In Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace, the academic Joseph Williams said, “If we are socially responsible writers, we should strive for a style that is no simpler than our ideas require but also no more difficult than it has to be.” Recognizing the inherent strain in reading, the fair writer agrees to keep matters clear as a matter of respect.
But does academic writing live up to this standard? No, it often hides simple ideas behind redundancy, empty words, and jargon. Let’s take an example from academic writing and revise it to reveal the underlying ideas.
A Sample Paragraph from an Academic Research Paper
This paragraph from a research paper examines whether health care should be a guaranteed right under a philosophical concept by John Rawls called “the veil of ignorance”.
If no one knew whether they were healthy or sick, rich or poor, weak or strong, how would they determine whether they would prefer to leave the provision of health care to the dictates of the free market or establish public guarantees of health care rights? The question is fundamental to any discussion of health care policy that takes seriously the notion of justice because, at least as John Rawls suggests, a just society is one that allocates goods and services on the basis of how individuals would choose to allocate them if they operated behind a “veil of ignorance,” in which they did not know their “class position or social status,” their “fortune in the distribution of natural assets and” their “intelligence,” or their “strength”?
Although this paragraph swells to 125 words, the underlying problem is simple: would we choose to have our health care guaranteed by the state if we lived under a “veil of ignorance” where we were ignorant of our underlying characteristics?
Rewriting the Paragraph, Sentence by Sentence
Let us rewrite the paragraph’s two sentences for concision:
Original sentence 1:
If no one knew whether they were healthy, rich, or strong, would they prefer buying health care on the free market or having a public guarantee of health care?
I have simplified the discussion of individual characteristics and of the individual’s choices for getting health care.
Original sentence 2:
The question is fundamental to any discussion of health care policy that takes seriously the notion of justice because, at least as John Rawls suggests, a just society is one that allocates goods and services on the basis of how individuals would choose to allocate them if they operated behind a “veil of ignorance,” in which they did not know their “class position or social status,” their “fortune in the distribution of natural assets and” their “intelligence,” or their “strength”.
My sentence 2:
For philosopher John Rawls, to be just, a society should allocate goods and services based on how individuals would choose if they were behind a “veil of ignorance”, in which they do not know their characteristics and situation, such as “class position or social status,” “their fortune in the distribution of natural assets”, and their “intelligence” or “their strength.”
Here, I eliminated the repeated uses of “just” and “justice.” Further, I simplified needlessly orotund phrases like “how individuals would choose to allocate them if they operated behind a ‘veil of ignorance.’
My first version of the complete paragraph:
If no one knew whether they were healthy, rich, or strong, would they prefer buying health care on the free market or having a public guarantee of health care? For philosopher John Rawls, to be just, society should allocate goods and services based on how individuals would choose if they were behind a “veil of ignorance”, in which they do not know their own characteristics and situation, such as “class position or social status,” “their fortune in the distribution of natural assets”, and their “intelligence” or “their strength.”
Now, we’re down to 90 words, and the essential meaning shines through.
We can still make the paragraph better. Let’s put the second sentence first so that the little-known concept of “the veil of ignorance” is immediately introduced. Then, we can immediately consider the rhetorical question of how this veil influences individual choices.
My second and final version of the complete paragraph:
For philosopher John Rawls, to be just, society should allocate goods and services based on how individuals would choose if they were behind a “veil of ignorance”. There individuals would know nothing of their characteristics or situation, such as “class position,” “their fortune in the distribution of natural assets”, their “intelligence”, “their strength”, or their health. Not knowing this, would they prefer buying health care on the free market or having it publicly guaranteed?
Now, we are down to 74 words from the initial 125. Through concision, we have shown we respect the reader’s time and effort. Eliminate flabby text and respect the reader’s limited time. Write that way.
Why Does Prose Get Flabby and Wordy
In The Sense of Style, linguist Steven Pinker talks about the curse of knowledge as the asymmetry when an academic who knows his subject completely cannot understand that his reader will not have even remotely his level of knowledge in the subject. Pinker also notes that this asymmetry is very prevalent and very hard to correct. He notes, “The curse of knowledge is the single best explanation I know of why good people write bad prose.” To ameliorate the curse of knowledge, he recommends working with a person who could be a member of his intended audience: “show a draft to some people who are similar to [the] intended audience and find out whether they can follow it.”
And here is why it is critical to work with a professional writer. Pinker’s theoretical audience member can give the writer feedback. But then the writer must implement the feedback alone. But I can help with both the feedback and the implementation. Then, with clear prose, the readers can focus on the brilliance of your ideas.
Find this information useful? Work with me so that we can improve the clarity and style of your writing and speaking so that you communicate with clarity and command. Set up a free 15-minute consultation with me, and let’s move forward.
