Ten Words to Cut from Your Writing

[T.Allen.Smith]

You make an exception for dialogue, Tim (which I agree with), but what do you say when the narrator has a voice. Take a first-person narrative, for example? Don't the same considerations for dialogue also apply to a first person narrator? Or even a third person narrative with a demonstrable narrator whose voice comes through in the telling of the story?

Absolutely! In the first person we're going to be deep within the POV most likely... That being the case, I'd want internal thought to mimic the way people really think, or at least that person.

Same would be true with a strong narrative voice. If that voice has a personality, and that voice speaks in such a way, with consistency, then by all means, yes.

I was hoping to steer the conversation back to the words and their use in different styles (like you just did...thank you) and away from the "Don't tell me how to write" sentiment that often can derail these types of debates.

 

[Steerpike]

I was hoping to steer the conversation back to the words and their use in different styles (like you just did...thank you) and away from the "Don't tell me how to write" sentiment that often can derail these types of debates.

Yeah, I hear you I think part of the problem is that when people write these sorts of things, the tone (if not some of the wording) suggests they're dealing in absolutes, so people fixate on that (like I did earlier. Heh).

 

[Guy]

I am getting sick of this tightness fetish that saturates the writing community. I don't mind if a writer chooses to write in a tight style if that's what they want, but demanding that every other writer adopt this style is conformist and obnoxiously evangelical.

Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig +1 on that. One of these days I'm going to see an article advising never use "the" or "of."

I agree that "amazing" and "literally" are used way too much, and usually incorrectly. Reminds me of a T shirt I saw that said, "Misuse of the word literally makes me figuratively insane."

 

[GeekDavid]

I am getting sick of this tightness fetish that saturates the writing community. I don't mind if a writer chooses to write in a tight style if that's what they want, but demanding that every other writer adopt this style is conformist and obnoxiously evangelical.

The problem is, far too many writers -- and people in general -- think their experience is normative. In some instances it is, in others it most definitely is not. Writing is one of those areas where it is not, but people continue to think "it worked well for me, so it must work well for everyone, right?"

And that's where the friction starts.

 

[Penpilot]

To a certain degree I agree. I'd use this list as more of words to be careful with. In my current novel I made a conscious and deliberate choice to use "got" and "just". The manuscript is peppered with many many instances of these words. My POV character's diction required it, in narration and conversation.

 

[Steerpike]

"This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man."

**EDIT for those demanding lean prose:

Be real, and you won't be frontin'

(I prefer the original)

 

[Svrtnsse]

Right, I went through my wiki and checked the occurrences of the words on the list in the short stories I have there as well as in the scenes for the book I'm writing. I've used all but one.

Just - "The inn looked just the way a traditional anfylk countryside inn should." - The sentence would work without the word, but to me it's a case of narrator voice. The sentence just wouldn't feel the same without it (bad pun intended).
Really - "She was able to interact with the trees just as well dressed as undressed – it really was just a matter of personal preference." In this case it's a matter of internal monologue.
Very - "The top of the hill had been cleared except for a gnarly old pine at the very edge of a sheer drop overlooking the forests to the south" - I feel that using "very" here is perfectly acceptable.
Perhaps/maybe - "It was perhaps thirty minutes later that he reached his destination." - Yeah, I could have skipped the perhaps here. I could have just gone with "Thirty minutes later he reached his destination." It says the same thing, but again, it's how I write. It's not particularly tight or active, but as far as the time is concerned I'm fine with the vagueness. He's on a leisurely stroll through the forest and the exact time he spends going from point a to point b is not that important.
Quite - "Waving his hands in the air and yelling at the top of his lungs he made quite a spectacle." - Narrative voice.
Amazing - "It was a wonder of technology and even though she’d owned her own stereo for years the little machine still amazed her." - Strictly speaking it's not "amazing" but it was the closest I could find.
Literally - Not used.
Stuff - "It had started out just like any other day; receive customer orders, prepare deliveries and lodge payments – all perfectly normal, mundane stuff." - I'm okay with the usage of "stuff" here. It's a recollection of the POV character's day so it's sort of internalized. It also serves to underline how unremarkable the day had been.
Things - "At the moment it held one lone cart and some gardening tools; rakes, spades, things like that." "None of those things had happened and now it was too late and he wouldn't get another chance." - In both of these cases the word refers collectively to stuff mentioned earlier in the text.
Got - "The kids had eventually managed to agree on a clever way of carrying his suitcase between them and after that they'd disappeared up the path so quickly Enar got a little embarrassed." - Yes, I could probably have used a different way of saying the same thing. In fact, I should probably rewrite the entire sentence.

Sure, the writing isn't the tightest and the most active and could almost certainly be done better. Still, these are the cases where I've used the listed words. If these examples aren't as polished as they could be, it's down to my skill as a writer on the whole, not just because these words appear in these sentences.

 

[GeekDavid]

"This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man."

**EDIT for those demanding lean prose:

Be real, and you won't be frontin'

(I prefer the original)

You have to follow your own voice. You have to be yourself when you write. In effect, you have to announce, ‘This is me, this is what I stand for, this is what you get when you read me. I’m doing the best I can—buy me or not—but this is who I am as a writer.

--David Morrell

Write the kind of story you would like to read. People will give you all sorts of advice about writing, but if you are not writing something you like, no one else will like it either.

--Meg Cabot

Write your story as it needs to be written. Write it honestly, and tell it as best you can. I’m not sure that there are any other rules. Not ones that matter.

--Neil Gaiman

The job of the writer is to kiss no ass, no matter how big and holy and white and tempting and powerful.

--Ken Kesey

But, hey, what do these people know about writing?

 

[Philip Overby]

All these rules are just driving me crazy! I mean, really? I find it disconcerting to see a lot of these very useful words being put on this list. Perhaps some people like for their dialogue to be quite realistic and nonrestrictive? The truly amazing thing is that I see this kind of stuff in fiction all the time. I've literally got tons of books on my shelf right now that exhibit many of these features that are perfectly fine books.

OK, now go back and read that paragraph. Is it really that distracting? I used all 10 words.

Now let me try to rewrite that without the words.

"All these rules are driving me crazy! I find it disconcerting to see a lot of these useful words being put on this list. Some people like for their dialogue to be realistic and nonrestrictive. I see this in fiction all the time. I have tons of books on my shelf right now that exhibit many of these features that are perfectly fine books."

Hmm...I don't know. The meaning doesn't change much, but it feels sterile to me. Like I steamcleaned my paragraph.

OK, let me try again with some dialogue.

Richard wiped shaving cream from his face. "Missy just washed that dog and it literally jumped in the mud again."

"Really?" Lisa brushed the knots from her hair and wiped the mudtracks with her socks. "That dog's got another thing coming if he thinks he can just wallow around and prance around the house like a king."

"What is it with all this stuff on the kitchen counter?" Richard said. "It's just a bunch of junk mail. Can we throw this away?"

"Amazing, Rich. You're just now noticing that?"

"Look, I've got to be at work in five minutes. Can you get the kids to clean this junk up before they go to school? You know, it's very distracting to wake up to these messes every morning."

"You think?" Lisa screamed up the staircase. "Kids! Get down here and clean all this stuff off the counter."

OK, same dialogue without the words.

Richard wiped shaving cream from his face. "Missy washed that dog earlier and it jumped in the mud again."

"What?" Lisa brushed the knots from her hair and wiped the mudtracks with her socks. "That dog can't wallow around in the mud and prance around the house like a king."

"What is it with the kitchen counter?" Richard said. "It's a bunch of junk mail. Can we throw this away?"

"Rich. You're noticing that now?"

"Look, I have to go to work in five minutes. Can you get the kids to clean this up before they go to school? You know, it's distracting to wake up to these messes every morning."

"You think?" Lisa screamed up the staircase. "Kids! Get down here and clean off the counter."

For the second example,the dialogue may be tighter, but I lost some flavor in some ways. The flow seems off. I'm going to say in general, these words can be cut if they're in abundance, but sniping them all out of your fiction doesn't seem conducive to display the natural way people talk.

I'm going to say, if you're writing medieval fantasy, sure, you can cut most if not all of these words considering they're modern words for the most part. If you're writing in a modern style, modern people talk this way. Vague wording for me, isn't always bad. People think in vague terms.

Yeah, I don't think this thread needs to be "Don't tell me how to write!" again. We've already established that in numerous posts. For me, it's seeing how cutting these words works in practice. I practiced them and yeah, it felt weird and unnatural in some cases. The only true way to determine if these words belong in your toolbox or not is to try not using them and see if it somehow hurts your soul or annoys you. That's when you know there's something wrong.

 

[ThinkerX]

We are watching a shift in writing style take place, similiar to the one that happened a few decades ago.

And some of us are active participants in that change.

Back when my computer still accepted it, 'Pro-Writing-Aid' used to flag many of these words in my writing. Which sort of says where they stand on this emerging new style.

 

[GeekDavid]

Speaking of those ten words, let's look at Tolkien:

"And why not? Surely you don't disbelieve the prophecies just because you helped them come about. You don't really suppose do you that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck? Just for your sole benefit? You're a very fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I'm quite fond of you. But you are really just a little fellow, in a wide world after all."

"Good morning!" said Bilbo, and he meant it. The sun was shining, and the grass was very green. But Gandalf looked at him from under long bushy eyebrows that stuck out farther than the brim of his shady hat.

This of course is the way to talk to dragons, if you don't want to reveal your proper name (which is wise), and don't want to infuriate them with a flat refusal (which is also very wise). No dragon can resist the fascination of riddling talk and of wasting time trying to understand it.

"I should think so — in these parts! We are plain quiet folk and have no use for adventures. Nasty disturbing uncomfortable things! Make you late for dinner!"

As all things come to an end, even this story, a day came at last when they were in sight of the country where Bilbo had been born and bred, where the shapes of the land and of the trees were as well known to him as his hands and toes.

And one of the most famous quotes:

"What have I got in my pocket?" he said aloud.

And that's just in The Hobbit. I guess ol' JRR never read those rules. He even has three of the forbidden words in one paragraph of dialogue, one of them twice!

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Not to diminish the importance of Tolkein but that was 60 years ago....

No, I'm not saying to have modern success you have to write lean. The reason I started this thread was to begin a discussion on how each of us use the words...where I why we choose to use them. I've heard some excellent reasons; characterization, internal thought with uncertainties, dialogue, narrative voice in close POVs, distinct narrative voices, etc. that's what I was hoping to generate & they're all valid.

It wasn't intended to be viewed as another rule set to fight against. Perhaps the tone of the article comes off that way. I didn't see it in that light and I don't fully agree with its assertions. Still, I think it's probably a valuable practice to examine the use of any words that often don't offer meaning. You have to recognize the use and understand it for what it is before you can discern if it's performing the function you intended. That's a productive discussion.

 

[GeekDavid]

Mr. Smith:

If a writer isn't examining every single word they use (including the possibly superfluous ones in this very sentence), they're not doing their job very well.

 

[Steerpike]

Tolkien books sell very well right now.

 

[GeekDavid]

Tolkien books sell very well right now.

I see what you did there, intentional or otherwise.

 

[Steerpike]

I'm on my phone. I might have done anything

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Tolkien books sell very well right now.

My point being, you're not going to see many modern advice columns advocating that style. They will offer contemporary advice, more than likely.

Again, I don't diminish Tolkein's contribution, his sales longevity, or his style. Style choices are completely valid. Success speaks for itself.

 

[Jabrosky]

I apologize for derailing the thread, Mr. Smith. I simply thought the article linked to in the OP was advocating for an absolute approach to writing, but I see you don't interpret it that way.

 

[GeekDavid]

I apologize for derailing the thread, Mr. Smith. I simply thought the article linked to in the OP was advocating for an absolute approach to writing, but I see you don't interpret it that way.

I agree with your interpretation, for what it's worth.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

No, it's fine Jabrosky. Threads take a life of their own and we're all entitled to voice our opinions. I was just hoping for a more constructive discussion on style choices.

I totally understand why artists lash out at something they view as confining. I just don't see advice as restrictive. It's within my power to accept, reject, or ignore. So, I'm always a bit surprised to see discussion inevitably head down that road. Perhaps I shouldn't be....