{"id":51655,"date":"2020-10-13T06:00:24","date_gmt":"2020-10-13T10:00:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/geneveith\/?p=51655"},"modified":"2020-10-10T14:32:07","modified_gmt":"2020-10-10T18:32:07","slug":"additional-principles-for-good-writing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/geneveith\/2020\/10\/additional-principles-for-good-writing\/","title":{"rendered":"Additional Principles for Good Writing"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Writing should always be clear, simple, lucid.\u00a0 Writers should avoid \u201cwordiness\u201d at all costs, the passive voice is not good, the short word is always better than the long word, etc.<\/p>\n

Such rules for writing are sacrosanct among many writers, writing teachers, and editors.\u00a0 They derive mainly from the classic book on writing The Elements of Style<\/a>\u00a0by William Strunk, Jr., and E. B. White (paid link) .<\/p>\n

First published in 1918 and frequently updated in new editions, Strunk & White<\/a>\u2013as it is affectionally or non-affectionally known\u2013is the most-assigned college textbook of all time<\/p>\n

\n

And rightly so.\u00a0 \u201cDead wood\u201d should be cut out of sentences.\u00a0 \u201cIt is this that is important\u201d must be trimmed down to \u201cThis is important.\u201d\u00a0 Every word in a sentence must count.<\/p>\n

There is truth to Strunk & White\u2019s dictates.\u00a0 But there is also more to say.\u00a0 Sometimes the long word really is better.\u00a0 And brevity is not always ideal.\u00a0 And good writers should also consider the rhythm and \u201cmusic\u201d of what they are writing.<\/p>\n

Jay Nordlinger, one of those good writers\u2013who is also a good editor, of National Review<\/em>\u2013makes those points and explains them in\u00a0\u00a0The Right Words:\u00a0 On How to Write, and How to Read.\u00a0\u00a0<\/a>Read it, bookmark it, print it, and study it.\u00a0 Here is a sampling:<\/p>\n

\u201cFavor short words over long words!\u201d people say. Okay. Maybe as a rule. But rather than a short word or a long word, we should favor the\u00a0right\u00a0<\/em>word \u2014 whatever it is. Often it\u2019s short, but often it\u2019s not.<\/p>\n

Someone once said to Bill Buckley, frustratedly, \u201cWhy did you use the word \u2018irenic\u2019 when it just means \u2018peaceful\u2019?\u201d \u201cHmmm,\u201d said Bill, \u201clet me see that.\u201d He checked over what he had written. And then he said, \u201cI must have desired the third syllable.\u201d<\/p>\n

To make the sentence musical, you see. To have the rhythm right. To keep the sentence in balance. Now, good writers are seldom\u00a0conscious<\/em>\u00a0of such things. They are not self-analytical. The words just come out. . . .<\/p>\n

Should a writer be fancy or plain? Plain, right? Well, it all depends. What are you trying to convey? What is the best means of communication?<\/p>\n

Macbeth says, \u201cthe multitudinous seas incarnadine, making the green one red.\u201d Why those fancy, multisyllabic words? Well, can\u2019t you hear the waves?! And see them, turning red?!\u00a0 [followed by a digression on weird punctuation]. . . .<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t care what words you use, but use them\u00a0precisely<\/em>, please! Know their meanings and deploy them accurately. Don\u2019t scattershot them. . . .<\/p>\n

Sometimes it helps to write as though communicating to one person \u2014 one person, a real person, you have in mind. What do you want to tell him, or her? How should you \u2014 how would you \u2014 speak to this person?. . .<\/p>\n

Figure out what you think, before you write (or\u00a0as<\/em>\u00a0you write, but at least at some point). Usually, if you\u2019re unclear on what to write, it\u2019s because you\u2019re unclear on what to think. . . .<\/p>\n

Never aim to be stylish. If you have style, you will be stylish. The aiming is disastrous. . . .<\/p>\n

Follow the rules, yes, or \u201crules.\u201d For example, it\u2019s unwise to begin consecutive paragraphs with the same word \u2014 except when it isn\u2019t. If a rule conflicts with a writer\u2019s ear, the rule has to go \u2014 provided the writer has a good ear.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Nordlinger\u2019s own writing is a little jaunty for my taste, and some of his points could use more \u201cdevelopment,\u201d as we English teachers say.\u00a0 (That is, discussed in more detail.)\u00a0 He quotes Macbeth, but a little more context is called for to enable the reader to fully appreciate the point.\u00a0\u00a0Macbeth is expressing his guilt after he has just murdered the king, :<\/p>\n

Will all great Neptune\u2019s ocean wash this blood
\nClean from my hand? No, this my hand will rather
\nThe multitudinous seas incarnadine,
\nMaking the green one red.<\/p>\n

Macbeth<\/a>, Act I, Scene ii, lines 61-64.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The difficulty of washing blood off of one\u2019s hands is a motif later repeated by Lady Macbeth as she sleepwalks trying to scrub her hands, saying \u201cOut, damned spot!\u201d [Act V, scene i, line 40].\u00a0 Shakespeare\u2019s lines about the \u201cmultitudinous seas incarnadine\u201d are brilliant poetry, balancing a polysyllabic line derived from Latin with a monosyllabic line derived from basic English.\u00a0 I had never noticed, though, how the rhythm of the former so perfectly captures the waves of the sea, as it turns red.<\/p>\n

To summarize Nordlinger\u2019s contributions, writers should attend not only to the grammar and clarity of their writing, but also to its\u00a0music\u2013<\/em>that is,\u00a0<\/em>its rhythm and sound\u2013a sensitivity that can be cultivated by reading good writers.\u00a0 (He closes by providing a list.)<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p><\/blockquote>\n