Happy New Year! And a request for feedback.
I ran a bunch of my blog writing from last year through a wad o' software for a quickie analysis. I must say it was pretty good. It picked up a few grammar errors that I didn't catch myself. It recommended some subtle edits, half of which I would have ignored (and did on the practice run). The other half would have smoothed out rough spots. It will be useful.
I hit the "readability" check. It says I'm writing to the 11th-13th grade level, at least two-to-three years above what they recommend. The general reading audience is at the 9th grade level.
(shrug) Eh, OK, I can live with that. Most 9th-graders I've met, at least since *I* was in the 9th grade, are dumber than hammered shit anyhow. It's like driving a spike through my forehead to talk to them on their level.
But then the program explained that a sizable chunk of the paragraphs I write are in the "20 -30" range on the Fletsch readability scale. This roughly translates to "Very Difficult To Read, Best Understood By University Graduates". I believe Fletsch's original classification for these numbers was "What The Fuck Is Wrong With You?"
It then recommended shortening sentences, using more single-syllable words, and reducing complexity.
Re-reading, most of the elements the software highlighted are what I wanted said. They would withstand only the lightest editing without modifying the meaning, context, or "feeling" of whatever I was banging on about. My first thought was, "I ain't changing my approach because this dumbassed piece of software says so. One thing about my readers is that they're pretty smart and catch more subtlety than most. I ain't gonna start underestimating them and dumbing-down to entertain the 13-15-year-olds in the world."
Hubris and arrogance, of course.
The software also says recommendations may depend on the purpose of the document and the audience for it, both being answered by the long-standing "For my own amusement, thanks".
But that's not true, is it? Otherwise, I'd never put a line on the Internet anywhere. I could just write into an encrypted diary set to delete itself when an update timer notices I haven't been around and decides I've lost interest or that I've gone tits-up and pockets-out. I have such a journal, so I know it's possible. (No, you can't see it.)
With that realization, I've decided to ask people who are likely to have a useful opinion on the matter — you guys, the readers.
Tell me, then. Do I need to use fewer polysyllabic words, shorter sentences, less convoluted connections, and give more explanations for fewer obscure references in my writing? Or what?
Drop a comment or three as the mood moves you and I'll whittle out some sort of "New Year's Resolution" on how I'm going about this thing in the future. Or, I may just ignore them altogether. One of those.
No, of course not. That's ridiculous. I certainly hope tweens aren't reading your blog! Sometimes I don't understand the physics you write about, but that's not YOUR fault or because of big words - I'm sure Don and Roy understand it. If we don't write for our own pleasure and to illuminate our own understanding of [love, life, motorcycles, whatever], then what's the point? We might as well write stuff like "10 Ways to Land a Better Job." Which actually I do write, as a side hustle, but I don't enjoy it. It's work (and helping out a family biz). I think you should write to please yourself; otherwise, you will lose that spark of creativity that makes your writing so much fun. You'll end up with some garbage like THE DAVINCI CODE. And who needs that... just to make scads of money and get turned into a movie with Tom Hanks? Feh!
ReplyDeleteScads of money -- ugh. If I thought that was going to happen, I'd stop writing tomorrow. Fortunately, I suspect this is in the "low probability" part of the timeline. Curious thing, though -- I stuck a paragraph from Dillard (you know I'm I huge fan) into the same software. This paragraph, specifically:
ReplyDelete"Hoopla! All that I see arches, and light arches around it. The air churns out forces and lashes the marveling land. A hundred times through the fields and along the deep roads I've cried Holy. I see a hundred insects moving across the air, rising and falling. Chipped notes of birdsong descend from the trees, tuneful and broken; the notes pile about me like leaves. Why do these molded clouds make themselves overhead innocently changing, trailing their flat blue shadows up and down everything, and passing, and gone? Ladies and gentlemen! You are given insects, and birdsong, and a replenishing series of clouds. The air is buoyant and wholly transparent, scoured by grasses. The earth struck through it is noisome, lighted, and salt. Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in his holy place? "Whom shall I send," heard the first Isaiah, "and who will go for us?" And poor Isaiah, who happened to be standing there -- and there was no one else -- burst out, "Here am I; send me.""
...and the software said it was "easy to read" and should take about 45 seconds. Uhmm....not in the universe I live in. Or did I miss something? Probably has to do with word length or some such. Anyhow, I'm still considering how seriously to take what it's telling me, and whether to pay any attention to it other than spell-checking and whatnot. But for the moment I think I'm inclined to agree with you. We'll see what others have to say...
The software was written for writers who are unsure of themselves.
ReplyDeleteAnd not, it needn't be said, to improve anyone's writing.
DeleteYours is good as is.
It all started with that English teacher who told us that using proper grammar was not as important as writing clearly. What we heard was, anything's OK as long as "they know what you mean." Wrong, don't go down that road. The typical Twenty-first Century Internet "content creator" is a clear demonstration of what can go wrong there. Unless you're really good. Tom Wolfe or Hunter Thompson good.
ReplyDeleteOnce I played around with some program--way back in the DOS days--that analyzed writing, and came to the conclusion that its results were determined mostly by sentence length and word length. I played around with it and altered some of my writing until it effectively dumbed down to the 7th grade level. That was tough, I admit. Turns out it's hard to communicate when you are not allowed to use the precisely appropriate word where you want to. But you still kind of feel like maybe it's on to something. So, a friend recently offered to read one of my works-in-progress. I sent him a .docx file and waited hopefully for his editing remarks. When they came, I was sort of pissed off because there were so many. And the main complaint seemed to be my long sentences. Run-on sentences. My cunningly crafted darlings that, I admit, sometimes made Dickens sound like Hemingway. But, hell. Anyway, bottom line, I re-wrote most of it, and while I kept some compound sentences, I found in most cases that they were a little opaque. I "dumbed it down," and when some time passed, read it all again. It was better.
YMMV. FWIW, I think your writing is good as is, too. While I can't claim to comprehend some of the stuff you write about, it's never about the writing. It could be that some people would enjoy what you have to say if it was a little plainer. So, you just have to decide if you care, or if your audience is a bunch of 7th graders, or to what extent it is still good advice with the audience you do have.
You could pretend you're from Oklahoma and your blog is being read mostly by cowboys--intelligent, well-meaning cowboys who left school in the sixth grade to go to work and help out with the groceries.
I ran my latest blog post through the web site called Analyze My Writing. Average grade level: 9. I assume that means a 9th grader would totally comprehend what I wrote. Hmm.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I remembered something from my early days at the phone company when I administered tests to job applicants. The test given to operator/clerical applicants was designed, they told me, so that a proficient 7th grader could pass it. Pass it--not ace it. I found that kind of depressing . . .
Hemingway: 6th grade
DeleteCharles Dickens: 19
Gettysburg Address: 11.4
When I was in the military ages ago, I heard a rumor, never dispelled, that all military manuals were literally written to the 9th-grade level, and less if they could find a way to do it. This includes everything from which foot to start marching on to the disassembly and servicing of a field artillery piece. This probably makes sense when one realizes that the Private Pyles in the world who must be trained to a degree that the machine will run vastly outnumber the Vonneguts. Guess I need to figure out which crew I'm writing to or whether it's possible to bridge them.
DeleteHad the same philosophy when a manufacturing engineer. I wrote procedures and was advised to make sure any monkey off the street could follow them. I was able to but it took a few tries.
Delete