Solid and Clean Code never felt solid or clean to me
Reflections on "Clean Code" and the Illusion of Solidity
Date: 2026-07-01
Author: Daniel
My journey into programming wasn't paved with textbooks; instead, I forged my path through hands-on projects and online documentation. While I did venture into professional literature, I wouldn't call those books the cornerstone of my growth as a software engineer.
📚 The Reading List
I've encountered several influential texts, though my reactions to them varied wildly:
| Book Title | My Takeaway |
|---|---|
| Designing Data-Intensive Applications | An exceptionally high-quality resource. |
| The Mythical Man-Month | A bit dated, but essential for understanding the industry's lineage. |
| Design Patterns (GoF) | Read too early to fully master, but provided a baseline for patterns. |
| Clean Code | Felt like a collection of senior-level anecdotes—some useful, some unverifiable. |
Despite my skepticism of Clean Code, it did instill in me a vital realization: code is read more often than it is written.
😵 The Interview Disconnect
I once had a jarring experience during a technical interview. The interviewer asked me about SOLID principles and design patterns. I began discussing the patterns from the Gang of Four (GoF), but I was quickly shut down.
I realized later that the interviewer was simply checking boxes on a rubric without actually understanding the nuances of the topic.
📹 The "Uncle Bob" Experience
Driven by confusion, I searched for "SOLID principles" and found a presentation by a figure known as Uncle Bob. The pacing was... agonizing.
- 0-10 mins: A tangent about water molecules.
- 10-20 mins: A lecture on the growth of the industry. He argued that because the number of new programmers doubles constantly: Therefore, he claimed, half of all engineers will always be novices.
- 20-30 mins: He finally mentions that
bad code is slow(obviously) and that coupling is a problem. - 30+ mins: The actual topic finally begins.
Nearly half an hour of content could have been condensed into a mere five minutes.
🎓 The Historian's Perspective
At the time, I was in my third year of a History degree. This academic background taught me that writing is not universal; it is a set of cultural rules specific to a discipline. To excel, I learned to mimic the pacing, density, and argumentative style of my professors.
Beyond academia, I had a strange streak of luck: I had witnessed several high-level scams firsthand. I spent months watching con artists manipulate their victims.
"I had developed a sense for understanding how people wrote and spoke."
When I encountered Uncle Bob's content, my "scam sensors" went off. To me, his delivery felt less like a genius sharing wisdom and more like a performance designed to convince the listener of his brilliance.
The "Branding" of Authority
Take the nickname "Uncle Bob" for example. While there is a backstory involving a coworker from 1989, the name feels strategically manipulative—it positions him as a dependable, paternal figure in the industry.
Side note: It is perfectly reasonable that modern developers have no idea what UUNET was.
🧠 Subjectivity vs. Objectivity
Software engineers often view themselves as impartial machines capable of seeing objective truth. However, history taught me the opposite: True objectivity is only possible when you acknowledge your own subjectivity.
If you believe you are perfectly objective, you become an easy target for manipulation. I saw this in my colleagues, who cited Uncle Bob to justify overly complex Dependency Injection patterns as if they were quoting a prophet.
The Art of the "Filler"
Uncle Bob's style relies heavily on filler—witty asides and broad references to astronomy or math—to create an aura of intelligence. In my university essays, this was called "padding."
How I handled filler-heavy texts:
- Scan the document quickly.
- Highlight the actual core arguments.
- Read only the highlighted portions.
Some people actually enjoy this. I found a comment saying:
“You can see how smart Robert is by watching only a small bit of the workshop, talking (and a lot) about software principles in development, astronomy, math, history...”
To me, this is just a preference for fluff.
🏷️ Acronym Marketing
There is a certain responsibility that comes with being a "senior" mentor. When substance is replaced by dogmatism and faith in the author, it's dangerous. This leads into the industry's obsession with Acronym Marketing.
We have acronyms that are well-researched and honest, and others that serve as corporate bullet points:
- ACID (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability)
- CAP (Consistency, Availability, Partition Tolerance)
- OLAP (Online Analytical Processing)
- OLTP (Online Transaction Processing)
While some are foundational, many proliferate simply because they sound authoritative in a marketing pitch.