The Day You Became A Better Writer

I went from being a bad writer to a good writer after taking a one-day course in “business writing.” I couldn’t believe how simple it was. I’ll tell you the main tricks here so you don’t have to waste a day in class.

Business writing is about clarity and persuasion. The main technique is keeping things simple. Simple writing is persuasive. A good argument in five sentences will sway more people than a brilliant argument in a hundred sentences. Don’t fight it.

Simple means getting rid of extra words. Don’t write, “He was very happy” when you can write “He was happy.” You think the word “very” adds something. It doesn’t. Prune your sentences.

Humor writing is a lot like business writing. It needs to be simple. The main difference is in the choice of words. For humor, don’t say “drink” when you can say “swill.”

Your first sentence needs to grab the reader. Go back and read my first sentence to this post. I rewrote it a dozen times. It makes you curious. That’s the key.

Write short sentences. Avoid putting multiple thoughts in one sentence. Readers aren’t as smart as you’d think.

Learn how brains organize ideas. Readers comprehend “the boy hit the ball” quicker than “the ball was hit by the boy.” Both sentences mean the same, but it’s easier to imagine the object (the boy) before the action (the hitting). All brains work that way. (Notice I didn’t say, “That is the way all brains work”?)

That’s it. You just learned 80% of the rules of good writing. You’re welcome.

Comments

[Ranjith]

An important factor that contributes to the improvement of the business letter is the respect of styles and genres. These provide an overall structure and style which is expected to business correspondence and documentation. In addition to a general framework, vocabulary and thematic specialist idiomatic phrases used in the common vernacular of the economy for players in the trading community. These requirements are daunting and, in fact, many professionals are finding writers, especially in the early days of the written form. WhiteSmoke response to these models are their business. http://www.outsourcingresearchwriting.com

[Chess Openings Guru]

Excellent advice. Thanks! I'm glad you put the part about the subject-verb relationship. I need a friendly reminder now and then.

[stewart]

Re: Eugene's comment
I don't think anyone knows for sure how our brains are wired by default, but SVO (Subject-Verb-Object) is not specific to Western languages. Chinese (by which I include all Chinese dialects) can hardly be more different from Germanic/Romance languages, and yet it uses SVO. If Chomsky is correct about universal grammar, it is not impossible that our brains have a slight preference for SVO, since Creole languages often uses SVO. (These are grammatic languages made up by children whose parents speak almost grammarless pidgins.)

[Eugene]

Thanks. This helped somewhat. i have to write a paper for my Honors English class using no adverbs and no adjectives.

[Ed]

Correction: Not 'all' brains think this way, as is your presumption. Sure, brains tutored under a language where subject comes before verb in the SVO (subject, verb, in/direct object) makes more sense to you, and many other's (including myself) have been raised under Germanic and Romantic derived languages.

This is merely an illusion. Native speakers of Japanese function primarily in a SOV format (subject object verb). To new speakers of English (from Japanese at least), "The boy the ball hits" would be an easier and more comfortable translation (needing only the words for verification, and no need to reverse the word order for comprehension).

Consider Latin (although a dead (nearly, except for college geeks) language) where the placement of the words is generally (and arguably genuinely) arbitrary, wherein the endings of such words designate their position in a grammatical structure. In Latin, you could easily find a sentence, that without rearranging the order of words, states: "the fire in Rome Nero fiddled the burning while was occuring", when the actual sentence should translate as "Nero fiddled while the fire burned Rome." Put into context the designations for sentence structure as well as the prepositions we needlessly add, ("the, in, while, was, etc.") are needless , the 1 or 2 letter endings which put such nouns, verbs, and objects (direct, or indirect) in their particular designations, make way for both their function in the statement, as well as how the subject is affecting them (to, from, with, against, around, near, using, etc. etc.). Consider this food for thought.

Further, there are African languages which function the same way (as well as Swahili, if I'm remembering my linguistics properly (which is a language very much alive)) where they add grammatical designations (Subject, Object, or Verb) into the middle of the word.

Case in point, Human brains are NOT wired this way, its just a generalized stereotype of how western language (and arguably western upbringing) exemplifies itself.

[David]

"I went from being a bad writer to a good writer after taking a one-day course in 'business writing.'"

The author says he rewrote that opening sentence a dozen times. Maybe 13 is the charm. The main idea is that he "went from being a bad writer to a good writer." That idea should be at the end of the sentence rather than the beginning.

Why? Because most readers of English most of the time expect to find the most important information at the end of the sentence, in the "stress position."

Rewrite: "After taking a one-day course in 'business writing,' I went from being a bad writer to a good writer."

[Mick Gregory]

There is a "Bull Fighter software put out by Deloite consultants, that is free and is used to simplify writing. Once you download it, a button appears on your Word and e-mail banner.

Just Google Bull Fighter index.

[William]

"My Chemistry professors insisted on passive voice in all lab reports."
They do this because they want you to not have a subject. That's the one time you should use passive voice. "The world was destroyed" for example.

[brian rittenhouse]

"...Both sentences mean the same, but it’s easier to imagine the object (the boy) before the action (the hitting)."

WOAH! Isn't the ball the object? And the boy the subject? It has been a while since I had English in school but I am pretty sure that is the way it used to shake out....maybe it has changed since I was a boy. Or maybe the 20% not included in this "good writing lesson" is how to use proper English??? Or maybe good writing goes beyond "rules"???

That aside...I do appreciate your insights here...and I think you are amazing at delivery here on your blog! Thanks

[damien]

Umm, yeah, and if its going out in an email, you will lose 90% of your readers if it extends beyond a single paragraph. The will all say "my brain hurts" and "reading makes me sleepy" like Homer Simpson ODing on valium. Lets face it, when writing, youre better of treating your audience like a bunch of morons. They will appreciate your thoughfulness. Better yet, dont write. Make short video and upload it to youtube with a catchy upbeat tune running in the background.

[RDB]

--
Writing for ex-Business Majors.

Yeah, those drunken, vomit-spattered bodies we used to step over in the college dormitory every Sunday morning.

The ones who grew up to be Pointy-Haired Bosses.

I fully understand. After all, you don't prescribe antipsychotic drugs for people who don't have major thought disorders.

You don't write short except for stupid people.
--

[isabelle dolce]

I do not want to live in a world where all writing is reduced to conveying information. While simple is better for business it would be a great loss to the world of belles lettres if all writers adopted the KISS rule. Of course, not all writers are talented enough and the primary use of language is to convery ideas, but an excellent description, a rich vocabulary, a mastery of syntax and an understanding of rhetoric is a superb gift.

"Here as a boy I walked down every morning, barefoot and bearing a dented billycan. on my way to buy the day's milk from Duignan the dairyman or his stoically cheerful, big-hipped wife. Even though the sun would be long up the night's moist coolness would cling on in the cobbled yard, where hens picked their way with finical steps among hteir onw chalk-and-olive-green droppings. There was always a dog lying tethered under a leaning cart that would eye me measuringly as I went past, teetering on tuptoe so as to keep my heels out of the chicken-merd, and a grimy white cart-horse tht would come and put its head over the half-door of the barn and regard me sidelong with an amused and sceptical eye from under a forelock that was exactly the same murky shade of creamy-white as honeysuckle blossom. I did not like to knock at the farmhouse door, fearing Duignan'smother, a low-sized squarish old party who seemed fitted with a stumpy leg at each corner and who gasped when she breathed and lolled teh pale we polyp of her tongue on her lower lip, and instead I would hang back in the violet shadow of the barn to wait for Duignan or his missus to appear and save me from an encounter with the crone.

John Banville, "The Sea, pp. 38

[Tara]

good better best, never let 'em rest,
til your good is better, and your better best.

Now THAT piece of writing advice is free!

xx

[Gnat]

Indonesian (not my first language) uses the passive voice much more than active voice. In Indonesian, the form "I did this" is much less common than "This was done by me".

[Yitzi]

ty

[Korgull]

"Brevity is the soul of wit." - William Shakespeare

So u r kewl w/simple sh!t !!

[TomH]

Scott, WOW, thanks. I was wondering how to make my Blog entries shorter :-)

[jubilukian]

The object in his sentence is NOT the boy...it's the ball. The boy is the subject. So what you meant to say was that readers comprehend the active voice easier than the passive voice. http://grammar.qdnow.com/2007/03/25/active-voice-versus-passive-voice.aspx

[some confortably numb dude]

"Write short sentences. Avoid putting multiple thoughts in one sentence. Readers aren’t as smart as you’d think." ... have i just been insulted?

[ymal brucker]

I dunno.

"All through the whole of a dull, dark, listless day in the autumn of the year, I had been travelling alone on horseback through a singularily dreary tract of country and, at length, found myself, as the shades of evening wore on, within view of the melancholy House of User."

seems more, um, interesting than:

"I arrived."

[patty]

are you SURE readers aren't as smart as you think ?

[Aaron Bickerton]

80% is all I need right?

[Ian Nastajus]

AWESOME! Thankyou for putting to words the idea that objects should go before actions. My god, this simplifies my life!

[Chris Benson (Asparagus Pee Guy)]

I like short sentences. I also like long ones. Sometimes, it's nice to take the time to turn a phrase along the lines of "be there or risk being less than well rounded" to spouting a cliche like "be there or be square." That's the key to the famous British understatements like "I found her rather not unattractive."

[Florent V.]

The advice is not that bad, but I have doubts about the “The boy hit the ball” rather than “The ball was hit by the boy” thing.

You said it’s about brains. It’s not. It’s about how brains are trained, which includes language and culture.

In French, you use much more nouns and much less verbs than in English. And passive sentences (“The ball was hit by the boy”) are far more common. One of the first things you learn when you study French↔English translation is that most “This doesn’t sound quite right” situations can be solved by switching perspective… active↔passive and noun↔verb. It just works. Believe me.

[Budieglli]

Good [short] post.

[ny]

I agree.
I went to this English Composition Class last summer and at the end of that course - realization dawned on what a lousy writer I was. It's the superfluous and unnecessary that bring any writing down.

[MCO]

See if this meets the criteria.

http://mostcasualobserver.blogspot.com

[Giancarlo Angulo]

But with the 80/20 or pareto's law the 20% you haven't told us on how to become a good writer takes 80 % of the work.

[karenlim]

Perfect post.

I too practice writing short sentences at my blog on law of attraction

I use videos to paint a story and add some words to illustrate the points I am making.

If you could, I will appreciate if anyone comment if this style of writing allows readers to retain information taught:-
http://secretofunlimitedprosperity.com/62/sharing-an-inspiration-from-britain%e2%80%99s-got-talent-part-2/

Cheers!

[spike17]

Shakespeare may have said, "Brevity is the soul of wit," but his reference to lawyers in Henry VI does more to encourage shortening of the spoken, and written word, "The first thing we do let's kill all the lawyers."

[Real Live Girl]

Now will someone please tell that to the elementary school teachers who still give students writing assignments requiring a minimum number of words or pages so we can stop the madness?

[Ash]

You just taught my entire writing class for law school. It took the prof 2 semesters.

[Ivan Tikhonov]

Use minimum, add tools as you grow. Start with everything onboard and you will fail.

[MM]

Keep it lean, keep it mean, but keep the detail ! Trouble with deaf issues, you have to be ultra specific and this can hinder getting over your point. What I see is a load of 'links' given as 'further reference' and nobody can follow them, because they AREN'T short and to the point.

[Mark]

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

- William Shakespeare

Which was better than his origina quote: "Boxes are the soul of wit". Hey, the guy was ahead of his time!

[Yippo]

A fair point, Mr. R... but you, to my mind, are an exception.

Or maybe I just love Scott's books so much I want to see them praised wherever I go. Either's fine by me.

[Orwell]

Read this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/portal/2007/06/14/nosplit/ftannoy114.xml

[Ben]

Interestingly enough, only dead or dying languages support sentences that start with verbs. Coincidence?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb_Subject_Object

[Ben]

Japanese does have a different structure, but it still puts the object before the verb. Although sometimes the object is implied and left unsaid because it's obvious.

Does anyone know of a language that puts verbs first?

[Bill]

I thought I had absorbed all your writing advice before.

But I hadn't. Thank you for repeating it.

[Kanon]

Thanks but I wanna know the remainig 20%

[Ben Joseph]

"Eliminate unnecessary words."

I assume I'm about a million comments too late to bring up Strunk and White.

[Jon Ericson]

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

- William Shakespeare

[Sam]

Thanks.

I also read that if you can't say something in three minutes, there's no point saying it at all.

[Mister R]

Yippo: Interesting. We observed the same thing, yet our reactions were so different. I said "thanks" because it takes giving personality to share simple, yet not intuitive knowledge. Source doesn't matter. Scott gave away something that he paid for, and spent a whole day to obtain. I found this information useful, and it will stick. "Thanks" is easy, and the least I could do. You are welcome :)

[Mister R]

Thanks

[Sir Mike Tallon]

To be a great writer, you have to have a style unlike any other.

[Bradm]

Do you have the old sock puppet pages archived somewhere? I can't find the picture I submitted back in 1996. I apologize for coming out of nowhere and sticking sock puppet memories in your head, but you started it.

Also, thank you for all the philosotainment. You are my role model ever since the original gang of idiots from Mad Magazine died.

[neolifeforever]

the cheque is in the mail.
i expect a reciept before tax-day.
im writing this off as a work expense.

[Ben]

Thanks

[Yippo]

I can't help but be amused as half of the commenters leave something saying 'you're brilliant, Scott!'. You people do realise that Scott is just passing on information gathered from a class, right? This isn't his brainchild. If you want to slather him in conjectural love, admire his books!

[Nomi]

Thank you.

And thank you for doing your part to stem the very tide.

[Howard]

I'd add a comment on structure - particularly for business writing:

Buy a copy of Barbara Minto's "Pyramid Principle." Read it. Internalize it.

[Patrick]

Usually it's the ball that hits the boy. :-)
Thanks for the good advice.

[Christoph Jenkins]

Hmmm... That explains the bevity of dear old Bush's speeches.

[Peter]

> That doesn't explain why other languages have completely different syntax to English.

But it does explain why all foreign speakers expend more of their brainpower on language, leaving less for everything else. After all isn't it only the English-speaking part of the world that has kids speaking English by about age 3? I hear some of those foreigners don't even understand cricket.

[C Johnson]

So, in summary, assume your target audience are morons and write short sentences using small words.

As for comedy... You can't swill a coke, and since drank is the past of drink, that probably means you can't swall a coke either....

What? No drum roll? Dang busted comedy punchline machine? How will people know to laugh?

[henkbovekerk.nl]

Great post. Thanks.

[Renee]

I'm with you on this one. The best thing I ever did for my writing was attend journalism school, where we have this saying: "In English classes, including 100% of the information will get you an A. In journalism classes, you have to chose the right 10% to be the most effective."

[Lubna Kably]

If I write in simple terms, perhaps I will lose my job. You see we tax guys have a reputation to protect. Perhaps the pointy headed boss must attend a business writing class. Can't wait to see what will happen then.

[Noah]

I like your rules. As a former columnist, I'll say that everything Scott says is excellent advice. Once you really get your chops you can bend things a bit. However, if you never strayed you would almost certainly be considered an effective writer.

I'll add another piece of advice. Consider your words tonally. I'm a big fan of rhythm and pacing in writing. If you're not sure your words have a smooth flow, just read it aloud. If it sounds jarring aloud, it will sound off to whoever else is reading it too.

[forthnoggin]

Don't forget to avoid redundancies such as "whether or not" or "bright sun."

[Chris]

This is exactly how I have thought since I figured it out in high school. I can't attest to the humor part, but for clarity, nothing beats simplicity =D

[Mridul]

Not sure if you have seen this article, but it is very interesting read : http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote04.html

Has applicability on not just global warming, creationalism, and rest of the subjects you are interested in, but in basics of science as well.

[Matt]

In general, even smart people are stupid 90% of the time, so this makes sense. My normal tactic is to seem smart by writing compilcated sentences. People assume I'm talking sense because they lack the mental energy to work out exactly what I'm saying. Perhaps I should try writing shorter sentences instead.

I have a random idea for a blog post. I think you should take the political compass (google it) and post your results. It'd be hard to make it funny, but it'd be interesting to anyone politically minded.

[Balkrishna Nadkarni]

Yoda, where art thou?

[Ray Saunders]

BTW: There are several ways of organizing the words in a sentence and not all languages are the same. One way is not inherently more 'the way minds work' than another.

[mnuez]

Yowza, Dilbee! this was by far the worst blog post you've ever sent published! Your writing is about as awesome as any writer could hope for but in this one here you seem to have been thinking about following the "rules" too much and (in my very humble opinion) your form did not benefit from the experience.

To reiterate: You're a writing God. Just not in this post. So much. Okay. Goodbye.

;-)

mnuez

[CoderFloyd]

The Elements of Style by Strunk & White gives the same advice and more. It's worth 10 times the $10 price.

[Adam]

Hi there. Not sure if you have facebook, Scott, but here's a link to a dilbert app on there: http://hs.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=2369443931

[Ray Saunders]

British novelist John Masters described (Pilgrim Son) how he learned to write by having his commander reject any words that were not critical to understanding. His goal became to write a paper with no adverbs, adjectives or suborndinate clauses - simple declarative sentences. It would certainly be easy to read, but boring. The real trick is always keep in mind the audience and the effect you want to produce in the minds of the readers. You speak differently to a 5-year-old than you would to a teenager. You speak differently to a business meeting than to a cocktail party. It's not so much what you want to say as it is what effect you want to produce.

[lump]

This post was concise and informative.

I hope the microsoft technical writers read it.

[a person]

Well not all brains work that way, but all English speaking brains work that way.

Wait, what's the other 20%?!?! I suppose this will have to be good enough.

I don't remember if it was you or Stephan Pastis copying you who called it "economical" use of words.

George Orwell has an excellent essay that says sometihng very similar. I think it's called "on the English Language."

[David Anderson]

Thanks Doug...I've heard a lot of this before, but never so succinctly.

I have taken a lot of 1 and 2-day courses that could easily have been summarized in a 1 or 2-page typed handout. This would have saved me many hours of boredom.

I'm looking forward to the final 20% of your course material.[joke]

[BearofNH]

Other 20% -- do charts qualify? I do a fair amount of business writing and include visuals that correspond to my point. It's also hard to make a good chart. You need to keep it simple and on point, just like text.

[Jaime Bakulic]

Thanks! I'll try it on my next entry.

[R A]

BOOOOOORING...

[Dramenbnejs]

"Readers aren’t as smart as you’d think."

Interestingly, the claim is valid no matter how stupid you think the readers are. Sometimes it looks like the people are having competition in idiocy, outperforming your wildest predictions.
Especially if you hurt their core belief (e.g. creationists or various discussion about truth/understanding or about morale...).

Personally, I consider naming the human "homo sapiens sapiens" as the most bitter biological joke ever.

[LA Clay]

The key to GREAT writing.

Originality is the art of concealing the source.

[Mary]

Simple, valuable and true. Thank you. Timely for me because I have a research paper to finish today with a page minimum. Also, you are experienced and your first sentence was self-edited a dozen times. No wonder it takes me 50 hours to write a 10 page research paper.

[Jayelle]

I'm still much too prone to using great big gobs of adjectives, but I try to practice those tips when I write. I guess now would be a great time to confess something to you. I use the second half of your "The Joy of Work" a *lot*, as a reference/reminder. It has helped me tremendously. For example, if I have a choice of two topics, I know to pick the one that makes me respond physically, as you suggested. I'm sure that's not what you meant, but there it is. Thank you for saving me time and money! :-)

[Lieva]

The best ideas are the most simple :)

Still... 'he was very happy' promotes the thought that he feels a happiness that is more than the average happiness. Perhaps in that case 'he was extreamly happy' would be allowed?

[Anton]

This is why Hemingway. Is popular. But not very good. If you have half a brain. That is.

[Bob]

You neglect any mention of the effect of meter within a sentence.

I find this very unhello.

[Steph]

The other 20% of good writing strategy comes from choosing a monkey as your main character. Your reader won't be able to put your work down. You could hook them for a trilogy if 2 or more supporting characters are also monkeys.

[Steph]

I used to write beautifully constructed sentences designed to utilize as few commonly used words as possible.

Then I became an engineer. For five years it was no longer necessary to communicate my ideas using anything other than Excel.

Then I graduated and went to go work for a monkey. This monkey was the VP of Engineering.

I learned the hard way that getting the monkey to agree with me was not dependent on the quality or technical accuracy of my work. The monkey would always agree with me if I used 20 pt. font and at least 5 different colors in my reports.

Matrices were popular then so he also liked it if I converted lengthy technical documents to a 4x4 matrix with one bullet point in each box.

[B. Ross]

That's a very very good post.

[Len]

Good one Scott. And you're not the first to try to help people to write well. Here's what I found in Wikipedia:

In his essay "Politics and the English Language" from 1946, George Orwell (Animal Farm, 1984, etc) provides six simple rules for all writers of English (that is, in a non-literary context):
* Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
* Never use a long word where a short one will do.
* If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
* Never use the passive voice where you can use the active.
* Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
* Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

I think that sums it up.

[Sajal Budhathoki]

video,comments,articles,photos all n all

[Sajal Budhathoki]

video,comments,articles,photos all n all

[Fionn]

This blog was very insightful up until the last paragraph. Different languages have different structures, different rules of layout (see German, or Japanese for 2 examples).
However if English writers only concern themselves with with writing for English reading brains, then yes I totally agree.
thanks!

[Edward]

And another tip you didn't mentioned but used was to apply what you're saying at the same moment you write it. Really easy to understand for everyone.

[P]

"" All brains work that way.'

That doesn't explain why other languages have completely different syntax to English. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_typology ""

Being a bi-lingual speaker I was thinking the same thing.

[Mark Bowness]

Brilliant. I shall try and remember this for all future writing, or at least keep coming back to this post to remind me.. seems that my brain is much more simpler than others!

Mark Bowness
www.peoplpassionplanet.com

[Shefali]

Though I have read most of your posts, this is my first comment.

The post reminded me of The Elements of Style by Strunk and White that I read sometime ago. Pretty handy book.

I would love to read your views on short-hand/SMS-lingo that is so widely and wrongly used.

[peter]

You've come a long way since "The Dilbert Principle!" (Sorry about the adjective.)

[ArvindTM]

What a coinicidence Scott. I took the pen today. To revive the book I had abadoned for six months. I guess the trick is just not limited to business writing. I am gonna try this over a technically-challenging topic. Thanks for the tip.

[lofi]

this sucks ass, even when scott squeezes out a fat one you guys are bustling underneath for the chance to catch it in your grinning mouths

[Derek Lang]

Scott, Thanks bunch.

[Eugene Cox]

I, as an avid reader of your highly esteemed blog, would like to make use of this opportunity to thank you for your tips on how I can better my already excellent writing skills, thereby someday becoming a highly acclaimed writer. Broke all yer rules, HA!

[Esn]

Scott... I think you may be falling into the trap of believing that just because that's the way it's popular in America, that's the way it's popular around the whole world. And that if it's NOT like that somewhere, then obviously they haven't yet evolved to the "ideal" way that sentences should be structured. "They'll learn eventually", eh? :p

The aversion of Americans to the semi-colon is well-documented; that still doesn't explain why it is used more often in the United Kingdom. Assuming that British writers haven't learned how to do it right probably isn't a good explanation.

Oh, and I agree with dave. That word order is probably only easier because you were brought up in the English language and learned to look at it that way. It's fascinating how much influence the language one grows up with has on one's ways of thinking.

I grew up with Russian, and the interesting thing about Russian is that unlike English, you can put the OBJECT/VERB/SUBJECT of a sentence (i.e. "Sam ate oranges", OBJECT VERB SUBJECT) in any order and not have one version be shorter than another. English has a lot of extra words, and it favours the orientation of OBJECT VERB SUBJECT simply because it is shorter.

In Moscow and the central regions, the preferred word order of sentences is similar to that of English, while in the remote rural areas the way of organizing sentences is vastly different. It's quite shocking upon first experience.

I think the best advice is simple: adjust your writing style to the preffered way of doing things wherever you happen to be living. Unless you want to be an innovator, but then don't expect success.

[skraps]

Hi Scott,
Just wondering what your current thoughts on Hamas are.
It seems they have moved to the center (of Gaza).

[Esn]

"Humor writing is a lot like business writing. It needs to be simple."

But isn't there something funny about needless complexity? If not, why are the works of Douglas Adams so popular? Or, for that matter, the illustrations of Heath Robinson? (such as the one in the following link:)
http://members.chello.at/theodor.lauppert/brnstwm/potatoes.htm

[Steve]

Damn. Should have used the word 'folks' instead of 'people' in my last post.

[Xavier]

much appreciated

[Steve]

The way our brains think is tuned by our primary language. Your business writing rules are counter productive for non-native English speakers. No wonder people in the middle east are so unhappy. New solution to world peace - start writing jokes backwards.

[John L]

You say: "Readers aren’t as smart as you’d think."
As a reader who is smart enough to read sentences longer than one clause, I find deadening the bland pap that too often passes as American prose, especially journalese. Sure, simplicity is a virtue, but so are diversity, creativity, and expressiveness.

[William Skyvington]

The precision and terseness of words in Dilbert strips have always impressed me, and I've wondered whether the final polishing was done by a team. The 92-page Strunk and White masterpiece might be better value than a course in "business writing".

[Tim Harding]

Ernest Hemingway must have taken the same one-day writing course you did.

[the man in the trout mask]

I agree - up to a point - keep the sentence short and simple,not simple in the sense of unsophisticated intelligence,but in the sense of precision of expression,notwithstanding an inherent tendency to employ flowery language as a means of self righteous pomposity and as an egotistical euphoria inducing agent,not unlike unleavened praise showered upon the unsuspecting writer of the people by slobbering literary critics who,while singing anthemic psalms of biblical proportion,suck the very life force of the exalted one to sustain their own vampire existence.

[Zachary Buckler]

Great advice Scott. And it's the same for public speaking. If you want to get your point across well then keep it simple. Many people incorrectly assume that talking a great deal helps prove your point. Actually, talking a great deal to prove your point only puts people to sleep.

[Rohit Krishnan]

Interesting post. The rules kind of apply for business writing although the trend seems to be for extreme verbalization.

As for humour, P G Wodehouse, the greatest humour writer ever and in my opinion the greatest wordsmith as well, never tried to make his language simpler. You could say probably that he was replacing his "drink" with a better word that "swill", but that would just be evading the question.

Cheers

[Rohit Krishnan]

Interesting post. The rules kind of apply for business writing although the trend seems to be for extreme verbalization.

As for humour, P G Wodehouse, the greatest humour writer ever and in my opinion the greatest wordsmith as well, never tried to make his language simpler. You could say probably that he was replacing his "drink" with a better word than "swill", but that would just be evading the question.

Cheers

[Rohit Krishnan]

Interesting post. I would agree to a small extent regarding business writing, although to a large extent extreme verbalization seems to be the requirement for a lot of the communication.

As for Humour, I just would say P G Wodehouse, arguable the best humour writer in ever and in my opinion the best wordsmith ever as well, and ask you to explain how exactly did he cut his verbiage to make his stuff funnier.

Cheers

[sey]

Sorry but I didn't like your first sentence. Too convoluted. Short, snappy. Remember?

I went from being a bad writer to a good writer after taking a one-day course in “business writing.”

So your rules are:
active tense
no unnecessary words

[chuck]

My English teacher taught me "always state the obvious", because the obvious is not obvious to many people.

All essays should consist of 3 parts:
1. The introduction - this is were you say what you intend to say.
2. The middle - this is you say something.
3. The conclusion - this is where you say that what you said was what you said you would say.

[Elbonian]

Wow!

[Adam]

Grazie.

[Kalid]

I completely agree. "On Writing Well" by William K. Zinsser is an excellent book on this topic.

People often confuse being simple (easy to follow) with being simplistic (lacking depth or meaning). They aren't the same; e=mc^2 (equivalence of energy and mass) and "All men are created equal" are simple yet profound.

[dreamstohack]

While there are some differences between business writing, and comic writing, and novel writing; these are actually really god points for them all. A lot of people come out of story writing class thinking that they should try to maximize adjectives in their sentences. But this is idiotic. Even Tolkien who is known for describing things to no end doesn't do this. He separates the adjectives into multiple sentences; which makes all the difference. And the other rules are also really strong ones. Excellent post Scott; concise and informative.

[Manoj Khatri]

Apt!
Those who use too many words in their writing lack confidence. Too many adverbs and adjectives shows that the writer is struggling to make a good impression.
I think too many writers write to impress, not to communicate and that's where the problem lies.

[aaronjb]

Wow, thanks. You're a genius, Scott Adams.

I love your comics, but please don't associate your success with any sort of innate intelligence.

[Walter E. Wallis]

It took me years to learn to write engineer, and 25 years to learn not to.

[Sameer]

Conciseness ? And they took a whole day to explain this much. What oxymorons....

[Andrew]

As a student, the need I find frequently is to pad out sentences with a great abundance of redundant, unnecessary and very vague phraseology. The usefulness of your tips was fairly limited.

[radityo]

very good article!

[Anders]

Really!?

Even though I do comply with some of your thoughts I'm not entirely convinced that simple is always the most efficient way of conveying one's patos. When trying to - as I most of the time do - sound more intellectual than I actually am, I tend to use sentences that are not only too long but also very uncomfortable to read.

This is not only because I feel good about myself creating intricate sentences but also because there is some worth in establishing the feeling of higher literacy that one so easily brings in using a language in a way that it is not, in the eyes or ears of the general public, meant to be used.

Sure, writing comics probably calls for a concise language. You need, however, to realize that there is a great deal of information and even humor to be had through reading a text that is not overly simplified. I'm sure you do.

That said...

Don't patronize folks by saying that language is better used with caution. Where I come from there was a guy called August Strindberg who wrote in short and stubby sentences about one-hundred years ago. He managed to pull it off in a way that has never before, and never again to my knowledge, been done. This was done in a language that had (and still has) been rationalized beyond belief and does not, therefore, pose any of the wordiness of the English dito.

My point is that words can never be used enough and that only a master deserves to treats words as a scarce resource. I use my words hoping that they will be read by someone who does not feel reluctance towards a shitload of shear text, even though it is not profane until the end.

Fuck short sentences.

Greetings!

//A

[Rex May]

The point about syntax here is that the English default is SVO. Sticking to the default form in any language, SOV, VSO, whatever, enhances clarity.

When I taught freshman English, many of the students had been corrupted into thinking adding complexity enhanced their writing. I'd ask them what they meant by a particular convoluted sentence. When they explained it, I said "Then write down the explanation instead of the sentence you wrote. It's clearer." That almost always worked.

[Billy B]

And you are not as smart as you think. But maybe a tick smarter than you were yesterday, I know that is how it works for me.
Billy B

[John]

& never use a big word where a diminuitive one will suffice.

[Yoda]

Thanks be to you, helpful it was..

Yoda

[dire]

some great points, though i don't agree that conciseness encompasses 80% of good writing.

[niCk(MemBeth)]

A free class from Scott Adams. WOO-HOOO !

I am forever in your debt.

[rd]

ok, i admit the fuzzy beaver was cute

if seriously
you are very patient, kind and considerate
thank you
though it's not that i'm aspiring to be a writer, in english especially, good english writing skills are always useful and your blog is an excellent teaching
just it seems i'll never fully master english coz my brain works differently from your explained language structure 'subject+action(verb)+object'
in my mind it's 'subject+object(with it's suffix)+action', so i have to translate it scrolling from the end to the beginning
it's like reading your blog comments - from the bottom to the top
hm, now with your permission may i start to omit all articles in the name of simplicity :)
that way i'd be totally comfortable with my english
and perhaps will start to talk a bit

[Liz]

Er, forgot to mention that I DO agree with the general rule that no one wants to read a long-winded ramble. Oops. :)

[South]

These and many other tips are contained in Stephen King's book "On Writing". It is a great book for those interested in writing better, or those interested in the process. Fun to read, too.

Also Strunk and White: "The elements of style". Absolutely get this very short manual.

"Omit needless words". This advice is why it is such a short and useful book.

[Nonchalant Savant]

I'll give you another tip that hardly anyone uses. If, when writing, you're having trouble finding the correct words, read what you've written out loud. Your brain will kick in and often automatically pick out the correct words instantly.

This can save you LOTS of time, particularly if a sentence starts getting wordy.

[jerry w.]

We will all die soon.

I left out the "..er or later.

Got your attention?

Good.

Go.

http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

[Liz]

Also, a "simple" sentence doesn't necessarily mean every sentence should be shorter or so single-minded; in my opinion, connecting ideas within a sentence helps the reader absorb what's being said more easily.

For instance, I think this:

Your first sentence needs to grab the reader; go back and read my first sentence to this post. I rewrote it a dozen times, and it makes you curious. That’s the key.

is much easier on the brain than the original:

Your first sentence needs to grab the reader. Go back and read my first sentence to this post. I rewrote it a dozen times. It makes you curious. That's the key.

While I don't think you can ever make an _absolute_ rule when it comes to writing, I think it's pretty safe to say short sentences should really only be utilized for emphasis. In the first example, you really notice the line "That's the key," because it's so short compared to the other sentences surrounding it. You can see how the emphasis is lost when EVERY sentence is emphasized because they're all so short and punchy that they cancel each other out--the sentences just becomes disjointed and chunky. Good writing should read musically to the ear. It's not only the subject matter that must keep the reader interested, but also the rhythm of the words, and the variation within that rhythm. You wouldn't want to listen to a song that just had the same beat over and over again would you?

I think it's important to note that the class Scott took is one for "business writing," in which one is expected to present information as succinctly and as technically accurately as possible. The methods he advocates here are good for that kind of writing. But if you want to write something that people will want to read in their free time, or especially something that will provoke thought or change opinions on a deeper level, the style here is all wrong. Writing should read like an elevated version of the spoken word, not stereo instructions.

[Frances]

I've been having a problem with exactly this issue for the last two weeks. I need to write a review and I have been struggling with the language. The secret is to use as little language as possible.

I was aware of these rules. They bear repeating.

Thanks Scott.

[steve h]

Steven King wrote an article a long time ago about his first job as a journalist. He wrote a superbly graphic and wordy account of a baseball game I think it was. His editor ravaged the report, eliminating the unnecessary and revealing the essence of what the writer was trying to convey. What remained was 80% shorter and 200% more interesting than the original.

[Max]

I think you just lowered the bar for literature, man...

[Max]

I think you just lowered the bar for literature, man...

[Geoffrey]

Here's some of the other 20 percent, for advanced business writing only:

The use of the passive voice depends upon the structure of the paragraph. Depending upon the previous and following sentences, the use of the passive may be more natural. But active voice is usually best.

Better a strong noun without an adjective but if you must use a weak noun, use a strong qualifying adjective that adds color. One of my favorites is "Dilbertesque." Another is "Monte Pythonesque."

Forging verbs from nouns can spice up an otherwise dull sentence. "He frankensteined a network" is much better than "He improvised a network." Business editors love that stuff.

Cliches are acceptable as long as you add the term "proverbial," reverse the wording ("the iceberg's tip") or turn them into puns ("Kathie Lee's performance was just the tip of the nice-berg").

And here's something about business writing that almost nobody knows:

The middle of chapter seven inside most business books is rented to the CIA in order to communicate secret messages to agents out in the field. This is done because studies have shown that nobody has ever, ever read chapter seven of about 99 percent of the business books published.

[Andrew]

I think Scott means all english speaking brains work that way. I had the same idea because the japanese have completely different syntax.

[JoeBlu]

robert,

In technical writing there is a good case to be made for passive voice. Techinical writing's goal is to convey facts and obscure the role of an individual. The reader wants to know what was done with some particular thing, not who did it. It is difficult to write in the active voice without using first person pronouns, so the passive voice is used.

Your Freshman Comp professor is full of it. Complicated sentences are the product of an inefficient mind. Notice how simple the axiom he provided you was?

[Og the Invincible]

I know why you posted this subject: Because half your readers try and fluff up their posts by filling them with useless banter and big words. It takes forever to read them, and in the end, they say very little. You just made your own life easier, at least for the next few days before people forget...

Bravo!

[Robert Hamilton]

Certainly Scott, there must be room for alternative styles is there not? Or is this some made up law by some frustrated writer turned teacher, remembering that those that can't do, teach, or something like that, anyhoo I did find some merit to your post as I did have a bad habit of writing run-on sentences, but I have learned that maybe I should reconsider that style - and I will give it some consideration.

[Harry]

Thanks for the advice Mr. Dilbert. Terrible writer am I. Now I will be the next you. I hope!

[Jon]

That's similar to technical writing (also a one-day class)

Start all "procedure" sentences with an action:

Bad:
1. After you computer turns on, click the start button

Good:
1. Turn on the computer
2. Click the start button

[tubaguy]

I learned these rules in life, then had to discard them to satisfy my graduate committee. They required 13 revisions as they dickered among themselves.

The situation wouldn't have been nearly as funny if it weren't for an extensive lecture at the beginning of the program on avoiding "academic slavery."

So it goes.

[David Banks]

It is good to remember the following: "We think in words. It takes fit words to have fit thoughts." Oliver Wendell Holmes, I think.

[Manny]

The Hebrew Bible was written in a verb-subject-object form. No wonder it can affect people's brain.

[Anthony]

George Orwell's five rules for good writing:

(i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.

(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.

(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

[rebo]

Kudos to you! That should put a stop to those who post comments that are longer than your blog!

[steve]

Scott only gives us 80% of anything. The rest isn't worth it.

[David Banks]

We think in words. It takes fit words to have fit thoughts. Oliver Wendell Holmes, I think.

[synapticmisfires]

I agree with most of this. My writing improved a lot when I was a freshmen in high school. I turned in a paper, and when I got a back both side margins were full with "c-s" (comma-splice) and "passive".

I must say to those who have voiced their objections that these aren't inflexible rules. It's still good to have adverbs when appropriate. "Very" is not a meaningful adverb so it can often be deleted. The passive voice is a terrible way to write, except that it can be helpful for documenting scientific research. With the passive voice, the speaker is removed from the action. You should remove yourself from scientific research, but you should not remove yourself from your own thoughts.

[Jef]

Your post was very liked by me.

[Ian Ferguson]

I'm always impressed by cartoonists who can convey meaning and humour in such short sentences, constrained as they are by cartoon panels. I'll never be a great writer partly because of this reason - I find it tricky to explain things concisely. Or at all - I suspect most people are always wondering what I'm on about.

[Kyle]

The rule of keeping sentences is short, and interesting. However, reading you latest entry, which uses noticably short sentences, just feels wrong.

It might work well for persuasion or getting a point across, but it doesn't really cut it for making things enjoyable to read.

[dolphin]

thank you for this: "Readers aren’t as smart as you’d think."

[Guardian1153]

I do some writing for my wife's chuch pastor. I also write to a number of government ministries. In the latter case, keeping it simple is critical.

This can also apply when speaking face-to-face with professionals. Tell them what you need done, listen to the advice, and then do it. Especially if you know nothing about the field. If you don't like the answers, you can always get a second opinion.

[Boris]

I see myself as having better than average writing skills. I may be quite wrong; I may just be a pretentious %&!!&#^, but that's how I see it.

For business writing, I agree that it's best to keep things simple, for the sake of clarity. Sometimes, though, this degenerates into dumbing things down for idiots. I think that adults, with at least a high school education, should be able to handle some complexity.

In writing the above, I did my best to keep it simple. Did I succeed?

[OG]

Those NEC monitor ads were great to look at when I was young. I'm glad to not have to read them anymore. Maybe when they reach 600dpi I'll find them interesting. Thank goodness business writing is used just for business.

[Yoda]

Agree with you, I do.

[Gareth Garvey]

1.Interesting. Good business writing is about getting the message across....This assumes there is a message! Maybe complicated writing is a symptom of a missing message.

2. If the brain works better in the way you describe does this put languages that put the verd at the end of the sentence (eg German) at a diadvantage?

[Ben Chambers]

Remember that this is business writing, and geared towards an American audience (who tend to appreciate brevity).

Fictional writing, or writing for different cultures, can be vastly different (for instance, brevity is seen as rude and inconsiderate in many Eastern cultures).

[Shannon Knowles]

Bring back Sourpuss!

I should've added please but I'm not sure if that makes me a poor writer.

[macuga]

The other 20%, of course, includes such rules as "a good writer can break any other rule if she knows what she's doing."

Incidentally, I'm reading a book from 1600, and my god, were they wordy! The rules you mention above are just that--rules for corporate writing in the 20th century. They are a reflection of our utilitarian, ADD-stricken, "time is money" age. They are not universal.

[Patrick]

Those are 60% of the rules of good writing. Some people think they're 80%, but those people think they're 20% better at writing than they actually are.

[Max]

Hey Scott,

Friday, I flew out to Pleasanton to visit a client; my co-worker, who lives in that area, chose Stacey's Cafe for the meeting. Six people ordered salads, I had the penne with meatballs (what is it with Californians eating salads all the time?). Anyway, I enjoyed the restaurant very much. Good atmosphere, good service, good food.

-Max

I've always considered those rules to be common sense. I figured most people didn't follow them because s