Conventional Writing Wisdom: It May Be Conventional, But Is It Wisdom?
March 27th 2008 08:13
Challenging Conventional Wisdom
Conventional wisdom tells us much about what constitutes "good," or "quality" writing. But, is conventional wisdom always right?
The Conventional Principles of Good Writing
The following principles are, according to conventional wisdom, virtually indispensable to all good writing. I present them here, along with my own thoughts about each.
Brevity Equals Clarity
Principle 1: Avoid wordiness at all costs. Simplicity and brevity are always best. Use short sentences and few words to convey your ideas more clearly.
My Response: An overly concise writing style sacrifices literary smoothness and sophistication. Even in business writing, it's critically important to maintain an intelligent, professional, and authoritative tone, which is rarely accomplished by over-simplicity or excessive brevity.
I would, in fact, contend that the problem of unclear writing isn't at all caused by wordiness, per se, but rather by a lack of facility in the effective use of language to convey thought. When a writer makes every word count, crafting each sentence, clause, and phrase with care, words become the source of a richness and breadth of self-expression that would be impossible to achieve with fewer words and less-complex sentence structure.
Such writing unquestionably requires greater concentration and mental processing on the part of the reader. Yet that effort is rewarded by the pleasure of partaking in the gourmet literary fare the writer has created just for the reader's enjoyment. As writers, our job is not to spoon feed our readers miniscule servings of pablum, but to provide a fabulous spread of grand ideas beautifully garnished with well-chosen words and phrases.
Simple language has its place, to be sure. Yet, when we limit ourselves to its exclusive use, we deprive our readers of the transcendent power of language to raise our consciousness above the mundane, the everyday, the commonplace. We ground their imaginations, preventing them from reaching the heights of thought to which they are capable. And that is not what great writing is about.
As for sentence length, variation is the ideal. Breaking up more complex sentences by varying them with shorter ones can give the reader a much-needed breather, clearing the way for the next great idea. And just as too many complex sentences in a row without a break can cause mental "exhaustion" in a reader, so also can too many short sentences in a row have the opposite effect, creating an unpleasant, choppy, uncoordinated feel that leaves the reader bored and dissatisfied. Short sentences can deliver ideas with impact--but only when they are the exception and not the rule.
Passive Voice is Passe
Principle 2: Avoid passive voice (like the plague). Active voice is always best.
My Response: Passive voice has its place and can be used quite effectively to achieve a more detached, clinical, authoritative, or exalted tone. Voice is entirely dependent on the writer's purpose for a piece, and passive voice is simply one writing technique that can improve a piece of writing when properly used--and when not overused. Passive voice can provide a refreshing variation from active voice when used periodically to make a piece more interesting. Passive voice can also be used to create a less forward, challenging, or accusatory tone.
Don't fear passive voice; rather, use it with wisdom, discretion, and intention--or don't. The choice is entirely up to you. You certainly aren't required to use it; but don't feel as if you mustn't, either.* Passive voice, like any other writing technique, is simply one tool in the writer's arsenal--perhaps one of the more specialized tools, which are used less often than the standard ones--but, nevertheless, one which is there to be used when needed. In writing, as in everything else, we always want to use the right tool for the right job.
Adjectives Are Out
Principle 3: Use adjectives sparingly; in fact, remove as many of them as possible from your writing.
My Response: I've received many a chuckle from this rule, as I've studied the paragraphs in which various writers have expounded the rule, mentally removing all the adjectives that hadn't been removed by them (note the non-accusatory passive voice here), only to find that, alas, the paragraphs that remained made little sense. I fear that most of us are unaware of the importance of the much-maligned adjective.
In my view, there's absolutely nothing wrong with adjectives. They're wonderful creations, which, when properly used, can add much to our writing. There's little doubt that the adjective is sometimes overused and that it often causes laziness in our choice of nouns by allowing us the luxury of using less-colorful, less-descriptive, or less-precise nouns. But my personal belief is that it's far more important to remove adverbs from our writing than adjectives, because removing adverbs forces us to use livelier verbs, which energizes our writing.
Adjectives should never be used simply to avoid the work involved in mining our vocabularies for the right noun to express our thought. But, neither should we fear the well-placed adjective, which adds substance to a sentence and builds descriptive power into our writing.
Those are my personal thoughts on a few of the rules of conventional writing wisdom.
What do you think?
Jeanne
* This sentence illustrates the happy marriage of passive and active voice. The first clause is passive, the second active. (This entire paragraph in fact represents the friendly give and take between active and passive voice. As you can see by the unforced variation between them, the two can indeed peacefully coexist.)
Did you enjoy this post? Have anything to add? Are there any rules of conventional writing wisdom with which you disagree? We'd love to hear about them!
Please note: If the StumbleUpon and other social bookmarking buttons aren't visible, please click the "Add Comments" link beneath this post. Thanks!
| 158 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Tracy
Movies and Life
TRacy
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Thanks for stopping by so soon after this piece was posted! Glad you found it helpful!
Take care!
Jeanne
Comment by Always Eighteen
Always Eighteen
Great entry! Writing, like all forms of art, is highly subjective. Like with the point about sharp, concise writing. Hemingway pulled off the simplicity brilliantly, but then again Virginia Wolf wrote superb, elaborate pieces.
I think the best thing to do is to have no rules. You can know every word in the dictionary but produce the worst piece of literature in the world, or you can be the complete opposite. You can be an extremely good looking guy and lack the execution to get a girl, or you can be an ugly shit but have the charm to catch even an angel.
It's really subjective... beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all.
Great stuff !!!!
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Whenever I get bugged by these so-called rules, I go back to some real writers who I know are considered to be good writers, and see what they do. Usually they're a lot more subtle than these rules allow.
Comment by cherylwright
Amen! I'm not crazy.
Bravo! Superbly written.
Jeanne it is just this type of information that prompted me to subscribe to your blog in the first place. And, while I tend to skim over other blogs or save them in my "TO READ" file, when I receive notification that there is a new post here, I click over immediately, lean in close to my computer screen and absorb every word, every time.
Thanks Jeanne for sharing these "writing vitamins" with us, your fellow writers.
Comment by Brad Shorr
Comment by Lis Garrett -
Comment by tlcorbin
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Thanks for your input! So glad you enjoyed this post! I appreciate your examples, as well as your point that writing is highly subjective. This is very true. Every writer has a unique voice and should write the way he or she writes best. Of course, audience and intent are always part of the equation, as are the requirements of specific writing clients.
Thanks again,
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I like your method of going back to the "real" writers, rather than blindly following conventional wisdom. As they say, "The proof is in the pudding" (adapted from the original saying, "The proof of the pudding is in the eating").
Successful writers come in all (literary) shapes and sizes, and it's an education in itself to study their work and figure out what spark made a specific writer's style "work." To be sure, there's a difference between "simple" and "simplistic," and really good writing that appears simple on the surface is the result of tremendous effort on the part of that writer and has a great deal going on beneath its unassuming surface.
Thanks so much for your insightful comment!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Thanks so much for that wonderful compliment! I'm honored--and humbled--by it! I only hope that I'll always be able to provide content that will inspire that response! I truly appreciate having you as a loyal reader!
Thanks for the encouragement!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
The passive voice used in your comment isn't likely to be judged harshly here! (LOL!)
Thanks so much for your thoughtful response to my post! Your writing is excellent, Brad, and I always thoroughly enjoy reading it! You have obviously found your own unique voice, and whatever you're doing, it's working!
I believe that each of us must determine our purpose, develop our style, and write with our particular audience in mind. Apart from that, as long as we police our own work, doing everything in our power to make it the best it can be, our finished product should be eminently readable. No one can ask anything more of us than that. It's quite apparent from your writing that you do all those things. Our goal as writers is not to write the way someone else thinks we should, but the way we know in our heart of hearts that we were intended to write (which, in a sense, is the point of this post).
Thanks so much for stopping by to share your thoughts!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I totally agree! As you know, I also do contract writing which places these same restrictions on me, so I definitely see the validity of your point! And audience is certainly a critical part of the writing equation.
Yet, in the absence of such an overly restrictive writing "formula" or format, I believe that a writer should have the freedom to explore the avenues of self-expression that are uniquely his or her own--without the inflexible limitations generally regarded to be a critical part of the definition of "good writing" by the writing establishment.
In my view, we needn't fear long, well-written sentences; passive voice, judiciously used; or adjectives which work well to add color and variety to our prose (above instances excepted).
Thanks so much for your welcome feedback!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
So glad you've enjoyed reviewing this post--even though you obviously don't need it! Since you already don't allow the (dare I say it?) pretentious proclamations of the "powers that be" in the writing establishment to influence your own writing, this post seems a bit like "preaching to the choir," where you're concerned.
The caliber of your writing, however, is a testament to the fact that (yes, horror of horrors, I used that literarily unacceptable phrase!) you have no need for the unreasonably restrictive writing rules that can definitely cramp a writer's style.
Thanks for your input!
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I agree with you on both counts:
Contract writing is quite restrictive, yet it does help a writer develop discipline. While I would definitely not want to be limited to contract writing (since it does tend to cramp my style), one does what one must to earn a living--all the while keeping one's eye out for more creative opportunities!
Thanks for stopping back by!
Jeanne
Comment by Lilla
From The Home Front
Enviro Warrior
Dream Herald
Esoteric Bookshop
...rules are why i don't freelance anymore... too restrictive... not allowing me to stretch and bend and grow a little. Certainly not a growth industry.. just look at the well worn hackneyed phrases that become so over-used, as to make me gag - esp. sports reports.
I have found blogging pays less (HA! you mean it pays at all...I'm still waiting)... but constantly being amongst writers, expressers, ranters and ravers is so positive and helpful for us all and certainly allows me the scope to explore my own 'stye' very amicably... I'll just keep working on my book(s) thanks.
It doesn't help that i am slow (well thick actually) when it comes to learning rules too. All the way through my masters degree I failed to understand the whole concept of passive voice and non-passive voice - I guess that means agressive voice?
I am not going to try and lern it now, either!
Lilla ...
Comment by Damo
Good post,
English sucks in so many ways that it is not funny.
I like the idea of taking carefully listening to all advice; ignore what annoys me and pretend that I invented what I like.
Passive Sentences have been the bane of existence ever since MS Word was loaded onto my computer.
Spell check- GrandMa check, Oh Crap 'Passive sentence please revise'.
Well no bloody computer is going to tell me how write.
Any way I like the advice that George Orwell gives:
Never use a long word if a short one will do.
Never use 2 words if a one will do.
Keep passive sentences to a minimum.
In a way some of the writing conventions help to a point.
You still have to consider who is the intended audience is.
If it your self, then writeth what thou pleaseth.
If it is a business report, then give them the dry crap that they like to read. Dry and boring look professional.
Anything else, decide for yourself.
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by Patricia
Travel Stripe
Comment by Damo
I did qualify it with 'that they like to read'.
If the audience wants to be amazed by superlatives then go for it.
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
It's like making children read dull story books because it's good for them, supposedly. Make reading enjoyable, I say, whoever it's for. I read enough dull material in my life (because I've had to) not to want to read another bit of it again.
Comment by Lillie Ammann
Comment by Damo
It is probably because we are imagining two different kinds of documents.
How does one write a report on testing results without resorting to a technically standard form of presentation?
The engineer reading it may only want the immediate facts.
What this does and how to do that in a particular sequence.
Yet a document that wants to sell the positive merits of a proposal has a lot more freedom.
A document that provides a professional opinion has to be written in a detached impersonal manner devoid of prejudices and emotion. In other words dry as a bone. Yet it is still a valid form of writing.
I am not so worried about rules so much but I do like to make my job easier by addressing their expectations rather than be sent to rewrite it.
Comment by tlcorbin
We have voice messaging for leaving dry, dull, flat out boring and brilliantly inane communications. Raven
Comment by Sonya 1
Freelance Tips
Writing Words
I like rules, they make a funny noise when you break them.
But seriously, I agree with you. Lucky for us, good writing isn't just a set of rules. If it were, we would all be writing more or less the same, and being a writer would be about as exciting as being an accountant. As proven by the comments to your post, writers are a rebellious lot. They break the rules and are proud of it.
Thanks for another great post!
Sonya
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by tlcorbin
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I agree with you that it's so important for a writer to stretch and grow! And Orble is a great place to do that--with so much support from fellow bloggers who understand what we're going through because they, too, are dealing with the same issues. We definitely have a lot we can learn from one another.
As for passive voice and "aggressive" voice, I wouldn't give it another thought. (In some ways, active voice does seem like "aggressive" voice--perhaps because it's so aggressively pushed upon us by the writing establishment.) As I see it, it's a bit of a non-argument in many ways, anyway, because it's really up to the writer what he or she wants to do.
Earning your Masters degree is a far greater accomplishment than learning the difference between passive and active voice, anyway!
Thanks for the visit!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I'm sure your philosophy is shared by many writers--as is George Orwell's! I like what you say about carefully listening to all advice. When we do that, we're still free to choose which advice we'll follow--and, at the same time, we're much more likely to ensure that we don't miss anything that turns out to be really important. A good combination, I'd say!
I also agree with your statement that "some of the writing conventions help to a point." The writing conventions can prevent us from going too far afield in our efforts to be creative. But once we understand the ground rules, we are then free to bend or even break them intentionally and judiciously, as we explore and expand the limits of our creativity. It isn't something we do carelessly. It's part of our quest to find our own unique voice and to strike a chord that resonates with our reader.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Having your creativity stifled as you have can be tough! But that's one great thing about having a blog! Whereas you may not be able to be creative in the writing you do at work, you can, in a sense, let your hair down in your blog posts, letting your creativity shine. All writers need that creative outlet--particularly those of us who write in some of the more restrictive markets (as I do, as well). It's important not to totally inhibit our Muse, who thrives on self-expression. Once in a while, at least, we must let her out and allow her to show us what she's got. Hope your Muse will inspire you to "tone back up" soon!
Thanks for the visit!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
You're the perfect example of why these rules aren't as "cut and dried" as many would like to think they are! Thankfully, there's room for each writer to be herself! If you follow and break a writing rule at the same time, you are simply demonstrating your uniqueness--and for a writer uniqueness is key! After all, what makes one writer stand out from among the crowd of other writers if not uniqueness?
When we "re-engineer" a writing rule to make it fit our personality and writing style, we tell the world that, as writers, we are a force to be reckoned with--we will not be mindlessly forced into a mold or become cookie-cutter reproductions of every other (conventional) writer. This is a good thing--and it's just this kind of out-of-the-box thinking that can make a writer famous. (Hope it does!)
Thanks for stopping by to comment!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Hopefully, the day that writing "ceases to amuse, delight and amaze" us will never come! I can't even imagine such a day--and shudder at the thought!
Jeanne
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
How absolutely boring life would be if everyone wrote the same! (What a nightmarish thought!) This is why we can't allow our creativity to be tucked away into a neat and tidy little box marked "The Unbreakable Rules of Good Writing." Perish the thought!
Now, don't get me wrong. I appreciate a good solid rule of grammar every bit as much as the next writer--and can often be a bit of a stickler about many of them. But we often overlook the fact that many well-loved and well-regarded writers of yore have broken quite a few of the rules of writing so adamantly pressed upon us and have received nothing but accolades in return. So, whom should we follow?
Thanks so much for your thoughts!
Jeanne
Comment by --Deb
That said, it doesn't mean it's not fun flaunting your cavalier disregard for the old-fogey rules once in a while (grin). But, that's part of the fun!
(Oh, and I found my way over from Brad's--I'll be putting you in my RSS reader!)
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Great to meet you! I totally agree that it's important to know the rules, and if we choose to break them, to do so intentionally.
As I shared with Damo, in reply to his above comment,
So, it sounds as if you and I both agree on this important point. Creativity is never an excuse for laziness or blatant disregard for helpful principles when there's no good reason to ignore them. And it goes without saying that breaking the rules only works when it makes our writing better.
(We certainly don't want to give anybody the wrong idea. Writing is hard work; and though it can be great fun to purposefully break with writing convention occasionally, we must first understand writing convention to develop an accurate picture of which conventions are OK to break and which aren't.)
So glad you decided to visit, and thanks for signing up for my feed!
Take care!
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Amen to that. If only more would-be poets knew this. I focus on poets especially because so many of them now think that there are no rules, there never were any rules, and even if there were any rules nobody writes like that any more!
I read Stephen Fry's book, The Ode Less Travelled, recently. It shows just how wonderful the rules are when you actually know them
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Thanks for stopping back by to continue the conversation!
Many writers and other artists like to push the limits; but when they push them too far, it can be difficult for the reader to enjoy--and appreciate--their work.
It's been said that poetry is "order threatening to become chaos." Maybe the poets you speak of are hoping to fulfill that threat.
I've never seen Stephen Fry's book. It sounds interesting--and it certainly has a clever title!
I've written some poetry myself (some of which is posted at the Orble Poems blog). Through that I've learned that even free verse has rhythm, because all language has rhythm; and while you may not want regular rhythm in free verse, you do want pleasing rhythm--just as you do with any well-written prose.
I enjoy writing rhymed and metered poetry or unrhymed but metered poetry, though I'll sometimes use internal rhyme without end-rhyme. Rhymed poetry must be very well-crafted, though, to avoid a trite, sing-songy, overly simplistic sound.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Creative Poems gives out (non-monetary) awards for poems they judge to be well-written, after they're entered into the site's regular poetry competitions by the poets (about 10 winners per week last I checked). I've won a few awards there, myself, which was very nice! Also won one of their contests, which only had two winners. That was an even bigger honor. As far as I know, my winning poem, "Pennies," is still listed on the site's home page (at least it was the last time I visited).
I wrote posts about these two poetry sites back in early 2007. If you're interested, you should be able to search my blog by inputting the site names, since I used them in the post titles. If you have trouble finding the posts, I can track them down and post links for you.
Where have you posted your poetry? (Hope I didn't go to all the trouble of telling you about two sites you already knew about!)
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Not sure whether you'll be able to pick up all five (?) of the poems on there, but there's usually a link from one to the others on the page.
Thanks for your interest. I'll check your poems out when I'm not supposed to be working...!
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
I have the same problem: more work than I can seem to get done--and little time to do anything else. But, I'll click over and read your poems as soon as I can find a few free moments. Right now, I'm off to give my mom dinner; then it's back to write another article, along with a few other writing projects! (As for poetry, I don't actually write much of it, either. Haven't written any in quite some time, in fact. I do enjoy it, but just don't have the time right now.
Take care!
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
It's at Poems.net.au. Here's a link: Poems. Sorry about that! I've often noticed it in the list of Orble blogs, but for some reason, I don't see it there now. You'll also find it in your daily Orble blog stats e-mail, since it generally ranks #1 in Writing blogs for unique readers.
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
The Orble Poems site does tend to focus mainly on posting more-or-less famous classic poetry; though it does contain some poetry posted by Orble poets, as well.
As I recall, I've only posted about two of my own poems there, as well as a short piece on the definition of poetry. (I've also posted a few poems by classic poets there.)
Here are links to my original poems and my other piece:
Childhood Voices
Mothers
What Is Poetry?
It does tend to be difficult to find poems previously published on the Poems site--unless they happen to be in the Popular Poems category.
I've read a few of your poems on your website, and I'm quite impressed! As soon as I have more time, I intend to go back and read the rest and also visit the second link you left. I'll talk further about it after I've had a chance to read more.
Later,
Jeanne
Comment by Mike Crowl
Webitz
Work Report
Comment by Jeanne Dininni
Writer's Notes
Jeanne