Can you define structure?

I've noticed a lot of people voting based on "structure" as of late.

So, can you give a site agreed upon definition to structure? And if not, should it be a qualifier for a vote?

I've noticed a lot of people voting based on "structure" as of late.

So, can you give a site agreed upon definition to structure? And if not, should it be a qualifier for a vote?

[Babylon]

When I mention structure it usually is in reference to, in part, how concisely a writer can produce his material compared to the opponent- in that the ability to convey a more cohesive idea, in a more accessible manner, is more obvious in one writer than the other.

I'd imagine another big part of the "structure" category would be how adeptly one executes a grasp on multis. Less in their perfection syllabically, and more in their overall placement within the bars.

[Babylon]

When I mention structure it usually is in reference to, in part, how concisely a writer can produce his material compared to the opponent- in that the ability to convey a more cohesive idea, in a more accessible manner, is more obvious in one writer than the other.

I'd imagine another big part of the "structure" category would be how adeptly one executes a grasp on multis. Less in their perfection syllabically, and more in their overall placement within the bars.

Originally Posted by Babylon

When I mention structure it usually is in reference to, in part, how concisely a writer can produce his material compared to the opponent- in that the ability to convey a more cohesive idea, in a more accessible manner, is more obvious in one writer than the other.

I'd imagine another big part of the "structure" category would be how adeptly one executes a grasp on multis. Less in their perfection syllabically, and more in their overall placement within the bars.

But, this is a subjective perspective, right? Is this how everyone who votes based on structure(not just those mentioning structure in their vote) considers and defines it?

And if not, can it be categorized as an objective medium on which to vote?

Originally Posted by Babylon

When I mention structure it usually is in reference to, in part, how concisely a writer can produce his material compared to the opponent- in that the ability to convey a more cohesive idea, in a more accessible manner, is more obvious in one writer than the other.

I'd imagine another big part of the "structure" category would be how adeptly one executes a grasp on multis. Less in their perfection syllabically, and more in their overall placement within the bars.

But, this is a subjective perspective, right? Is this how everyone who votes based on structure(not just those mentioning structure in their vote) considers and defines it?

And if not, can it be categorized as an objective medium on which to vote?

[Babylon]

I was gonna add a bit highlighting the subjective aspect, because it does bring the conversation to an interesting path. Yeah, its highly subjective. now I imagine if we asked every emcee here to define structure their definitions would at least echo some of my own sentiments but your point still remains-

So as a short side-bar what would you consider an example or two of objective mediums of voting to be? Aside from that yeah if youre using the word "structure" loosely or as a buzzword then it shouldn't be an objective medium on which to vote. but if youre providing enough of an explanation in conjunction with the usage of "structure" then I believe that adds to the objective template being built by the collective voterbase, and should be considered at least *fairly* objective.

[Babylon]

I was gonna add a bit highlighting the subjective aspect, because it does bring the conversation to an interesting path. Yeah, its highly subjective. now I imagine if we asked every emcee here to define structure their definitions would at least echo some of my own sentiments but your point still remains-

So as a short side-bar what would you consider an example or two of objective mediums of voting to be? Aside from that yeah if youre using the word "structure" loosely or as a buzzword then it shouldn't be an objective medium on which to vote. but if youre providing enough of an explanation in conjunction with the usage of "structure" then I believe that adds to the objective template being built by the collective voterbase, and should be considered at least *fairly* objective.

[Student]

I consider structure as who can get across the most ideas using the minimal amount of words, the tighter the verse is the better readability / the more it stands on it's own.

[Student]

I consider structure as who can get across the most ideas using the minimal amount of words, the tighter the verse is the better readability / the more it stands on it's own.

[Edgeworth]

Generally by structure I mean how well written the verse is by design, or in other words placement of multis and wording. What I mean by this is something like:

I grab the BIG SHOTTY HANDLE load it full of slugs first and then I go to the back of the bar to find my enemy and proceed to put the shells to his ribs like a FIG BODY CASTLE(???)

Has poor structure. There is so little space before the first multi and then a huge amount of space until the next multi. I guess this kind of spills over into flow, and sometimes I will use structure not interchangeably with flow, but paired with it. At the end of the day, if it's fairly easy to see who is a superior writer in terms of wording, placement, and cohesion, I would generally say they had better structure than their opponents.

[Edgeworth]

Generally by structure I mean how well written the verse is by design, or in other words placement of multis and wording. What I mean by this is something like:

I grab the BIG SHOTTY HANDLE load it full of slugs first and then I go to the back of the bar to find my enemy and proceed to put the shells to his ribs like a FIG BODY CASTLE(???)

Has poor structure. There is so little space before the first multi and then a huge amount of space until the next multi. I guess this kind of spills over into flow, and sometimes I will use structure not interchangeably with flow, but paired with it. At the end of the day, if it's fairly easy to see who is a superior writer in terms of wording, placement, and cohesion, I would generally say they had better structure than their opponents.

Originally Posted by Babylon

I was gonna add a bit highlighting the subjective aspect, because it does bring the conversation to an interesting path. Yeah, its highly subjective. now I imagine if we asked every emcee here to define structure their definitions would at least echo some of my own sentiments but your point still remains-

So as a short side-bar what would you consider an example or two of objective mediums of voting to be? Aside from that yeah if youre using the word "structure" loosely or as a buzzword then it shouldn't be an objective medium on which to vote. but if youre providing enough of an explanation in conjunction with the usage of "structure" then I believe that adds to the objective template being built by the collective voterbase, and should be considered at least *fairly* objective.

I think that the most objective categorical models fall into the conceptualized techniques we've come to accept on the site as the "fundamentals." The things that have a pre-existing basis in reality, beyond out subjective perception of such that can be fallen back onto to evaluate them. Multisyllabics, punchlines, metaphors, etc. The aspects of writing which can be more empirically evaluated. Everyone knows what a punchline is, that it has a particular format. A set up, and an ending. Everyone can count a syllable. And these are things that have replicability among a populous for evaluation, because they have shared understanding and demonstrability.

Originally Posted by Babylon

I was gonna add a bit highlighting the subjective aspect, because it does bring the conversation to an interesting path. Yeah, its highly subjective. now I imagine if we asked every emcee here to define structure their definitions would at least echo some of my own sentiments but your point still remains-

So as a short side-bar what would you consider an example or two of objective mediums of voting to be? Aside from that yeah if youre using the word "structure" loosely or as a buzzword then it shouldn't be an objective medium on which to vote. but if youre providing enough of an explanation in conjunction with the usage of "structure" then I believe that adds to the objective template being built by the collective voterbase, and should be considered at least *fairly* objective.

I think that the most objective categorical models fall into the conceptualized techniques we've come to accept on the site as the "fundamentals." The things that have a pre-existing basis in reality, beyond out subjective perception of such that can be fallen back onto to evaluate them. Multisyllabics, punchlines, metaphors, etc. The aspects of writing which can be more empirically evaluated. Everyone knows what a punchline is, that it has a particular format. A set up, and an ending. Everyone can count a syllable. And these are things that have replicability among a populous for evaluation, because they have shared understanding and demonstrability.

[KG The Prince]

I think of structure for each bar, as in how relevant the ideas the writer used are to their overall concept, and the readability and naturalness.

And structure for a whole verse would be how on much impact the punches had across the entire verse.

[KG The Prince]

I think of structure for each bar, as in how relevant the ideas the writer used are to their overall concept, and the readability and naturalness.

And structure for a whole verse would be how on much impact the punches had across the entire verse.

[Skizzo]

I mean..


One time I had written out a whole tutorial on structure, what it is, means and how to do it "properly". As with any category, theres different ways to do it and lay it out..


But I dont have the tutorial anymore so id have to rewrite it. I'll try to explain it the best I can though (in my own perspective), in a short form. Or rather, shorter than my tutorial.


Structure, basically has to do with three main parts of a verse: placement, layout and technique.


Placement:
Placement is how you place your multis or concepts, and more specifically, WHERE you place them. For example.. if you place a short line ending in a multi.. then drag out and "stretch" the following line ending in another multi, and have a lot of filler in the second line with too far a space in between multis, then the entire "structure" of that line becomes stretched and throws the flow off. The "placement" of your multis and ideas is important, because if you add too much filler or too many ideas, they tend to stretch or ruin the concept your going for. So placing multis wordplays punchlines etc. Has a great deal to do with the "structure" of the overall concept or bar.


Layout:
Theres a LOT of ways to layout a concept, as we all know. This is what makes different styles for us all. But layout has more to do with who lays out their ideas to make their concepts connect harder for the overall concept. So whether youre a wordplay heavy kinna guy, or a personals heavy kinna guy.. layout is how you utilize those setups leading into your concepts to make them hit harder. As an example.. if someone was gonna do a wordplay heavy verse.. but utilized a personal setup line, and ended that bar or concept out with a generic oronym that had nothing to do with the setup that lead into it.. that "layout" of concept choice would be horrendous and a waste of a personal setup. This goes a lot deeper but thats a basic example. It also has to do with making sure your wordplays or metas or personal setups connect properly to the concept and how you choose to lay out those ideas, and who can make them hit harder.


Technique:
This dives more into the "format" or "style" you choose. Lets say, someone decides to do inner multi heavy verse.. this technique has to be utilized in a way that helps strengthen the concepts, and not added just to rhyme. But also, someone who does a complete verse of all setup punchline verses.. can be outdone by someone who can show versatility by using multiple techniques throughout their entire verse. For example, someone who only does punchlines.. can be easily outdone by someone who does punches wordplay personals metas etc. So, this is why technique is an important part in how to structure a verse.




I know.. tl;dr ... and im not saying im 100% correct, but thats how ive learned to define "structure" myself. Its actually an extremely important aspect of the actual construction of verses and writing overall. To me anyways.

[Skizzo]

I mean..


One time I had written out a whole tutorial on structure, what it is, means and how to do it "properly". As with any category, theres different ways to do it and lay it out..


But I dont have the tutorial anymore so id have to rewrite it. I'll try to explain it the best I can though (in my own perspective), in a short form. Or rather, shorter than my tutorial.


Structure, basically has to do with three main parts of a verse: placement, layout and technique.


Placement:
Placement is how you place your multis or concepts, and more specifically, WHERE you place them. For example.. if you place a short line ending in a multi.. then drag out and "stretch" the following line ending in another multi, and have a lot of filler in the second line with too far a space in between multis, then the entire "structure" of that line becomes stretched and throws the flow off. The "placement" of your multis and ideas is important, because if you add too much filler or too many ideas, they tend to stretch or ruin the concept your going for. So placing multis wordplays punchlines etc. Has a great deal to do with the "structure" of the overall concept or bar.


Layout:
Theres a LOT of ways to layout a concept, as we all know. This is what makes different styles for us all. But layout has more to do with who lays out their ideas to make their concepts connect harder for the overall concept. So whether youre a wordplay heavy kinna guy, or a personals heavy kinna guy.. layout is how you utilize those setups leading into your concepts to make them hit harder. As an example.. if someone was gonna do a wordplay heavy verse.. but utilized a personal setup line, and ended that bar or concept out with a generic oronym that had nothing to do with the setup that lead into it.. that "layout" of concept choice would be horrendous and a waste of a personal setup. This goes a lot deeper but thats a basic example. It also has to do with making sure your wordplays or metas or personal setups connect properly to the concept and how you choose to lay out those ideas, and who can make them hit harder.


Technique:
This dives more into the "format" or "style" you choose. Lets say, someone decides to do inner multi heavy verse.. this technique has to be utilized in a way that helps strengthen the concepts, and not added just to rhyme. But also, someone who does a complete verse of all setup punchline verses.. can be outdone by someone who can show versatility by using multiple techniques throughout their entire verse. For example, someone who only does punchlines.. can be easily outdone by someone who does punches wordplay personals metas etc. So, this is why technique is an important part in how to structure a verse.




I know.. tl;dr ... and im not saying im 100% correct, but thats how ive learned to define "structure" myself. Its actually an extremely important aspect of the actual construction of verses and writing overall. To me anyways.

Originally Posted by Skizzo

I mean..


One time I had written out a whole tutorial on structure, what it is, means and how to do it "properly". As with any category, theres different ways to do it and lay it out..


But I dont have the tutorial anymore so id have to rewrite it. I'll try to explain it the best I can though (in my own perspective), in a short form. Or rather, shorter than my tutorial.


Structure, basically has to do with three main parts of a verse: placement, layout and technique.


Placement:
Placement is how you place your multis or concepts, and more specifically, WHERE you place them. For example.. if you place a short line ending in a multi.. then drag out and "stretch" the following line ending in another multi, and have a lot of filler in the second line with too far a space in between multis, then the entire "structure" of that line becomes stretched and throws the flow off. The "placement" of your multis and ideas is important, because if you add too much filler or too many ideas, they tend to stretch or ruin the concept your going for. So placing multis wordplays punchlines etc. Has a great deal to do with the "structure" of the overall concept or bar.


Layout:
Theres a LOT of ways to layout a concept, as we all know. This is what makes different styles for us all. But layout has more to do with who lays out their ideas to make their concepts connect harder for the overall concept. So whether youre a wordplay heavy kinna guy, or a personals heavy kinna guy.. layout is how you utilize those setups leading into your concepts to make them hit harder. As an example.. if someone was gonna do a wordplay heavy verse.. but utilized a personal setup line, and ended that bar or concept out with a generic oronym that had nothing to do with the setup that lead into it.. that "layout" of concept choice would be horrendous and a waste of a personal setup. This goes a lot deeper but thats a basic example. It also has to do with making sure your wordplays or metas or personal setups connect properly to the concept and how you choose to lay out those ideas, and who can make them hit harder.


Technique:
This dives more into the "format" or "style" you choose. Lets say, someone decides to do inner multi heavy verse.. this technique has to be utilized in a way that helps strengthen the concepts, and not added just to rhyme. But also, someone who does a complete verse of all setup punchline verses.. can be outdone by someone who can show versatility by using multiple techniques throughout their entire verse. For example, someone who only does punchlines.. can be easily outdone by someone who does punches wordplay personals metas etc. So, this is why technique is an important part in how to structure a verse.




I know.. tl;dr ... and im not saying im 100% correct, but thats how ive learned to define "structure" myself. Its actually an extremely important aspect of the actual construction of verses and writing overall. To me anyways.

But is it an objective voting medium? Or, is it being used as a buzz word in its recent seeming uptick in its usage in votes and their expos?

Originally Posted by Skizzo

I mean..


One time I had written out a whole tutorial on structure, what it is, means and how to do it "properly". As with any category, theres different ways to do it and lay it out..


But I dont have the tutorial anymore so id have to rewrite it. I'll try to explain it the best I can though (in my own perspective), in a short form. Or rather, shorter than my tutorial.


Structure, basically has to do with three main parts of a verse: placement, layout and technique.


Placement:
Placement is how you place your multis or concepts, and more specifically, WHERE you place them. For example.. if you place a short line ending in a multi.. then drag out and "stretch" the following line ending in another multi, and have a lot of filler in the second line with too far a space in between multis, then the entire "structure" of that line becomes stretched and throws the flow off. The "placement" of your multis and ideas is important, because if you add too much filler or too many ideas, they tend to stretch or ruin the concept your going for. So placing multis wordplays punchlines etc. Has a great deal to do with the "structure" of the overall concept or bar.


Layout:
Theres a LOT of ways to layout a concept, as we all know. This is what makes different styles for us all. But layout has more to do with who lays out their ideas to make their concepts connect harder for the overall concept. So whether youre a wordplay heavy kinna guy, or a personals heavy kinna guy.. layout is how you utilize those setups leading into your concepts to make them hit harder. As an example.. if someone was gonna do a wordplay heavy verse.. but utilized a personal setup line, and ended that bar or concept out with a generic oronym that had nothing to do with the setup that lead into it.. that "layout" of concept choice would be horrendous and a waste of a personal setup. This goes a lot deeper but thats a basic example. It also has to do with making sure your wordplays or metas or personal setups connect properly to the concept and how you choose to lay out those ideas, and who can make them hit harder.


Technique:
This dives more into the "format" or "style" you choose. Lets say, someone decides to do inner multi heavy verse.. this technique has to be utilized in a way that helps strengthen the concepts, and not added just to rhyme. But also, someone who does a complete verse of all setup punchline verses.. can be outdone by someone who can show versatility by using multiple techniques throughout their entire verse. For example, someone who only does punchlines.. can be easily outdone by someone who does punches wordplay personals metas etc. So, this is why technique is an important part in how to structure a verse.




I know.. tl;dr ... and im not saying im 100% correct, but thats how ive learned to define "structure" myself. Its actually an extremely important aspect of the actual construction of verses and writing overall. To me anyways.

But is it an objective voting medium? Or, is it being used as a buzz word in its recent seeming uptick in its usage in votes and their expos?