My experience has been that, when people cite lack...

2009-12-01T10:25:51.873-08:00

My experience has been that, when people cite lack of nuance, they mean lack of depth. Depth relates to layers of meaning, not to subtle shades of same. "Nuance" as a generalization (as in, something lacks nuance) is so unspecific, it's akin to a critic saying, "Your piece lacks... um... er... something."

A piano student gives a robotic reading to a passage marked Cantabile. His teacher says, "Singing... singing.... Make it sing." Or he plays a rubato passage in strict tempo. Nuance, both.

A piano student plays a complicated contrapuntal passage, omitting half the notes. His playing lacks substance, literally. Depth is missing in action.

I suppose that, in modern usage, his note-deficient playing in the last example would "lack nuance"?

Well actually when a person states that something ...

2009-12-01T08:48:45.549-08:00

Well actually when a person states that something is not nuanced, it is actually to point out that something is roughhewn, and has not taken into consideration the sublte differences in the subject matter.

Nuance means one thing, to be nuanced means something else yes. But look at the entire sentence before dismissing it ;)

Comments on MYPWHAE Text: "Nuance," and other deceased words

My experience has been that, when people cite lack...

Well actually when a person states that something ...