Don’t bore your reader: seven sentence hacks for punchy prose
No matter what kind of research-led writer you are, your prose needs to be punchy. Like it or not we live in an attention economy so keeping eyes on the page (or screen) is vital to communicate the stories that deserve to be told. If you’re writing Op Eds or blog posts, you have 800 words to build a whole world. Drafting academic journal articles? You’ve got to get your point across fast because readers don’t get much further than the abstract - there’s so much literature out there to read. In creative nonfiction, strategies to hook readers are needed because nonfiction books need to compete with pace of fiction and novels if they’re going to sell.
So where do you start? Well, borrowing the title of Joe Moran’s book: ‘'first you write a sentence’, let’s begin there. It’s the sentence that holds the key to spellbinding writing. The words in it, how its is arranged, its length, and the way your sentences vary all impact how easy-on-the-brain your writing is. And by easy I don’t mean dumbed down. Here are seven experiments to try:
It’s the sentence that holds the key to spellbinding writing.
Seven Sentence Hacks for Punchy Prose
1. Cut filler words. As US journalist Shepard Smith said “We don't communicate in full sentences anyway. We don't need all those words.” Poets are maestros of this: read this blog post for some examples in action.
2. Scratch as many adverbs as you can. Yes, even when you are trying to bring a scene to life. Yes, even when you are ‘showing not telling’. Adverbs often over-describe the action in an off-putting way so try using another, richer, word instead. For example, if someone walks off hurriedly perhaps they trot, stride or march instead. If you’re not sure what an adverb is, try this handy ‘adverb analyser’ to see if you rely too heavily on them.
3. Use interesting words, but use them simply. A wide, appropriate and interesting vocabulary doesn’t have to be flowery. To expand your vocabulary try subscribing to Dictionary.com’s ‘word of the day’ or read the dictionary like I used to when I was a child (true story). Over-use of the same word vs. weird and wonderful synonyms is a fine balance – repetition can be irritating, but so are speakers who opined, exclaimed, suggested, muttered and stated instead of simply ‘said’.
4. Avoid sensationalism. In all but the most popular of writing (such as magazine columns), remember you are writing with authority and dealing in what John McPhee refers to as the ‘literature of fact’. Persuasiveness and impact in your writing are cheapened by descriptive qualifiers like ‘shocking statistics’, ‘outrageous opinions’ and even ‘groundbreaking studies’. Let the reader decide for themselves from the information you present.
5. Write in the ‘active voice’ especially if you don’t need to write in the third person (which in my opinion no-one does). “Precarious careers are experienced by artists as stressful” (passive voice) is less punchy than “Precarious careers cause stress for artists” (active voice). This handy passive to active voice converter is your friend here.
6. Allude to context, don’t spell it out when presenting findings: ‘As we sat chatting in her bedroom, surrounded by keyboards and piles of washing’ shows that the music producer I was interviewing works from home, and that she doesn’t have a dedicated space for music-making. It also implies that perhaps her music-making can’t be accorded a greater status because her home is small, or she shares it with others, or music doesn’t earn her much money. Why else would she have keyboards and laundry in her bedroom, and choose to speak to a researcher there too?
7. ‘Don’t split, in so far as its possible, your clauses, because to all intents and purposes, your reader will not be able to follow, or remember, what your point is.’ Yuck. Right? Let’s try that again. ‘In so far as its possible, don’t split your clauses because your reader won’t be able to follow your point, let alone remember it.’ And we could improve that sentence further by deleting the first clause. Ask yourself whether the clause is truly necessary. It's usually a superfluous aside to the main point - what is often referred to as ‘throat-clearing’ in writing.
Don’t bore your reader!
Research findings are often reported in dull ways that hide how fascinating the story actually is. Research-led writing doesn’t have to be littered with long, complex words and concepts that are hard to read and even harder to understand. Sure, this is sometimes necessary because you’re explaining a technical concept, but it doesn’t make for engaging storytelling. We know that reading fiction increases critical thinking skills and leads to an increase in readers’ prosocial behaviours more readily than traditional nonfiction texts so let’s borrow as many techniques from fiction as we can. Rigorous writing can be delicious writing – even in academia! There is nothing wrong with people enjoying your journal article or PhD thesis. In fact, since form and substance are intertwined, punchy prose can be an aid to comprehension so why wouldn’t we want readers to enjoy our research-led writing as much as a novel?
If you’re not sure if your writing packs enough punch, why not book a Draft Doctor session with me? Friendly, inspiring, real-time critique on your work during an online call. Or if you’d prefer asynchronous feedback, developmental editing services start from as little as £40.