Revisions are part and parcel of the writer’s life, particularly if said writer works for clients. The very same client who is so woefully unable to put a sentence together that he hires an outside writer suddenly emerges, once text is written, to be so skilled at the art and practice of writing clearly that he must correct what the writer has prepared.
People who can’t write an email without six typos, a sentence fragment, and diffuse intentions suddenly want to explain to me what a subordinate clause is.
Now the fault of all this is English class. If somebody ever heard in English class that all subordinate clauses must be set off by commas, suddenly he will recite this rule obnoxiously to the writer he just hired and insist the law be carried out.
Here’s the news flash. Language is much more complicated and organic than you think. Rules change. I’m honestly not even sure American English has rules, but if it has rules, they are more like suggestions and a few of them change every year.
Take this recent incident. I was ghosting an article for an author who gave me zero input but when I delivered a paper, her first comment was that I did not use topic sentences. Topic sentences, she informed me from her office on Mt. Parnassus, were to be the first sentence of any paragraph and they were to set forth the topic to be covered in that paragraph. After the topic sentence, additional sentences would flesh out the topic. This would be followed by a concluding sentence.
Hello! Nobody writes that way. At least nobody who is ever read.
I suspect an English teacher once told her the topic sentence myth (and that’s what it is) and she insists that as a writer, I should follow it. The problem is that if I follow it, my writing will look moronic. This will cause my reviewer/persecutor to state that I’m a poor writer.
That is just to set the mood! The real topic of this piece is why topic sentences are out.
Good writing leads the reader from point A to point B to point C. While the writer is actually introducing new or at least somewhat new ideas to the reader, the writer must be careful to follow the “thought flow” going on in the reader’s mind. People do not think in topic sentences. Thought tends to be done in “hooks.”
Here’s how it works. Notice that each idea “hooks” into the next idea.
- The U.S. government is going to require stricter warning labels on over-the-counter painkillers like Tylenol and ibuprofen.
- [READER'S HEAD] Warning labels? Why?
- New studies have shown that excessive use of acetaminophen can cause serious liver damage.
- [READER'S HEAD] Who cares? That’s for people who take pills constantly.
- In fact, even doses well below the minimum set forth on the label can be dangerous in certain patients, particularly if taken over a long period of time.
- [READER'S HEAD] Certain patients? What certain patients? Would I be in that group?
- Among the patients at highest risk are those who regularly consume alcohol or those with liver disease.
Notice that we sort of swing from one thought to the next. This technique is particularly effective when changing paragraphs. Hook the reader into the next paragraph. For instance, in the above story, your next paragraph could start with this:
- For people in need of pain relief, some medical societies now recommend narcotic drugs over standard over-the-counter pain-relievers.
- [READER'S HEAD] What? Take morphine instead of Tylenol?
- Such narcotics would have to be closely monitored by a physician, but may actually be less risky to the patient over the long term.
- [READER'S HEAD] What about addiction? What about overdose?
- While addiction and drug diversion are real concerns, studies show that people who take narcotics under strict physician supervision for pain relief are not likely to become drug dependent.
The thing is, you have to get into the reader’s head to bounce him or her from thought to thought to thought.
The topic sentence approach works the opposite way. You basically spill your whole story in one sentence, provide a few proofs, and then repeat yourself. Here is a classic English-teacher paragraph:
Warning labels on acetaminophen will be required because these drugs can be dangerous in certain patients. The FDA will mandate stricter labeling starting April 2010. The concerns are that acetaminophen, even at proper doses and used occasionally, can cause liver damage, particularly in patients who drink or have liver problems. The new labeling on acetaminophen and other over-the-counter drugs has raised concerns about pain relievers taken by average citizens.
This text is boring. It says the same thing as the first series of sentences, but it’s boring because you’re not hooking the reader and propelling him forward to the next sentence.
Reviewers should stay away from dusting off their old freshman English textbooks and trying to help writers understand their craft. Reviewers do actually serve an important purpose, but they need to focus on two main questions.
1. Is the content accurate? I write a lot about very complex subjects and I rarely get any input or advice from the subject experts on the content. This is exactly where I need help. In fact, 99% of the time, the job of the reviewer is to look at the content and make sure it is accurate and fairly balanced.
2. Is the text easy to understand? Can you follow it or does it confuse you? If the reviewer feels that an argument is not made well or certain points are extraneous or the document does not “flow” well, then that is a cause to send up a red flag. Reviewers who note such things should take one of two actions. If possible, try to write it correctly or give a good “patch” that will fix the text. For instance, if I miss a point or state something incorrectly, a fast fix may be all I need to restore the section of text. That’s a great help. I think in my whole writing career, this has happened maybe a dozen times. The other thing that helps is if you explain, as best you can, what’s wrong but skip trying to critique the writing. Instead of saying, “This is just redundant, it’s poorly worded, it doesn’t flow, the organization needs work,” give me specifics. “There is more to narcotic abuse than just addiction. Many doctors are concerned about drug diversion, that is, selling a legitimate prescription on the street. Another concern doctors have is that patients may not take the drugs exactly as prescribed, which can have serious consequences. You need to make sure those points are added to this section.”
Do you see the difference? The first is just a rambling, incoherent set of complaints. The second one–even if it’s not the best-worded text on earth, makes specific recommendations, namely that some key points were omitted.
When people say something like, “This doesn’t flow” it is hard to know how to fix it, particularly when it flows just fine in your own reading. But in my experience, most of the time people who criticize the writing are actually objecting to the content, but they just do not know how to articulate it.
Anyway, today’s lesson was that English teachers rarely earn their living by writing, American English is notoriously slippery, and the best way to write is to get inside your reader’s head. There, that’s a conclusion sentence!
