Better, you say. But, there's still a problem with subject-verb disagreement. Let's repair it, too.
We have been warned not to eat at our desks and not to have drinks at our desks. Any food must be consumed in the cafeteria. We are urged to sit in the front of the cafe and not to fraternize (read: bother) anyone from other departments. Any food left from the meal must be disposed of before returning to the floor. Anyone caught with food at his desk will be reprimanded. For food?
I also think the parentheses interrupt the flow of the middle sentence. Away they go:
We are urged to sit in the front of the cafe and not to fraternize with, i.e., bother, anyone from other departments.
You will notice I corrected the use of fraternize by adding the preposition 'with.' A verb, 'having,' should also be added to the last sentence for clarity. There are other grammar and usage problems throughout the entry. Here are some rules to follow to prevent them:
And let's not forget the important matter of spelling. If you are not naturally a good speller, it is a good idea to keep a pocket dictionary next to your computer. You can check the correctness of a word in a snap. Just as easy is using an online spellchecker, particularly if you have a broadband connection. There is one built into Jaguar's version of Sherlock on the Mac. Just type in the word and, voila!, its spelling, meaning and synonyms will appear. Alternatively, you can add Dictionary.com or a similar site to your bookmarks.
Some readers will ask: But does it matter? Yes, it does. The way information is presented can influence how people interpret the issues it addresses. In the entry above, the topic, which it is not presented as clearly as it should be, seeks the reader's sympathy. It is the creation of a demoralizing work environment that also mirrors class, and, possibly, race divisions. A reader not particularly sympathetic to the writer's perspective would probably use the entry as evidence against better treatment of the workers, viewing the many mistakes as proof of the incompetence of one of them. Obviously, that is not the writer's goal.
Here are some more suggestions for poor writers:
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Phillip Winn
Bravo, MD! While my own efforts sometimes fall notably short of perfection, I do believe that a little care can go a long way in making our communication effective.
Then again, I've been called a "grammar nazi" a time or two. It's all like water off a duck's back... :)
2 - Craig Lyndall
It's funny how relative it all is.
I get annoyed while reading people's writing all the time, but I know I am less than perfect. Still, I get the "grammar nazi" label frequently in certain circles where people's minimum level of grammar knowledge is lower.
At the same time, if a pro started looking through my writing and picking it apart, I would probably scream the same nazi bit because I feel I maintain a minimum standard level.
You are right on all counts MD, but do you think a minimum standard level exists? Is that good enough?
3 - Eric Olsen
Absolutely right on all counts, except I would also encourage our sweet Dew who has much to offer and has an interesting way of saying it.
I would also add this: the reason precise writing is important is that it reflects precise thinking, and in fact requires it.
4 - Natalie Davis
Bravo, indeed, but I would disagree with a little of this. Let's go back to your revision of the paragraph, and specifically, to the first sentence:
We have been warned not to eat at our desks and not to have drinks at our desks.
The author originally wrote:
We have been warned: not to eat at our desk, not to have drinks at our desk, any food must be consumed in the cafeteria.
Now, I sense that she is trying to capture a sense of urgency here, that she is attempting to make us hear the litany of demands coming from management. I like this, but a few repairs are required to make the sentence sing, I think.
We have been warned: Don't eat at your desk. Don't drink at your desk. All food must be consumed in the cafeteria.
The result offers the urgency through the flow of the words. That is pretty good, I think.
Good writing is more than the use of grammar and spelling. There must be an element of style involved both in word choice and in the way the words are used, so as to breathe life into the prose and, thereby, grab the reader's interest. Often, I alternate between using Bush, Shrub, Dubya, Commander-in-Thief, Thief-in-Chief, etc., for purely stylistic purposes. (This is only in politcal op-ed pieces, mind you.) For one thing, it makes the article's point of view very clear. For another, it is dreadfully dull to read Bush, Bush, Bush again and again.
We are urged to sit in the front of the cafe and not to fraternize (read: bother) anyone from other departments.
You excised the parentheses in favor of using an i.e. construction, which is perfectly good and reasonable. Personally, though, I like parentheses at times. They can be manipulated to create a certain rhythm in the writing. In that particular sentence, they create a pause right at a place where I (as the author) would want the reader to slow his or her pace. And, in truth, I think using a comma and inserting i.e. followed by the phrase and another comma creates the same sort of pause. But that's just me, an editor looking for stuff to edit.
The bottom line is this: There are many ways to good writing, and sometimes rules are made, as they say, to be broken. While respecting said rules -- you have to learn them before you can break them - try all kinds of tricks and strategies and develop your own style and voice. Then you can be not only a good writer, but a singular voice.
Great advice, MD. Thanks for posting this.
And Dew, you're terrific. Keep writing. Read, read, read, and write every single day. I've been doing this for more than 30 years, and experience has shown me that the combination of voracious reading and disciplined writing creates writers people want to read. You are certainly on that road.
5 - TDavid
Somebody resurrect William Strunk Jr.! :) Omit needless words! Omit needless words!
Sheesh, MD, one of my entries was within the last 48 hours, should I be nervous?
I worked (er, volunteered and had my account comped, that is) in Dan Hurley's Amazing Instant Novelist (AIN) Area (keyword: novel) at AOL in 1997 judging 250 word, and then later 1000 word short story contest winners. An enjoyable and fulfilling experience in writing and writers on the web. I didn't do this job at first, of course, they asked me to come aboard after I entered and won a few of the contests.
At AIN we saw all kinds of stories, writing styles, use and misuse of words, paragraphs and sentence structure. Also spelling and the infrequently awful use of colors and font sizes that younger, less experienced writers seem to favor over choosing good old B & W. My favorite submission (not!) was written in a tiny font size with carnation pink text on a white background. My comment to the author?
Personally, I've ratcheted down true editorial standards on the web. The only styles that annoy me are articles that with overly long paragraphs and/or where the text is difficult to read. It's hard on the eyes and tedious for the reader trying to gulp one huge paragraph or survive a couple of sentences with garbled text. Yes, it better be a whopper of a rhythmic payoff if one is going to go much beyond a few sentences before busting out a new paragraph.
Whew, doesn't it feel better reading paragraphs like this?
So ... liberally break up paragraphs, run the text through a spellchecker and maybe let it chill for an hour or two before changing from draft to publish. You'll notice things that you didn't notice when it was fresh. If you leave it lingering longer, all kinds of irritations and bugs surface.
Like my aforementioned article where I used the word "entertainment" in back to back sentences. Grrrr, where's the thesaurus?
And omit needless words! Omit needless words!
6 - John Mudd
Some other good writing books are Writing for the Mass Media, The Associated Press Style Book and Briefing on Media Law and Writing the News: A Guide for Print Journalists.
I hope they write something as a guide for writing as a means for effective blogging in the future. I have noticed that blogs that are well-written tend to get more attention, if their topics are worthy, or blogs that are written by famous bloggers, whether well-written or not.
7 - Dew
I am honest enough to admit I took this very personally(stop) I am also honest enough to admit that I have not ever been the best where grammar is concerned nor do I care to be if the above is the result(stop) Had this been sincere I would be humbled and appreciative but I know better(stop) I wanted to join Blogcritics to bring a twist of opinion to the site (pause)not cater to the ego of an adult who can(apostrophe)t let go(stop) As evidenced by the fact that she sought me out (pause) more than once(pause)for no other reason than to insult me(stop) Yet you can feel yourself an authority to put Al Barger in his place(question) Is that not hypocrisy(question)
I do not write because I have to(stop) I write because I choose too (pause)and though your opinion has been noted and discarded I hold on to the fact that my book of poetry is still going strong after 6 months so there must be other simpletons out there who enjoy grammatically incorrect reading(stop)Fortunately for my untalented soul not even the Diva can change that(stop) Until this post I had received critism but not flat out brutal honest about my 'piffle'(pause)which ironically sparked continuous debate(pause)branch-off posts(pause) an all too brief resignation(pause) tears(pause) and this present contempt(stop) Imagine when I actually learn what I am doing (exclamation)I had become accustomed (look 3 syl-la-bles)to having always been considered one of the most creative and well versed amongst the academe in which I socialize(stop)Now I guess that speaks to their inadequecy instead of my own prowess(stop) The Diva is intelligent without question but she is also angry for what ever reason and it is directly related to color lines(stop) If the fact that I choose to embrace someone with no regard to their race makes me an Uncle Tom as you so politely referred (pause) then so be it(stop) I would much rather embrace those around me despite their faults, colors and opinion which differs from my own than to hold on to so much hate(stop) I hope coming to my site and cr t c z ng(pause)excuse me(pause) demonizing me (pause) my friends (pause)my writing (pause) and my life style (pause) which you know nothing about(pause) made you feel vindicated(stop) The only thing you have shown me with this maliciousness is that you are no different from the evil you claim to expose(stop) And if by chance you are different it is only in your cleverness to appear genuine(stop)
8 - Natalie Davis
Sweet Dew, it did not occur to me that this was aimed at you. I mentioned you because someone else did prior to my posting, but I wanted to encourage you because your contributions here are filled with such wonderful ideas and vibrancy and humanity. My "editing" was not directed at you personally in any way; my hope was to offer an alternative to MD's take on the craft of writing. I pray it did not cause you sadness. I most humbly apologize if my words caused you any pain. It was my honest thought that the purpose of this posting was for the benefit of all of us. Lord knows I can always use the help. And don't call yourself untalented -- that is in no way true. I've seen your writings here and on Dew Process: Your words and wisdom touch people; they certainly touch me in the deepest places of my heart. Your poem about your father, in fact, has been a source of comfort to me during this very dark time. So, thank you for sharing yourself through writing. Don't let anyone make you doubt yourself. You are a very special scribe with a loving heart and a singular voice. That's cause for celebration.
9 - Mac Diva
(Dew, your love affair with Al Barger is fine with me, though I wasn't aware of it until AFTER I wrote the entry above. Ditto for your joyful celebration of his having driven me from Blogcritics. I learned about that through the grapevine AFTER writing this blog entry, too. Your gaiety was a bit premature, though. Good-bye ain't always gone. So, you might want to be careful what you say about people behind their backs. Sometimes, word gets back to them.)
I have taught people with the writing problems Dew has. They often come from environments where going to school and not getting into a fight on a given day is considered a major achievement. They get As and Bs merely for good attendance and not being disruptive. Then, they arrive at college and are surprised to realize that the academic performance they think is excellent is on the ninth or tenth grade level at best. A minority of such students buckles down and improves. Most, many of them declaring the tests wrong and themselves right, fall by the wayside. What they lack in ability, they often compensate for in attitude.
Dew was not singled out for this post. (My other choice was Murphy Horner. . . .Who will now tell me off.) I made a point of not using a URL on my regular blog so as to spare the person used as an example embarassment. Most people who read the entry will never know the example's name.
I hereby apologize for anything sharp I may have said to Dew, but not for this entry. It needed to be written.
Furthermore, I wish Dew and Al the best of luck in their relationship.
10 - Joe
I hereby concede my candidacy for biggest A-hole in the blogosphere. I see, now, that I'm way out of my league.
11 - Al Barger
Ms Dew, I usually go straight to your posts first of anything on the site. Keep 'em coming.
I suppose there's always room for improvement, but I like your writing just the way it is. You have interesting things on your mind, and you express them clearly and with some gentle charm.
Thank you.
12 - Natalie Davis
Re: #9
Stunning. MD, do you enjoy inflicting pain? That was patently unkind. Wow.
And no, Al, I am not asking you, so please be gracious and grown-up -- as you were in your lovely post to Dew -- and refrain from replying. Please.
13 - Mac Diva
Inflicting pain? How? I haven't said a word about Dew that isn't true. In fact, I could have said some unflattering things that reveal her true character and did not. Let's just say that Miss 'Sweet' is really Miss Sneaky and leave it at that, Natalie. I will email you the details.
Meanwhile, Dew can be comforted by Joe and Al. Who could ask for more?
14 - Dew
Natalie I do appreciate your view and thank you for it. Through your posts and comments I can tell there is sincerity in your words, they definitely do not fall on deaf ears.
I'm glad that 'Dear Dad' was able to touch you, that is always my intent. Although I do question myself, it is self inflicted, I don't let negative comments or opinions deter me from my goals but I am more than grateful for the encouragement.
As for Diva, I find it sad for you to make such a simple and predictable assumption about myself or my past. I was a student in the International Baccalaureate Program. I graduated with honors (without a curve) and I am not saying there were no fights or guns, I just didn't see any. Unlike you I can not make such assumptions about things I do not know no matter how much I need them to be true.
Don't worry I will make this my last refute to any of the Diva's comments because I know how hard it is for her to exhibit the least amount of maturity. Maturity, funny word isn't it? It is also the reason I did not place a certain post on Blogcritics. At the time it was written the climate here was beyond hostile and I knew it would only add fuel to the fire. I do not expect Diva to understand such actions. (But I still thank Ash-a, not Ash-ley for the reference ;-)
I also apologize there is no conspiracy theory here to explore. There is no covert operation to write blogs and hide them from Diva, but I am flattered you see yourself in such high regards with me, that you would believe I am doing so. And with an accomplice too, that's just precious...
As for the imsinuation I am in a relationship with Al, you are quite correct! Seeming as though a relationship is the act of association I am in a relationship with everyone I encounter on this site. Now if what you meant to imply was that I am intimately involved with him I apologize for the misrepresentation. I do not know Mr Barger personally or anyone here for that matter. Although what I do know is that it isn't me or my writing that is the problem, it is the fact that I defended your nemisis and not you. I did not jump on your band waggon to disspell and expose the evil racists lurking in cyberspace and that, to you, was simply intolerable. Every comment thus far has included reference to Al and a personal attack:
Broaden your admission. You don't know what anything is. And, strangely, Instead of realizing you are functioning at an elementary school level, you think there is something wrong with smart people. You seem not to have a clue about your limitations, though they are glaring. I will expend an hour or two to try to remedy that.
Nor does your Uncle Tomming of Al Barger do anything to raise my opinion of you. It is just more evidence of lack of judgment, and, I suspect, profound stupidity.
I realize you will have to consult a dictiionary to grasp half the words I've written, but hope you eventually get the message.
These were your comments, Miss Diva. Yet you honestly feel I should believe you did not single me out? Your rationale by far is most interesting...
15 - marsden sanford
MD, one thing that struck me in your post #9 as surprising was the following:
I made a point of not using a URL on my regular blog so as to spare the person used as an example embarassment. Most people who read the entry will never know the example's name.
You get more traffic than blogcritics? Congrats!
Aside from that, this post is much appreciated, and will serve me well no doubt.
16 - Mac Diva
Marsden,
Hello? I WISH I got more traffic at Mac-a-ro-nies than Blogcritics does. I am assuming most people don't read my posts at Blogcritics. Or any minor blogger's posts here. They likely just check out friends or skim us. Jan probably gets more readers here than anyone else because he has the highest name recognition. If my next book sells well, I'm gonna drop being anonymous and give him a nudge-:).
17 - Mac Diva
Dew, or shall we say Miss Sneaky, 'forgot' to post the URL to the entry on her blog that preceded the comment she quotes. It is a long, vicious rant calling me everything from crazy to unfit to play in 'her' sandbox, i.e., Blogcritics. It appears that no one wanted me gone from Blogcritics more than 'Sweet' Dew. Classic Bell's Rules 3 and 4 mentality there.
However, that has nothing to do with this entry. I knew Dew was an awful excuse for a writer from the first time I read one of her entries. I also felt embarassed for her because her semiliteracy (after graduation from a black college that needs higher standards, obviously) plays into the stereotype of African-Americans as incapable of coherent speech. That was long before last night, when I was tipped off about the entry on her blog assailing me.
Nuff said.
18 - Phillip Winn
A general word of advice to nobody in particular: When more and more people end up on your bad side, is it possible that your bad side is the outside? Blaming others starts to ring hollow after a while, when that list of "others" grows longer and longer with almost every post. Examine yourself, honestly, please.
19 - Mac Diva
I agree, Phillip. Dew should examine herself. But, that takes intelligence and insight. I don't hold out much hope.
As for being on her bad side, the only choice seems to be to be either snowed by her deceptions or there. I prefer there. Having removed the long knife she shoved into my back so gleefully, I am going to keep my distance from now on.
20 - Eric Olsen
There are two sides to instruction: pointing out mistakes and noting highlights. To paraphrase MD, she is essentially correct that attention to writing detail (spelling, punctuation) does two things - it makes reading the content easier, and it serves to prevent readers from dismissing that content out of hand. It's like a club with a very public but rather esoteric code, and if you work within the code that is one less excuse readers have to not read you.
Now isn't content the important thing? yes, it certainly is, and in this regard Dew has the goods, as has been pointed out. She is an old soul regardless of her age, and much that is sweet, penetrating, deftly observational, and wise comes from within her. With a little editing it shines, but MD is correct to point out that self-editing is the best editing of all.
And may peace reign over the valley. Good God, y'all.
21 - Mac Diva
John, I wrote a piece on a review of Rebecca's Blood's book on blogging. It is around here somewhere. Rebecca disagrees with much of what the guy says about her, but the entry is still worth reading. There's also an entry about interviewing Wil Wheaton, one of the celebrity bloggers, that touches on the issue you raise. And, another about interviewing Ethan Zuckerman (he founded Tripod), a very deserving celebrity blogger, who is expanding IT to the Third World.
I write a series called Blogospherics regularly about issues of blogging for Mac-a-ro-nies. Some of those will hopefully be included in a chapter in a new book about blogging. (To the extent Blogger hasn't eaten my archives anyway.) The books written so far are mainly how-to. I hope to see someone get beyond that.
22 - TDavid
Dew -
You mentioned you have a book of poetry (published?), yes/no? I can attest (and so can others, I'm sure, if they have submitted non-fiction, fiction or articles for publishing) from personal experience that Mac Diva's article critique above (not talking about any of her comments above) is standard fare for Literary Agents and editors.
If there is fat then they want it pruned. Think a character has little point or use in the plot? Gone. Grammar, punctuation, spelling errors? Fix them. Scenes you love that they find are too much backstory and not enough advancing of the plot? Outta here. Even authors as successful as Stephen King have to go under the knife -- though I'm sure he can fight for a lot more content than most (Maximum Overdrive, anybody?) and editors have slayed him for years anyway. Shows you what some editors really know about the economics of the business.
Fiction and article writing are somewhat different animals, yes, but writing is writing. Despite any perceived (falsely or otherwise) agenda that Mac Diva might have had for writing this article, the bottom line remains that editors and Literary Agents -- the folks who will have a direct impact on all our work before seeing print -- are similarly as critical when it comes to technically admonishing a writer's work.
Personal and artistic feelings aside, unfortunately (for us writer's feelings, that is), this is a fact.
Now whether it is "nice" for Mac Diva to critique someone's work without specifically requesting it is a whole other issue.
My personal feelings are that if blogcritics is going to have editors, it should have official, designated editors rather than let the other blogcritics police each other on such technical issues through other article entries. I don't think this is very appropriate and is not going to help encourage new blogcritics to join and want to submit articles if any other blogcritics (in a sense, the fellow collective) can come out and beat up technically on their writing.
It's one thing to constructively comment on the piece but to drag out another entry and perform a technical autopsy on it is not what I thought this site was about(?) Let the readers do that, fine, but other blogcritics? Why? Plenty out there to review that we don't need to review ourselves, yes? Let the readers review us and use the comment area for critique, review or designate editors to screen all submissions and keep this internal technical stuff behind the scenes.
Despite what we all think, most readers don't break out the microscope like we do -- they will skip reading writers who write bad (and Dew, I'm not saying you write bad, I'm just speaking generally). If the majority of the content is written poorly then it will naturally affect said reader's opinion of the site and all the blogcritics writers.
After all, comments can be used to critique a piece after publishing by readers ;) But for one entry to directly use another as an example to pick apart technically doesn't say too much for the blocritics collective.
Just my 2 1/2 rusted pennies.
23 - Dew
I completely agree TDavid. It was not the critique that was of concern to me it was the intent. I'm not so silly as to run and hide in a corner because the 'mean mac' edited my writng, however harsh. It was the reasoning for doing so. As she/he pointed out it was I who stabbed them in the back so she/he unyielded their attack that previously they had hampered. By all accounts that is vindictive.
I had already stated several times over that I am not the best when it comes to the grammatical protocol. In poetry, grammar in most cases can be done away with all together, depending on the line strcture you are using, if any.
My most conspicuous issue is that I write what I am thinking. So the overuse of parathesis is because I have no other way to relay the sarcastic undertone that is apparent when actually speaking with me. You can not hear my infliction as you are reading so you lose quite a bit of the animation that is DEW. In writing I do my best to make it seem like a conversation. Maybe that is a fault?
I am a generation X'er to the core. I don't believe in rules, I believe in breaking them. I will respect you as long as I perceive you are respecting me. And I accept my faults as well as my assets equally. But above all I don't sweat the small stuff.
'Scared' the title of my book is self-published and I am currently reworking it for the interest that I have peaked in several agents. I do expect them to 'red-ink' me horribly and that is fine. How else will I learn and grow?
24 - Dew
Correction: I will respect you, regardless of you respecting yourself.
25 - Phillip Winn
Natalie's critique, #4 above, seemed to be right on target. You seem to have the right attitude of taking help where you can find it, even when the source is poison. In the end, the only editor that matters is the one that publishes you, but we can all use improvement, no matter how long we've been writing.
I've been known to say that "Some rules are meant to be broken, but what's the fun in breaking rules if you don't even know what they are?"
Keep up the great work, Dew.