The Big Bad Book Blog

Is it disloyal to admit that I admire, sympathize with, even like AP style? It’s true that Chicago will always be my first love. And 80 percent of the AP Stylebook is just alphabetized terms in loose chapters. To those of us with wandering eyes and a shaky grasp of the alphabet, that’s just cruel. Sure, it’s straightforward, but if I want to know about commas, it’s pretty well guaranteed I’ll get stuck reading about colloquialisms, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and commodities before I discover I’m to look up the entry under punctuation. Where, of course, I’ll find Purim, Pulitzer Prizes, and a direction to the punctuation chapter. Well, why didn’t you just send me there in the first place? (On the other hand, ask me about Lithuanian independence!) continue reading

Fact: Helvetica turned 50 this year. Yeah, people celebrated and everything. Okay, that may be an overstatement, but when there’s actually a feature film named after and about a font, there must be something interesting going on, right?

And there is. But it doesn’t really have to do with Helvetica—or even fonts, per se. No, it’s the entire study of and love affair with typography. And it’s nothing new: technology has effectively democratized the use and development of powerful, elegant, strange, and creative word design, but professional manipulators of text—each imbued with a vehement passion for how language is communicated—have existed since long before the computer and long before Gutenberg.

What can we learn from designers about writing and about communication? This: Visionary typographers understand one thing above all else—one thing that transcends the technicalities of kern, x-heights, serifs, and baselines. They understand that typography is writing out loud.

So when you’re writing, evaluate what you’ve developed, and imagine it in type. That is, imagine what it would look like if it were alive and animated. This may help you to choose better words, create better sentences, and establish better flow. Here’s an elementary example. Try to imagine how different both sentences would look.

She walked slowly. vs. She crept.

Can you see the difference? No? Still don’t know what I mean? It’s hard to explain. Check out these videos instead to get a better idea and to hopefully get inspired. continue reading

Anytime you’re writing nonfiction, it’s nice if you know a lot more about your topic than your audience does. That isn’t usually a problem—most of us write what we know. But how do you know your audience will get the point? And how do you avoid explaining too much and losing their attention? There’s a fine line between clarity and condescension—but you need to know where it is. continue reading

Sometimes, when I read a manuscript, one particular stylistic element seems poised to bring down the whole book—impossible-to-read dialect; verbose, long-winded exposition; trite or “symbolic” imagery; scenes so mysterious you don’t quite know what’s going on; or some other literary device that simply doesn’t fit. But when I tactfully mention the offending device to the author, the response is “I meant to do that.” Uh-oh.

The impulse toward unconventional techniques is easy to understand. To write memorable, stylish prose, great authors often break the rules and incorporate uncomfortable elements into their writing. When a nontraditional method works, it garners attention for the book and adds to a writer’s reputation for creativity, judgment, observation, and skill. continue reading

What do we want? Syntactic equality. When do we want it? Now! Parallel syntactic elements—words that serve the same function in a sentence—must be treated equally to foster peace, love, and (most importantly) understanding. The key is creating balance among similar words, phrases, and clauses in each sentence you write. continue reading