Anthologize This

Writing is an art. No one can tell you how to be a good writer. There’s no guideline to follow. Just intuition.

Which is why I love it when someone gives me rules for writing. Specific, Stone-cold, hard-nosed, zero-tolerance rules.

Reading this article from the Paris Review, which references this other article in the New York Times has made me think a lot more about the words I use. It points out how one weak work can erode your ideas, and provides a handy list of words that esteemed editors have banished from the lexicons of well-established, professional writers.

Think of it this way: A list of words that are almost invariably weak. A handy field guide to identifying bad writing. Basically, don’t use these words and your writing will be better. Why? Because these words don’t really mean anything. For example, do you ever need to use “queried” when you can just write “asked”? No, it’s a word that jumps off the page visually, but doesn’t add anything to the prose.

Here is Paris Review editor Lorin Stein’s partial list.

Home (for house)
Hopefully (for “I hope”)
Disinterest (for “lack of interest”—yes, even though I know it’s totally correct)
Delicious, Spicy, Tangy (used metaphorically)
Tasty (ever, but especially in reference to a “lick”)
Pleasantry (except in the sense of “joke”)
Following (to introduce a list: as in “the following”)
Contact (as a verb)
Relationship (ever, ever, even when it’s the mot juste)
Impact (unless we’re talking about, e.g., a car crash)

If you want to see novelist/NY Times editor Kurt Andersen’s list. You’ll have to click the link.

Here’s the beginning of my list. I actually write these words all the time, but I realize now that they are almost distractingly vague. Think about the words you use/rely on. Are you relying too much on the reader to give them meaning?

• somewhat
• make love
• sarcastic
• fairly
• grin
• cynical
• unique
• smirked
• shrugged
• softly
• indie
• startled
• beautiful