Cutting words: Why?

I’ve been looking at some recent comments in the First Three Sentences thread and one thing is beginning to bug me. A lot of the comments involve rewriting the sentences so as to “save words.” Why is it considered good to save words? Are shorter sentences or paragraphs intrinsically better than longer ones? Are shorter books intrinsically better than longer ones?

To me, cutting words for the sake of cutting them can be disastrous. It can rob the passage of color and subtext. It can make the passage simply mean less than the writer intended. And it certainly robs the passage of the voice of the narrator, and that voice might be a major attraction of the story. The personality of the narrator, whether a first-person character participating in the story or simply a third-person “character” relating the story, can slant the story’s meaning, or even impart the meaning in the first place. It can be the writer’s main tool in convincing the reader of the story’s essential truth.

All that goes out the window if words are cut willy-nilly. So please, think a moment before you recommend cutting words. You might be recommending cutting the heart out of a story.

 

Cutting words just for the sake of cutting them isn't a great idea. If you can cut "unnecessary" words, then that's fine. Unnecessary is often subjective. You not only have to consider the information you want to get across, but matters of style, voice, art, and the like. The words Lee Child might cut to maintain his usual style, pacing, and the like will look much different from the words Mervyn Peake might have cut.

So, no, in fiction there's no inherent value in brevity for its own sake--it's all a matter of the greater context.

 

I think it's a style thing, which is why I usually avoid rewrites as critiques -- too much of your own style tends to creep into those. I try to explain why I'd make cuts, instead, or ask why these details are important (if they are), and let the writer decide for themself whether those are things that are affirming or obscuring their intention.

A while back I got feedback on a piece of mine that completely missed the point of a scene. In fairness to that commenter, the 'point' was purposefully unclear -- but certain changes they suggested making would've ruined that point. It's up to me to filter out the non-applicable advice, but it's important to remember in giving advice, I think, that the original writer knows best what they're trying to communicate. You should be trying to help them reach that goal. Sometimes that means cutting, but other times it means understanding that they're not going for a lean style, and helping them to attain the best possible version of what they are going for.

I like the First Three Sentences thread, but it's tough to judge things based off of three sentences.

 

Articles I've read on the subject so far do tend to recommend favouring shorter sentences always, and some give examples of initially long sentences made shorter (or better). There are also often suggestions on how many words at the most a sentence should include. I've found I couldn't shorten many of my sentences all that much, simply because of my writing style. That's why I agree this can't really be a rule that applies to all writers.

With that being said, I'm finding that I do choose to save words, sometimes. In my case this mostly happens when I am trying to describe an idea as accurately as possible, and come up with a whole series of words to do that I initially intend to make a sentence of. Often I find that I can actually "extract" (not sure that's the word I want but it's a little past my usual bedtime and my eyelids are closing) several ideas or thoughts from that group of words for other things I will want to say later, so I just pick the two words that are the very best match and build my sentence around them. The words I haven't used I keep until the time comes they are the best match for that new idea I want to convey.

I do have a slight apprehension I will re-read this tomorrow realising not much of it made sense. Good night.

 

It seems like it would be hard to give advice on prose without giving advice that brings it more in line with your own taste. Most popular fiction uses clean, short sentences.

 

I often recommend adding words to the pieces in the "first three lines" thread, but they have to be the right words. When I recommend cutting words, it's because the words don't seem to be purposeful or impactful.

ETA: But obviously there's an element of judgement involved. If you disagree with someone's recommendations in the thread, I'm sure the OP would appreciate you commenting to that effect, with specifics.

 

This. Without naming specific posters, lately I'm seeing way too much of the author's voice being changed into that of the critiquer. That's not helpful.

ETA: There's a way to cut and trim without changing the author's voice.

 

No, they don't.

 

I am one who frequently suggests cutting out empty words, and I usually explain why.

I've had over 150 stories and articles published, edited an e-zine, etcetera so I do feel confident about continuing to make the suggestions that I make.

It's always up to the writer to take it or leave it but what they asked for is other people's opinions, as that critiquer sees it. It's probably more helpful to the people asking for opinions if others critique them. They asked to be critiqued. The critiquers did not.

 

I'm published too, Carly, with an almost identical number of credits in non-fiction.

 

Yeah, well many people say that but I don't see anything verifiable. In any case, if you want to critique, critique those who asked for it. I will continue to critique as I see fit for those who ask for it and I will do it the way I think best.

 

How about this -- can we agree that getting yourself published and knowing how to critique other peoples' writing aren't contingent on each other and put away the credit measuring?

 

Of course there's not anything verifiable. Most writers who write both non-fiction and fiction take extreme measures to keep the two aspects of their writing life separate. My point was simply that you're not the only published writer here and that there are other ways to look at editing.

 

Thank you.

 

You guys know that feeling when two of your friends just finished a heated argument and everyone sits there all quietly for a couple minutes, avoiding eye contact, waiting for someone else to eat crow/change the subject?

That's what I feel in this thread right now.

 

No offense Izzy, but there’s more going on here. And what *I* was doing was stating some of my credentials because my critiquing ability was called into question.

The measuring game we can stop is someone who’s barely posted her first ever excerpt for critique feeling the need to “correct” my critiques to others. Which btw, according to the places I spent years actually giving and receiving critiques, is very poor etiquette.

Shenanigans, if you have a problem with anything I say to someone else, I suggest you take it to a moderator. I don’t bother you at all so this little game is getting old. If you want to critique, for the third time, go critique the people who asked for it. When I need your interference in any critiques I'm involved in, I'll let you know.

 

I don't have a dog in this race, but if you've taken issue with Shen's comments, I'd recommend taking it to PMs rather than derailing the thread by talking about how accomplished you are and vaguely suggesting that no one else's writing credits are legitimate.

 

a

No, I just explained to you what I was doing- and that wasn't even remotely it. As you say, you don't have a dog in this fight but if you feel the need to insert yourself between something Shenanigator and I have going on anyway, I suggest you at least read what actually went on more carefully before making insulting and inaccurate accusations at me. I don't appreciate it. Also, it's probably better to leave any required modding to the actual mods.

 

Later posts deleted. I realized I'm not interested enough to bother.

 

I love stepping on land mines the more awkward the better.

Izzybot I like what you said here, I'm avoiding rewrites with my WIP, until it's done. I'm having trouble as a new writer seeing the techniques used, as I don't have those skill sets yet. I think trying to second guess, add to or cut anything I write would be a detriment to myself as a writer. Those skills will come with time not the other way around I think.

I acknowledge that just because I've read many books does not equal that I will know taking this path or that, choosing this word in this way, using good words instead of words that have meaning. These are confusing concepts to me.

I just like to write.

I like flowery words and imagery, I love setting the stage, so the actors will have a world that feels alive.

Writing too many words, seems like such a shame to cut them. They're all so beautiful. I love them all. They are unique individuals that give me life and inspiration when they come to me.

Are there any writers out there that write in my style? Is it better to write a lean book as powerful as Bruce Lee? Here I think is a small part of the answer.

Balance.

Wonderful I was late to the ballgame. I came here for actual discourse, c'mon who knows tony shaloub from galaxy quest? Group Hug! You are all my special words too.

 

Your probably right HP, unless I wine them and dine them make them my thrall. Then it will cost considerably less.

 

The ladies in group have no prob chopping words, and even whole sentences.
Though it can be hard to understand why, but I suppose they might be right.
Lady J is a pro-editor so that might be part of it too.
Lady A is a mid-pro-editor, but she is having writing troubles and hasn't been
to group for awhile now.

 

To be clear, though, CT, while I can't speak for @minstrel , it's not the cutting or editing in itself that's the issue. The issue I have is when the critique changes the writing so significantly it sounds like they wrote it, in their voice, as opposed to using the author's voice.

In other words, when someone's critiques sound like the voice of their own posts, that's a problem. Edit: The resulting edited piece is what I mean, not their explanation of it.