Self-Editing and “Weasel Words”
Image by Ulrike Leone from Pixabay
There’s a lot of writing advice that tells authors to remove passive voice, adverbs, and more. And while these things can be useful ideas to keep in mind when you’re editing your writing, there’s a lot more nuance to these “rules” than is initially apparent. Some people take “remove passive voice” to mean “never use ‘to be’ forms,” which is an extreme statement. There are perfectly valid uses of forms of “to be” that are not passive voice, but the rules don’t explain that. And adverbs can often be cut in favor of a stronger verb, but sometimes, a handful of adverbs can be appropriate. (And definitely appropriate within dialogue, because people use adverbs all the time when they speak.)
The better way to think about a lot of these “rules” of writing is to look out for so-called “weasel words,” which are the words authors use to avoid being too direct. This article shares some weasel words from the perspective of one author, but every author is likely going to have their own list. For example, I like to search my stories for “ould,” which occurs in “could,” “would,” and “should” (and also “shoulders,” which is its own potential issue). I certainly don’t cut ALL uses of these words, but they bear a closer look to determine if they make sense in the context or if they’re just another way that I’m being indirect.
I’d also say that some of the verbs from the article can have their place. Sometimes, using “tried to” makes sense–think about the difference between “I tried to understand” and “I understood.” So even having things on a personal list of “weasel words” doesn’t mean that every single use of them needs to come out of whatever you’ve written. It really means that they’re words you’ll want to consider when you’re self-editing your writing, just to make sure that you really need or want them to be included.
Comments