Avi

word craft

blog

“Less is more.”

typewriter wordsYears ago—so many that I was typ­ing on a portable typewriter—I had a dead­line to meet. It involved fin­ish­ing a book, and then typ­ing it and deliv­er­ing it by a cer­tain day. Soon. 

(I wish I could remem­ber which book, but I can’t.)  

I asked if I could use a friend’s out-of-town sum­mer bun­ga­low and took off a week from my librarian’s job. All per­mis­sions grant­ed, hith­er I went and fin­ished the draft of the book. Then, with only twen­ty-four hours till the dead­line, I set my alarm for ear­ly the next day, got up, and com­menced typ­ing. Three hun­dred or so pages. 

(This was in the day when writ­ing was legit­i­mate­ly con­sid­ered a form of phys­i­cal labor.) 

I began typ­ing at six AM. At about three PM my hands were hurt­ing so bad­ly that I knew if I stopped, my fin­gers would lock, and I’d not be able to type any­more. At eight that night, or there­abouts, I fin­ished the job. 

(My aching hands could not type for a week. I was lucky not to get carpal tun­nel syndrome.) 

I got the man­u­script in but that’s not the point of this tale. The truth is typ­ing that way improved my text. 

Sure­ly you have noticed that with the almost uni­ver­sal usage of com­put­ers books have got­ten longer, and big­ger. That’s because when you typed on a man­u­al typewriter—see above—you had an enor­mous incen­tive to cut your text. I know I did. 

And this is the moral of today’s ser­mon: These days you can almost always make your work short­er, tighter. Com­put­ers make writ­ing slop­py. Bloat­ed. Com­put­ers have high-calo­rie counts. 

Now I admit I have a fond­ness for tight writ­ing. Ham­mett, Hem­ing­way, Simenon, and Chan­dler, were my men­tors. Yes, noir fic­tion. Not the sto­ries as such, but the writ­ing. It was not the dead bod­ies I liked but the lack of dead words. Loved it. Still do. 

(Read my not-real­ly-mem­oir, Catch You Lat­er, Trai­tor .)  

This all comes to mind because the oth­er day I was try­ing to decide why I didn’t like what I was writ­ing. I decid­ed that the writ­ing was bad. Bad in what way? Pro­lix. Wordy. Exces­sive ver­biage. Long­wind­ed. Rambling. 

(I’m pleased that there are so many words for overwriting.) 

So, I did what I so often do: I went through the text and tried to cut every unnec­es­sary word/sentence/paragraph. In the past, when I have writ­ten a big—forty thou­sand word–book, I arbi­trar­i­ly set a goal of cut­ting five thou­sand words. Or some­thing. Maybe more. 

(Com­put­ers, as if to apol­o­gize for the excess­es they pro­mote, have word coun­ters! Sort of a built-in word-watch­er plan.) 

When you rewrite, keep in mind the well-known phrase made pop­u­lar by design­er and archi­tect Lud­wig Mies van der Rohe: “Less is more.” Far from Shake­speare’s “the unkind­est cut of all,” mak­ing your text clean, lean, and tight is the kind­est cut of all. 

Your read­ers will thank you. 

(Maybe your will hands, too.) 

4 thoughts on ““Less is more.””

  1. So inter­est­ing that com­put­ers con­tribute to over­writ­ing. Now what con­tributes to the overuse of
    Jump­ing back & forth in time? Hard­ly any lin­ear sto­ries anymore—maybe I need to read more children’s lit

    Reply
    • @Cathy Bon­nell, I agree there’s an overuse of time jump­ing. It’s rarely done effec­tive­ly, and I find myself as a read­er skip­ping ahead to keep the sto­ry lin­ear, then going back to read the “sec­ond” sto­ry. Some­times the same goes for two nar­ra­tors (in dif­fer­ent times or the same).

      Reply
  2. It’s cool to know you’re so proud of that book and you real­ly nailed the shot heard ’round the world. I had all kinds of base­ball his­to­ry books and VHS’s as a kid. I think Ken Burns even did a his­to­ry of base­ball; it was 8 tapes and I watched all of them!! Look at me get­ting all ver­bose and off top­ic! But seri­ous­ly, that girl was so cute with her lit­tle tagline of Catch You Lat­er Trai­tor. I’ll nev­er for­get her and it’s much more fun than Sea­son of Sus­pi­cion. God, that was a great book. My daugh­ter and I loved it so much. Speak­ing of trai­tor books and since I’m on a com­put­er and I’m already too long for a com­ment, I might as well keep going. You real­ly nailed it with The Trai­tor­’s Gate, too. Your nar­ra­tor just killed it with the father’s act­ing, “Your finest room, of course.” I love you so much and thank you for all the laugh­ter and warm mem­o­ries you have giv­en me with my daugh­ter. I could nev­er repay you, but maybe I’ll cut down on words in the future and just say thank you 🙂

    Reply
  3. Com­pet­i­tive typ­ing dates to an era when type­writer man­u­fac­tur­ers held com­pe­ti­tions at places like Madi­son Square Gar­den. The events drew thou­sands, but pop­u­lar­i­ty waned after the first half of the 20th century.

    In 2008, though, the Type­R­ac­er web­site went up and drew a devot­ed com­mu­ni­ty. Now, there are mul­ti­ple web­sites where users log scores over 200 words per minute and an Ulti­mate Typ­ing Cham­pi­onship. It’s a “grass-roots move­ment,” one said. “It seems like this spe­cial thing that some peo­ple want to keep secret and spe­cial and tight-knit.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Posts