The Long and Short of Writing

Can writing be Concise and Comprehensive?

Substack predicts on the icon the approximate time it will take to read our pieces. (I think they use slow readers to measure it. When I am done reading, they say I have read 65% of the article.)

At what length to you decide, "Nope. That's too long"? We all are busy. (One of my subscribers does not write anything, but is subscribed to over one thousand stacks. Bless her heart. I can't do that.)

I aim for 4 or 5 minutes for my articles. A full presentation in book form would need to be longer. So, I chop it up into smaller pieces: a scene of the story for each post; or a chapter of a longer essay for each post. That way, it is like a magazine.

Comprehensive, not Reductionistic

One way to make an article shorter is to leave stuff out. Concentrate on a few salient parts. Assume the readers will supply the unwritten information from their own common knowledge. Discuss issues out of context. Forget the "forest" and just describe one "tree." For some writers, it might be one "leaf."

Okay. That is not the best way.  Artificially limited conversation and short attention spans make for miscommunication. Our aim is not to reduce an idea to oversimplification. We can't assume these readers have read and will remember everything we have previously posted. We can't take their understanding of our thinking for granted. Thoughts must have wholeness to be grasped.

Not every reader grew up learning that a "Why?" question asks either for a reason (a probable cause) or for a purpose (a hoped-for effect). So, it might be important to include a cause-and-effect explanation in the article. Clear understanding needs clear thinking as a foundation.

Not every reader will be using the same Bible translation with the same explanatory notes at the bottom of the page. So, we might have to explain some theological background for our devotional ideas. What do I mean by "free will" or "depravity" or "revelation"? Is talking about God even possible across denominational boundaries? I hope so.

The same situation applies when we talk about an event in history, or a current media issue, or a literature passage from a classic writer, or the philosophical assumptions of Plato or Aristotle or Kant. The context in our mental system of understanding will allow readers to think with us.

Being comprehensive does not require every reader to be already in agreement with us. But we can help them by stating our own assumptions that they need to know.

Concise, not Rambling

English is a hospitable language. It welcomes words and metaphors from other languages. We take the French expression déjà vu and act like we have experienced it before. We go halfway around the world for the word boondocks and use it to mean something halfway around the world. We throw in Latin phrases like status quo and assume that is how things have always been. We happily shift gears among Latin, Greek, Anglo-Saxon, and Sanskrit for word origins.

English is also a periphrastic language. We can talk around a subject at any length as we try to zero in on what we really mean. This is not a bad thing in itself, except when we are in a hurry to say something. Few listeners and fewer readers have patience for beating around the bush. We know they can scroll through our rambling.

Over the years, I have tried to focus on three strategies for conciseness. Three ways to do two things: make sure people understand; make sure people don't misunderstand.

1. Use the right word.

The right words are hardly ever adjectives or adverbs. You see what I did there? The noun "words" is broad and vague in its meaning, requiring the adjective "right" to specify what I wanted to say. The verb "are" is infinite, calling for two adverbs to narrow it down. Precision, on the other hand, allows conciseness.

Prepositions take readers in a direction. Select the right direction. Don't mislead readers. Which preposition points where you are going?

2. Draw word pictures.

Words have both inner and outer meanings. See the picture inside the word you use. It is the metaphor; it is the transcendent meaning. Choose the word by the picture it draws.

3. Tell stories.

A novel or short story has a narrative structure that guides readers to follow along with the author. Sequence leads to consequence. Characters bring their motives, strategies, and tendencies into the plot. People in every culture think in stories.

Even an essay should have a story line that readers can track. Logic leads and follows in a journey to the destination. People can get lost in sophistry. They want a story. If your story has plot holes, you will lose your readers.

Apology

I know many good writing instructors who try to help us do a better job. I offer these suggestions from my own experience. These are the rules I tend to break in my writing.