Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Killing Your Genius with Big Words (Pace)

Ernest Hemingway gained critical acclaim by crafting wonderful stories with lifelike characters by using common language. He avoided flowery vocabulary that might impress English professors or earn admiration from society's gentile crowd. Instead, he opted for simple, clear words--basic language that got the job done. For that reason, ordinary people enjoyed his characters and plots.

Reference books . . . for pleasure reading?

Is there a modern lesson in Hemingway's approach to writing? JK Rowling, Tom Clancy, and that writer who attracts enormous criticism from literary critics, Stephenie Meyer of Twilight fame . . . they all became successful using words average people understand. Readers inject themselves into stories, and if undistracted by dictionary visits, they experience the full impact of the writing. Shakespeare did the same thing. Sure, his plays sound odd by today's American English standards, but, back in his era, commoners raved about his pithy themes and every-day dialog.

Don't we writers all want the same thing? We hope our stories entertain readers, and maybe, just maybe, they'll become fans of both our stories and our writing styles. How can our word choices help this reader-to-fan metamorphosis?

Writers actually pick an audience when they select words. If your intended readers are college-educated professionals who demand literary eloquence, then, by all means, dust off the thesaurus and engage in the synonym dance. But, if the planned-for reader is a typical person, someone who works all week and wants a little escapism during their cherished weekends, then the author's writing should match readers' needs. We should write to the audience, not to our English professor!

In my personal experience, even highly educated people like doctors and lawyers want to relax when they pick up a book for pleasure reading. They're not much interested in passing the GRE exam's writing section . . . yet again. If a simple word gets the job done, then why complicate things with a five-syllable alternative? Sure, there are times when a word like anthropomorphism must be chosen for just the right meaning, but more often than not, a simpler word will be effective and easier to read. Pace in a story is a carefully constructed flow that carries a reader from one important scene to next. Correct pace depends on ease of reading.

Can it be overdone; perhaps too simplistic? Certainly. And, that's a fine line writers must walk. The old acronym, K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple, Stupid), works in fishing, building a porch, assembling a child's bike and most any other task in life. It's no different for writing.

Don't kill your genius by forcing readers to keep a dictionary close by. Awesome mental images and dynamic dialog wilt under interruptions by visits to a thesaurus. Great stories rely on pace, or more accurately, carefully planned variances in pace, to unfold their plots. They engage a reader's imagination and run effectively as long as there are no distractions. Avoid the curse of big-word-itis, and let your story's pace flow naturally. If it was good enough for get the rest.

Now, where did I put my thesaurus? I need to edit this post. lol.


  1. Okay. I agree with this, up to a point. The average American has a vocabulary of approximately 3000 words. Yep. 3000.

    I have ceased to read YA (except for the rare exception) because it is written with the idea of someone who has approximately a grade 6 reading level. I can't read at that level. It's like pulling teeth. There are only so many times I can handle 'giggle' for the use of laugh, snicker, etc., all reasonable words.

    For adult fiction, there is nothing halting the writer to write at at least a high school grade 12 reading level.

    There is nothing wrong with stretching a reader's vocabulary. Before YA, this is how we learned what words meant what. I recall reading Asimov at 12, his book in one hand, the dictionary in another. It forced me to 'learn!'

    I love Hemmingway, but it wasn't just about his everyman's language use. His prose was splendid.

    If an author must 'dumb down' their vocabulary for the masses to succeed, doesn't that have a nasty connotation of the dumbing down of the masses?

    Personally, I choose not to participate in that.

    Now, if you've read this comment and haven't a clue as to what I stated, I recommend a dictonary.

    1. Thank you. You just made my point. Your entire well-stated position used common language, grammar, and punctuation befitting a typical high school graduate. No dictionary necessary; very easy to read--good pace, too!

      Your response begs one question. Are we writers, or are we teachers? I feel my first responsibility is to entertain readers. That said, there are plenty of used English textbooks in every Junior college bookstore (at great prices) for those who want cheap education. Also, regarding YA readers/writers, we were all YA-level readers at one time. I actually like the current YA craze. Hopefully, these same readers will develop a love for reading and become future adult-level readers with mature literary expectations. Although, there is a chance they may get older but don't grow adult literary tastes...frightening thought, huh?

      This blog is meant for inexperienced writers who might suffer the misconception that superfluous words are, somehow, better writing. It's just food for thought. To that end, I deeply appreciate your feedback. These are the kinds of discussions neophytes need to read.

      Again, thank you...Dean

  2. I completely agree Dean. As far as for my audience. I know that each person has a different audience but I hope to write for entertainment. I'm not smart enough to write for any other reason ;)

    1. I've seen your comments and writing, Julia. Don't underestimate your abilities. You're smart, but more importantly, you're intuitive and empathetic. Those attributes almost guarantee your success as a writer...Dean

    2. I'm ever grateful for your words of encouragement :)

  3. If an unfamiliar word is to be used by an author, introducing it so that its meaning is clear using the context of the story and stucture is the way to go.

    Actually, that's the way most people learn new words, through encountering them in context, be it through reading, conversation, television, etc.

    Sticking with common words but using the best word for the job, even if it's a bit uncommon, is the route I follow.

    I think Dean has it right. When writing, consider the audience--what will work for them as well as the story. When you do both successfully, well, the reader will appreciate it.

    1. I agree completely. The pace of a story does not necessarily slow by introducing stronger vocabulary as long as context provides clear understanding (as you said). It's an age-old problem for writers. How much knowledge or life experience can we ASSUME readers bring to the story? If our assumptions match the reader's capabilities, then it's a win:win. If not, then our genius-prose fails to "involve" the reader in the story. It's a balancing act...Dean

  4. Excellent blog post (as usual) Dean. I've written ad copy for about 30 years now and I remember when I was a greenhorn at the game, a senior writer telling me: "write in the voice of your audience". The same is true for authors (if they have an audience, of course). It doesn't mean dumbing anything down. It just means making their voice your voice. Empathy follows (or should, hopefully), and therefore readership, fans, sales etc. However....(isn't there always one of those buggers!).....hopefully whilst entertaining our readers, it's nice to think that sometimes they go away having learned a thing or two...or even read something that made them use their grey cells to form an opinion or even alter one. So possibly by default, there is a teeny weeny education thing going on now and then. And that's not a bad thing. Having a bigger vocabular doesn't necessarily make you a better writer, just one with more ammunition. Whether you decide to use that ammunition depends on who you're shooting at. My two cents worth. Well...maybe one and a half....

    1. Every writer must decide his writing theme. Are we writing for entertainment, for money, for posterity...maybe even for pride. We combine such elements into blends that, ultimately, define our unique style. And, as Terry said above, there is nothing wrong with challenging reader comprehension as long as context is provided. I would simply add that "context" must allow for pace because pace elevates good stories into great stories.

      Thanks to you, God, the Devil and your good buddy, the bartender, for your much appreciated insights...Dean

  5. The more I write, the more I realize the old adage "less is more" really is true. Sometimes the simplest way of stating your point really is the most effective. If the stories we tell aren't interesting enough without all the frilly fancy words, I don't think that's the thesaurus's fault.

  6. Thea - you and I are on the same page. New writers might panic when they reach 60,000 of their 100,000-word goal, only to discover their story just finished. Instead of expanding the plot, temptation to embellish becomes irristable with dire consequences. The story gets bogged down in a verbal bramble; words that twist all over the place but go nowhere. As experience grows, so does the ability to build a strong plot where superfluous words don't even fit. It all starts with a big enough story concept...Dean (Hmmm--another blog?)


I would love to hear your thoughts about my blog.