by Jodie Renner, editor, author, speaker
In Part I of this series, I gave some tips and examples for
streamlining your writing to make your message more accessible and compelling.
In Part II, we saw some specific
examples of words and phrases to cut or reduce, to write more powerfully.
Here, we continue to explore ways to cut out the deadwood by
avoiding repetitions and convoluted phrasing and going for clear, concise writing.
Remember, it’s about direct communication and carrying your
reader along with the story. Don’t muddle your message with a lot of extra
words that just clutter up the sentence and hamper the free flow of ideas.
Avoid repetitions and
redundancies in all their forms: two words meaning the same thing; saying
something in five or six words when you can express it with one or two; and phrases
or sentences that keep saying the same thing over and over in different ways.
Redundant Phrases. Avoid this kind of “repetitive
redundancy”:
Repetitive phrase: Concise
equivalent:
honest truth truth
future plans plans
regular routine routine
past history history
final outcome outcome
extremely unique unique
repeat again repeat
totally unanimous unanimous
sudden impulse impulse
unexpected surprise surprise
overused cliché cliché
What’s the problem? It’s obvious
— the only kind of truth is honest truth, an impulse is sudden, repeat means to do something again, a surprise is by
nature unexpected, and so on.
Cut out the deadwood, words that restate what is obvious by the
rest of the sentence, words that just repeat what you’ve already said, words
that are just adding clutter to your sentence. For example, the phrases in
brackets are redundant here:
We passed an abandoned house [that
nobody lived in] on a deserted street [with no one around].
At this [point in] time, [the truth
is that] complaints are increasing [in number], but I don’t see that as a
problem [to be solved].
Cluttering your sentences with
too many unnecessary words can subliminally irritate your reader. Here a few examples of this “little word
pile-up” tendency:
in spite of the fact that although
as a result of because
came in contact with met
at this point in time now
during the time that while
he is a man who he
make use of use
with reference to about
Here are some examples, altered and disguised from my fiction editing, of trimming excess words:
Before: He was
shooting off his mouth in the bar last night telling everybody that he was going to find the bastard that ratted
on him.
After: He was
shooting off his mouth in the bar last night about finding the bastard that ratted on him.
Before: Jennifer ran along the tunnel and up the stone steps to the
walkway. She hesitated for only a moment
at the top in order to jam the hand gun she was holding into her waistband and give her time to figure
out where to run.
After: Jennifer ran along the tunnel and up the stone steps to the walkway.
At the top, she stopped to jam the gun into her waistband and figure out where
to run.
Finally, avoid convoluted phrasing and leave out unnecessary little details that just serve to distract the reader, who wonders for an instant why they’re there and if they’re significant:
Before: He had arrived at the coffee machine and was punching
the buttons on its front with an outstretched index finger when a voice from behind him broke him away from his thoughts.
After: He was punching the buttons on the coffee
machine when a voice behind him broke into
his thoughts.
In the first example, we have way too much
minute detail. What else would he be punching the buttons with besides his
finger? And we don’t need to know which finger or that it’s outstretched.
Everybody does it pretty much the same. Avoid having minute details like this
that just clutter up your prose.
Before: The
officer was indicating with a hand gesture a door that was behind and off to the right of
McKay. Angular snarl stuck to his face,
he swung his head around to look in the
direction the other officer was pointing.
After: The
officer gestured to a door behind McKay.
Snarling, he turned to look behind him.
Before: “Bastards.
Why am I always the last to know?” Pivoting, the detective walked in the direction of the station's front desk with a purposeful, nearly aggressive, gait.
He shoved
himself bodily through the swinging door and locked eye contact with
the uniformed officer on reception duty.
After: “Bastards. Why am I always the last to know?” Pivoting, the detective marched toward the front desk. He slammed through the swinging door and glared at the officer on reception duty.
Copyright
© Jodie Renner, May 2012
Next:
Resist the Urge to Explain (RUE), and One Plus One Equals One-Half
Your advice is terrific as always! This is why all writers need editors.
ReplyDeleteGreat advice, Jodie. No wonder your clients are so happy with you!
ReplyDeleteThe problem with clutter--at least for me--is that it's hard to see when it's in my own house. I'm always amazed by how editors can trim down what I already thought was lean. It's a skill i admire. Just wish I had more of it myself.
ReplyDeleteGood post, Jodie.
Thanks for your comments, LJ, Peg and Drew! Andrew, that's very common - pretty much universal, I think. I can cut so far on my articles, then I really need (although I don't often get) another set of eyes to smooth things out a little more. But it's a fine line - I once had someone slash one of my articles so badly that she cut all the "voice" and "attitude" and personality, and basically sucked the life out of the piece! What was left almost sounded like a telegram. That would be the editor from hell!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great article, it's really easy to fall into these traps. Great post! I write mysteries for Penguin and I just discovered your site. Love it!
ReplyDeleteThanks for your kind words, Mary! I'm glad you find my craft articles helpful!
ReplyDelete