Very Bad Writing Advice

Brian Clark's blog, Copyblogger, which purports to teach bloggers how to improve their writing skills, consistently ranks among Technorati's Top 100 "most favorited" blogs. (The last time I checked, it was #17.) That means a lot of people hang onto Clark's every word. Sometimes he, or a guest blogger, delivers the goods: see the pithy Ten Steps to Becoming a Better Writer, for example.

That's not the case, though, with Clark's recent post, "Three Ways to Spice Up Any Blogpost."  In a word, it's rubbish. Heed his advice at your--and your readers'--peril.

Clark begins the post in characteristically peppy fashion:

Is your writing all meatloaf and mashed potatoes and no jalapeño and oregano? If so, you may be focusing on format and forgetting about what Ernest Hemingway called vigorous language.

So far, so-so. Personally, I don't worship at the shrine of St. Ernest, but I don't disagree that vigorous writing is a good thing. And I don't take serious issue with two out of three of Clark's pieces of advice: use language that appeals to the senses, aim for impact, entertain your readers. (I'm not wholly persuaded about that last one.)

It's his examples that miss the mark.

Here's how he demonstrates using language that appeals to all five senses:

The crackling flames danced manically upon the charring husk of the car, illuminating the starless night sky as I stood and watched helplessly. Warm canyon winds pushed the pungent smoke into my face and nostrils, and I tasted my own salty tears at the thought of the laptop in the back seat. All I could think was, how am I going to blog this?

All I could think was, "Get me rewrite!"

This passage is the antithesis of "vigorous language." It doesn't appeal to the senses; it calls attention to its own overwrought construction. Vigorous language employs nouns and verbs, not flabby modifiers and clichés like "crackling flames." Granted, Clark is overdoing it for effect (see his Point #3, "Be entertaining"), but even one of his phrases would be too much. 

It gets no better with Clark's second piece of advice, "Employ high-impact wording." Don't use the first words that come to mind, Clark urges: search your thesaurus for something fancier. Or more hackneyed, as in these examples:

• Instead of brave, why not heroic?
• Instead of big, why not gigantic, tremendous or monumental?
• Try rejuvenating, invigorating or exhilarating instead of fresh.
• Go with chuckle, chortle or guffaw just for laughs.
• Why be frank when you can explode the myths about X and Y?
• It’s not new, it’s a glimpse into the future.

Does Clark really think "explode the myths" and "glimpse into the future" represent fresh, vibrant prose? On the contrary, they're the stuff of badly written press releases and hyperbolic sales letters. And there are good reasons not to substitute "heroic" for "brave" or "monumental" for "big": they have different meanings. (And extra syllables.)

Clark's final pearl, "Be entertaining," is just as ill advised as his other two suggestions. "Coming up with an entertaining angle, using interesting language and making knowing references will always be a hit with your readers," he writes. Clark gives no examples or references here, though they're sorely needed. How do you go about finding "an entertaining angle"? What makes language "interesting"? What's a "knowing reference"? And the entertainment value depend on the subject matter? I certainly don't turn to, say, Greg Palast or George Packer--two fine journalists and very good writers on politics and foreign policy--for winks and belly laughs. Even in marketing and advertising blogs, an inherently less-serious genre, jollity can be cloying and offputting.

Ernest Hemingway, like a lot of successful writers, learned his craft at a daily newspaper, the Kansas City Star, where he covered ambulance chases and drug raids. "On the Star you were forced to learn to write a simple declarative sentence," he later said. "That's useful to anyone." Clarity and concision are still worthy goals for any writer. Remember, your readers aren't looking for a new variation on "he said" in every sentence; they're looking for information, insight, a story.

If you're seriously interested in improving your writing--for a blog, a novel, or a nonfiction narrative--don't bother with Copyblogger. Instead, go directly to these better-informed sources:

Matthew Stibbe at Bad Language. His recent post, 62 Ways to Improve Your Press Releases, has much to offer all writers: Have something interesting to say; be brief; get to the point; write a killer lede (first sentence or paragraph); tell a story; use everyday words and phrases; create a sense of place.

John Ettore at Working with Words. You can skip the posts about local (Cleveland) journalism if they don't interest you, but pay close attention to his "best lead of the month" posts and his other nods to clear, effective writing.

Roy Peter Clark at Poynter Online (unrelated, as far as I know, to Brian Clark). Subscribe to his blog and read his book, Writing Tools: 50 Essential Strategies for Every Writer.

John McIntyre at You Don't Say. McIntyre is the assistant managing editor for the copy desk at the Baltimore Sun. He's crankier than Roy Peter Clark but just as instructive. Here's his advice for writers:

• Write the way a literate, informed adult would talk.
• Shun jargon and journalese.
• Grammar, syntax and usage are the tools of your craft. Master them.
• There are a few real rules in English and a host of bogus rules. Learn the difference.
• And, most of all, get to the point. Take this sentence: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” The creation of the universe has a 10-word lead. Why does this story need more?

Amen.

Comments

[John]

I agree with you, except for one thing: you say that vigorous language employs nouns and verbs. How could any writing not employ nouns and verbs?

[Joanna Young]

Nancy, I agree with your points here - only difference is that I'm pretty sure Brian was writing tongue in cheek.

Quite why is another question...

Joanna

[Nancy Friedman]

Touché, John. I should have just quoted Strunk & White: "It is nouns and verbs, not their assistants, that give to good writing its toughness and color."

Joanna: Yes, I know (I read your comment on his post, and his reply). "Quite why" is indeed the question. I think most of his readers will take him literally.

[Brian Clark]

I'll let you know *why* in an upcoming post.

And don't try to set your self apart from the "literal" crowd, Nancy... you've demonstrated that you are far less than acutely perceptive, and yet more than willing to step up and let everyone know it.

[Charles]

Given Brian's cranky response, one wonders if he was really "tongue in cheek." Maybe bloggers who write about writing just write for each other while the rest of us are supposed to ooh and aah in admiration.

[Nancy Friedman]

Charles: Not only cranky, but ad hominem! (Ad feminem?) He's even nastier in today's post: http://www.copyblogger.com/the-dangers-of-humor/

As I said at the beginning of my post, Copyblogger sometimes does share helpful tips for writers. However, this "spice-up-your-writing" post--which, to judge from Brian's commenters, was taken literally--was misguided and off target.

[Kinase]

A remarkably pompous post with entirely too many semicolons.