact. Change the setting. Combine people. Let an image carry what direct explanation would flatten. Art does not owe strangers your diary. It owes the work a real inner source.

There is a trade-off here. Work made only for yourself can become sealed off, full of references no one else can enter. Work made only for an audience can lose its nerve. The task is to make something personal enough to have stakes and clear enough to be shared.

Build creative self expression through taste

Your voice grows through choices, and choices require taste. Taste is not a list of approved artists or a polished set of references. It is your ability to tell the difference between what moves you and what merely signals intelligence.

Read work that irritates you as well as work you admire. Listen closely to music you do not understand. Watch films twice when the first viewing leaves you uncertain. Ask what the artist chose to leave out. Ask where the work loses pressure. Ask why a simple line stays in your mind after more elaborate work fades.

Taste requires judgment, which can feel uncomfortable in a culture that treats every preference as equally meaningful. Yet you cannot make strong work without deciding that some choices are truer, sharper, or more alive than others. Judgment need not become arrogance. It can be a form of attention.

Keep an evidence file

Make a private file of passages, images, sounds, scenes, and fragments that stay with you. Do not collect them to imitate their surface. Write beside each one what it does. Perhaps a song holds back its chorus until the listener feels impatient. Perhaps an essay earns its anger by describing one concrete moment first. Perhaps a photograph refuses to explain its subject.

Over time, patterns will appear. You may find that you return to restraint, repetition, awkward humor, empty streets, family speech, distorted guitar, or arguments that remain unresolved. Those patterns are not a prison. They are evidence of where your attention naturally goes.

Use limits to make decisions

Freedom without limits often produces delay. You have too many possible subjects, forms, and tones, so you wait for a perfect impulse that never arrives. Give the work a boundary instead.

Write 500 words about one memory without using abstract nouns. Make a song from three chords and one image. Photograph the same corner of your neighborhood for ten days. Record a monologue that lasts no longer than two minutes. Limits do not reduce imagination. They force decisions, and decisions reveal character.

Choose limits that address your own habits. If you explain too much, write scenes without interpretation. If you hide behind vagueness, name the object in front of you. If you keep polishing beginnings, start in the middle. The right constraint is not random. It puts pressure on the place where you tend to evade yourself.

Stay with the difficult draft

The first draft often exposes an unpleasant fact: your feeling is real, but your current skill cannot yet carry it. This gap can produce embarrassment. Many people quit here and call the project fake, when what they have actually encountered is the ordinary distance between intention and craft.

Stay longer. Revise the weak sentence. Remove the line that sounds borrowed. Replace broad claims with the moment that caused the claim. If a piece feels false, do not immediately abandon it. Find the exact point where you began posing instead of seeing.

Revision is where self-expression becomes more than release. A journal entry may tell you what hurts. A finished piece asks how that hurt can be arranged, paced, and made legible without being reduced. The work gains dignity through that effort.

Still, do not revise forever. Some projects need time; others need a clean ending. Set a date to stop, then return after a few weeks. Distance lets you see whether the work has a pulse or only a familiar story you keep retelling.

Share with discernment

Public response can teach you something, but it cannot tell you what your work means before you do. Choose early readers or listeners who can name what they experienced without trying to remake the piece in their own image. “I lost the thread here” is useful. “Make it more like what is popular right now” usually is not.

Expect misunderstanding. A serious piece may be read quickly, and a careful silence may be mistaken for a lack of feeling. That is part of releasing work into other minds. You cannot control the encounter. You can control whether you made the work with enough clarity to deserve one.

Do not measure the value of a piece by immediate approval. Some work reaches people slowly. Some work is a necessary failure that teaches you what your next piece needs. The better measure is whether you became more exact, more courageous, and less dependent on borrowed language while making it.

Build a life that gives you material

Creative self-expression does not happen apart from life. If every hour is spent consuming other people’s conclusions, your own perceptions will weaken. Walk without headphones sometimes. Have conversations that do not need to become posts. Spend time with difficult books, unfamiliar records, and people whose presence changes the speed of your thinking.

Protect boredom as well. Boredom can feel empty, but it clears the noise left by constant input. In that quieter space, unfinished thoughts return. A question you avoided may finally become clear enough to write.

Your task is not to manufacture a striking identity. It is to become available to your own experience, then give it form with patience. Keep looking closely. The work will tell you, often in a low voice, what it needs next.

How to Understand Subtext Without Guessing

Dess Dermondy rock music

Dess Dermondy blog home page

To understand subtext, read the gap between what people say and what their situation makes hard to say. Listen for pressure, restraint, repetition, and what a speaker seems to protect. Learning how to understand subtext means treating language as human behavior, not as a code with one secret answer.

Most people have felt the problem. A friend says, “Do whatever you want,” with a tight voice. A bandmate calls a new song “interesting” and changes the subject. Someone says they are “fine” so quickly that the word becomes a locked door. The literal statement is simple. The meaning lives in the friction around it.

Subtext is not a supernatural skill, and it is not permission to invent motives for other people. It is disciplined attention. You gather clues, consider the setting, and hold your interpretation lightly enough to revise it.

Start with the literal meaning

Do not rush past the words. Subtext depends on a surface, and the surface still matters. If someone says they need space, begin with the possibility that they need space. The mistake is to assume that every plain statement is a disguise.

Ask what was actually said, without adding a story. Then ask what the statement accomplishes in that moment. Does it soften a refusal? Does it avoid conflict? Does it invite reassurance? Does it preserve dignity after disappointment?

Consider the sentence, “I didn’t know you were coming.” It may be a simple fact. In another setting, it may carry surprise, irritation, exclusion, or a quiet admission that the speaker has not been paying attention. The sentence alone cannot settle the question. Its force comes from context.

This is where many people fail. They either cling to literal language as if tone does not exist, or they treat every phrase as evidence of deception. Both habits flatten human speech. People speak indirectly because they are uncertain, embarrassed, polite, afraid of hurting someone, or still trying to understand themselves.

Read the situation

Words change meaning when the stakes change. A compliment from a stranger, a teacher, a close friend, or a rival may use identical language while carrying entirely different implications. Before interpreting tone, locate the scene.

Who is speaking? What relationship exists between the people involved? What happened just before the remark? What does each person stand to lose if they speak plainly? A person who depends on approval may soften criticism. A person who has been ignored may turn disappointment into a joke. A person who feels exposed may become overly casual.

Power matters here, though it need not mean a formal hierarchy. One person may have social confidence, money, experience, beauty, status within a creative group, or control over access to an opportunity. The less secure person often speaks with more caution. Their subtext may appear as hesitation, excessive praise, a delayed reply, or a sudden change of subject.

A young musician telling a more established artist, “I’m still figuring things out,” may be stating a fact. They may also be asking not to be dismissed. If you hear only modesty, you miss the vulnerability in the sentence. If you hear only manipulation, you become cynical. Good reading stays close to the human stakes.

Listen to tone and timing

Tone is not just vocal color. It includes pace, volume, pauses, laughter, emphasis, and the strange little breaks in a sentence. A person can say “I’m happy for you” in a way that conveys warmth, envy, resignation, or all three at once.

Timing often speaks louder than the phrase itself. Why did this comment appear now? Why did a person bring up an old issue after hearing good news? Why did they answer immediately when they usually take hours? Why did they wait until everyone else had left?

Pay attention to disproportion. If a small comment receives an unusually sharp response, something larger may be present. The speaker may be reacting to an earlier wound, a private fear, or a pattern you cannot yet see. That does not make their reaction fair. It does mean the visible event may not be the whole event.

Silence belongs in the reading too. A pause after a question can mean discomfort, thoughtfulness, disbelief, fatigue, or restraint. You cannot know which one from silence alone. But you should notice it. The point is not to interrogate every pause. The point is to stop treating speech as a stream of detachable sentences.

Notice what repeats

People reveal their concerns through repetition. A person who repeatedly says they do not care may care intensely. Someone who keeps calling a project “just a little thing” may fear being judged for wanting it badly. Repeated disclaimers often signal a subject that carries emotional weight.

Listen for recurring words, jokes, complaints, and comparisons. If your friend repeatedly mocks people who seek attention, then becomes distant after you share good news, the pattern may suggest hurt or rivalry. It may also reflect their own fear of being seen as needy. Neither explanation gives you a license to accuse them. It gives you a reason to approach the relationship with more care.

Repetition works in art as well. A songwriter who circles the same image across several tracks is usually doing more than filling space. The image may hold a private conflict the artist cannot state directly. The audience feels this before it can explain it. That feeling is one reason art can seem more honest than casual conversation.

Separate evidence from projection

The danger of reading subtext is projection. You hear a neutral phrase and place your own insecurity inside it. If you already fear rejection, “Maybe another time” can sound like contempt. If you distrust praise, “You did well” can sound patronizing. The interpretation may feel convincing because it touches a real wound in you.

Pause and sort your response into two parts: what you observed and what you inferred. “She looked away when I mentioned the plan” is an observation. “She thinks I am selfish” is an inference. The distinction creates room for honesty.

Your history will always shape what you hear. That is not a defect. It becomes a problem when you mistake your history for proof. A mature reader of subtext asks, “What else could this mean?” before deciding they have uncovered the truth.

This restraint matters most in close relationships. Suspicion can become a private theater in which every delayed text, vague answer, and tired expression receives a dramatic role. Real life is messier and more ordinary. People are distracted. They are in bad moods. They lack words. Sometimes a short reply is only a short reply.

Test your reading through conversation

When the relationship allows it, the best way to understand subtext is to make room for direct speech. Do not announce an interpretation as a verdict. Offer it as a question.

You might say, “I may be reading this wrong, but you sounded disappointed when I brought that up.” Or: “When you said it was fine, I got the sense that it might not be fine. Is there something you want to say?” This approach gives the other person an exit. They can correct you without being trapped by your certainty.

Direct questions do not destroy subtlety. They protect people from the harm caused by bad guesses. A person may still choose not to answer, and that choice has meaning of its own. Respect it. Pressing for hidden feelings can become another form of control.

There are times when you should leave subtext alone. In a brief professional exchange, a crowded room, or a moment of visible exhaustion, demanding emotional clarity may be intrusive. Attention needs judgment. The goal is not to extract every buried thought. The goal is to meet people with greater accuracy and less vanity.

Practice with ordinary scenes

Build the habit in low-stakes moments. Watch a film scene with the sound low, then ask what each character wants and what prevents them from saying it. Read an interview and notice where the speaker becomes vague, overly polished, defensive, or unusually animated. Listen to conversations in your own life without rushing to explain them.

Then turn the skill inward. Notice your own evasions. When do you say “it’s nothing” because you do not want to seem difficult? When do you make a joke because the sincere sentence feels too exposed? Your own speech contains subtext because you are human. Seeing that fact with some mercy makes other people easier to read.

The best interpreters are not the people who claim to see through everyone. They are the people who hear more, assume less, and recognize that every conversation contains a struggle between self-protection and the wish to be known. Attend to that struggle patiently. It will teach you more than cleverness ever can.