
Five Paragraph Essays - jaf12duke
http://blog.42floors.com/five-paragraph-essays/
======
grellas
A nice post whose essential point is that you should eschew formulaic methods
of writing that force you to fit your thoughts into a rigid format and thus
hamper your ability to express them in a way that best suits the subject.

Writing style most definitely ought to be customized for its subject and
context.

Some say to write simply. This can be good. You engage your reader. You use
active voice. You limit adverbs. You keep sentences short. Nothing wrong at
all with this. It works well for many purposes.

Personally, I like to vary the short, direct, and active approach with
occasional long, flowing sentences that can add flow to your writing, that can
mix polysyllabic words with plain ones, that can use the passive voice as
freely as the active when it is appropriate for the task at hand, that can
build a succession of thoughts one upon the other in ways that flow naturally
for a reader, that can interpose an arresting pause or two to emphasize a
particular point - for example, by using hyphens to isolate an illustrative
example - and that can bring in parallel elements to help dramatize a point,
whether as a matter of form, or of substance, or of any combination of the
two.

Whatever your style, the structure of your piece ought to be customized to its
content. If it is a simple subject, it can have a simple format (nothing
inherently wrong with the 5-paragraph format if it is not used in a formulaic
way). If it is complex, then it needs to develop its themes with whatever
level of nuance and subtlety may be needed to say something intelligent about
the subject.

You need to be yourself in how you express your thoughts. Ever read a standard
old-fashioned press release. It almost always begins something like this:
"Company X, the world's leading producer of xxx and other market-leading
products . . ." Apparently, whoever writes these things has been taught to
puff the company right up front to give the release maximum impact. For me,
this sort of style has the opposite effect. I read the canned language and I
immediately click off and think, "this piece is going to be of very limited
value to me, if any." And, just as this is true of such press releases, it is
true of any other _artificial_ way that people express themselves in writing.
The artificiality may give you a fill-in-the-blanks way of completing your
writing task but it works against you with the reader. Readers _want_ to be
stimulated in their thinking and, by using custom forms of expression -
whether it be by an apt metaphor, a vivid illustration, an engaging story, or
whatever - you do them a tremendous service by making what you say
interesting. For this purpose, you should put yourself in their shoes and
think, "how would I want to have this explained to me to make it interesting."

But being yourself is more than just ranting about a subject. Good writing
takes hard work and by that I mean far more than putting time into a
particular piece. I mean instead that good writing is the result of a
cumulative effort, often spread over a lifetime, by which you read widely
about many things, learn how to think, write frequently to develop your
skills, gain depth of language skills through significant formal study if you
can, and do any of a number of other things that prepare you to meet your
reader as a craftsman and not as a hack (used in its non-HN meaning, of
course). Yes, this is _very_ hard work. But you will see that it is well worth
the effort. You have a lot to say about interesting things. Well, learn to say
it well.

Other opinions may vary. This is mine. In general, it also seems to be that of
the author of this piece, who put his thoughts well. It is a post worth
reading. For anyone interested, I have put together a few additional thoughts
on what makes for good legal writing (my particular vocation), which is set
forth here:
[http://www.grellas.com/articles.html](http://www.grellas.com/articles.html).

~~~
mcgwiz
Thoughtful comment, but I want to point out that your basis is misleading. His
essential point goes beyond eschewing formula, to specifically recommending
people use a spoken voice style.

The rationale that I infer is that when people sit down to "write", they enter
"writing mode". Writing mode is laden with dogmatic baggage. But the ultimate
goal is to communicate, not perform ritual. And since people communicate
successfully all the time through speech, it makes sense to suggest that when
people write, they don't enter writing mode. Instead, enter "speaking mode"
and simply transcribe their speech.

~~~
jamesbritt
_And since people communicate successfully all the time through speech ..._

Yes, but. Much speech is filled with hedge words, convoluted phrases, and
I'm-still-not-sure-what-point-I-am-making discourse. That stuff needs to go.

There's a fair amount of writing that comes across as if it were literally
transcribed from an off-the-cuff spoken exposition, and it is distracting.

In casual speaking it's OK to say, "At this point in time", or, "Let me
explain", or, "due to the fact", but if you're taking the time to write you
can take the time cut the filler as well.

I much prefer a conversational tone in writing but it works best with some
careful editing.

------
overgard
So here's something I just learned recently: be polarizing.

By that, I don't mean be controversial for controversies sake (that's cheap).
I mean that good writing has a point, and if you have a strong point people
will be polarized by it, and that's actually a good thing. The worst writing I
read (especially from myself) is writing that tries to hedge so it doesn't
offend people. People SHOULD be offended. That's why you wrote the damn thing.
If everyone already agrees, then you're not saying something worthwhile.

~~~
jasonwocky
> If everyone already agrees, then you're not saying something worthwhile.

Plenty of proverbs would disagree.

Oh darnit, you got me.

------
GCA10
Provocative! I write for a living, and I've got two teenage sons learning all
the standard high-school writing rules. I tell them that the rules are like
using glue or nails to make furniture.

It's possible to defy the rules and produce something awesome. But often you
just need to produce something that's reliable, sturdy, useful and quick.
Learn the rules first. Use them most of the time. Break them when you've got a
rare, wonderful reason to do so.

Blogging is the most conversational form of writing out there. The best
bloggers conjure up structures that are so subtle and sophisticated that
everything seems totally free-form. Getting that right consistently is a gift.
Switching into conversation mode 100% of the time and hoping for great results
is like pressing together some notched pieces of wood and hoping for the best.

------
antiterra
It's liberating and exciting when you learn there are tons of established
structural patterns more interesting than five paragraph and you're expected
to use and modify them.

Then you have to relearn the five paragraph essay for the GRE, and it's worse
than the first time.

~~~
munin
the GRE doesn't look for a 5 paragraph essay format, I never use one and I
repeatably score above the 95th percentile.

~~~
hkmurakami
I used the 5 paragraph essay format for both the GRE and GMAT and never got
anything other than perfect scores on them :/

You don't need that structure, but for what they are looking for, it does
often make your life easier.

Then again the essay part is the most pointless part for those pointless
tests.

------
ivan_ah
I recently discovered the "speak, don't write" rule while finishing my thesis
and I it has done wonders for me. I had written all the technical parts of the
thesis but had writers' block writing the introduction. How could you possibly
summarize 200pp of formulas and equations in a few paragraphs? I kept writing
attempts-at-paragraphs then editing each sentence until the paragraph was a
lifeless, unconnected jumble of ideas and facts.

At some point I was so tired that I went for a walk and recorder myself
explaining the intro and, lo and behold, it came out good. After that I acted
as my own secretary and transcribed it and I was done!

For those who want to try this, I recommend you have a little plan before yous
start writing so you can have a high level structure in mind about what you
want to say:

    
    
        point-form plan  --->  speak it ---> transcribe --> final edits

------
adamzerner
_> To become a better writer you have to stop writing and start speaking._

I loved it right up until that point.

The problem with the 5 paragraph essay, is that it's a rule-of-thumb. It's a
good guide, but isn't necessarily appropriate.

People seem like they always want to prescribe 'the rule to follow to do x'.
Their 'rule' ends up being a rule-of-thumb, and then smart people dissect its
inadequacies. I think that's what you did, is you nicely dissected a stupid
rule-of-thumb, but then prescribed an equally stupid one.

There are a lot of flaws in the structure of thought, and that definitely
isn't an _optimal_ way to write an essay. Personally, I like to diagram my
argument out first (how the sub-arguments relate to each other, like a
dependency tree).

~~~
jerf
"The problem with the 5 paragraph essay, is that it's a rule-of-thumb. It's a
good guide, but isn't necessarily appropriate."

The problem with the 5 paragraph essay is that it _isn 't_ a rule of thumb, it
_isn 't_ a good guide, and it is _never_ appropriate. Except _maybe_ as a
brief skeleton to build a student's understanding of longer-form writing on,
to be discarded in the next assignment or two, but to be grading _outgoing
seniors_ from high school on it (and so _rigidly!_ ) is an atrocity.

Try to find one in the wild, one that was never a school assignment (so no
published student homework or anything). Go on. Try it. Find one on HN comment
page. (A different page. I'm sure someone will at some point float a 5P essay
here as a response to be funny... the thought crossed my mind to try to do
this exact criticism in this style, but _ye gods_ is it a worthless style to
communicate in and I didn't feel like sacrificing my point for the meager
humor that would be produced.) Find one in a newspaper or magazine. Find one
in a blog post. Find one in a well-regarded historical work on philosophy. And
remember, it's not just a mere "it has five paragraphs", but a very proscribed
schema that is _at least_ :

    
    
        1. Thesis paragraph, 5 sentences
        2. Support point #1, 5 sentences
        3. Support point #2, 5 sentences
        4. Support point #3, 5 sentences
        5. Restatement of thesis, 5 sentences
    

and in the worst case, every paragraph must _also_ follow that exact form
(topic, supports 1, 2, and 3, restatement of topic).

I won't guarantee you can't. I _will_ guarantee that you will be looking for a
long time.

There is a reason for this.

~~~
nkarpov
I agree that it's a terrible format but why exactly is it a bad format to be
graded on? If you are able to construct a good 5 paragraph essay then you
certainly have demonstrated the ability to make a point, come up with
arguments to support that point, coherently link them together, and finally to
write them down using the language of your choice.

You're right - the format doesn't show up outside of school. And if we were
being bombarded by 5 paragraph essays in the "real world" then we'd certainly
have a lot of justification to this entire thread. But we don't. You just
proved it. So what's the issue here?

~~~
jerf
Unfortunately, while in theory you are correct, in practice it seems to be a
demonstrable fact that many people who can write the 5-paragraph essay and
score very well on such standardized tests can still in fact be incapable of
coherently expressing themselves in any other context. I'm not sure I can
entirely explain it, but the observation is pretty clear. I'd theorize that
it's the same basic story as any other excessively-structured thing we teach
our children; we think they're learning X, when in fact they're just learning
the structure we poured X into.

(See also our math curriculum's ability to convince people that "=" is not
symmetric by the repeated hammering of "1 + 4 = ___"; we think we're teaching
them math and using "equals", they're _learning_ that the "=" symbol means
something more like "simplify and reduce" and that it has a direction. Grab
three random people with the "usual" math education (i.e., not programmers),
and see if they will agree that "1 + 3 = 2 + 2" (you may need to put an
underline under the 2 + 2); I think you'll find a lot of them insist that is
"wrong" and the right hand side "should/must be 4". And that's just one
example.)

------
InclinedPlane
The best thing you can do to become a better writer is learn to edit. Once
you've written something, anything, go back through and make it better. Pick
apart the parts that seem clumsy and figure out ways to say the same thing.
Don't be afraid to completely drop something you've said that you thought was
particularly clever if it doesn't fit. Also don't be afraid to just completely
rewrite a big chunk of stuff, use what you've written as notes and start
rewriting. A good way to start is by trying to make things simpler and more
direct. Think of it like refactoring for writing.

~~~
gtz60
I really like this advice. It reminds me of sculpting. Should you start with a
block and remove what isn't needed? Or is it better to start with nothing, and
slowly build up?

------
ameister14
I think the author misunderstood the lesson his professor was teaching him. He
was told to abandon the structure he knew in favor of content, but that
doesn't mean that structure is inherently valueless or indeed that the 5
paragraph structure is without value.

The structure of writing is not really about ranks or levels. A Pulitzer prize
winner can choose to write a 5 paragraph essay without lowering himself to a
'high school level' of writing. You don't level up in college, you learn a
variety of structures and skills. This doesn't mean that the skills you
developed in high school are lessened. It just means that you have more tools
to choose from, and are probably better at deciding between them.

------
MichaelDickens
The five-paragraph essay isn't structured the way it is because that's a good
structure, but because it's easy to write and grade quickly. The AP graders
don't have time to read thousands of 5+ page essays with myriad layouts and
structures.

~~~
RamiK
Agreed.

Even more so, essays, like the serial novels, are antiquated formats from the
time of letter-writing and paper publishing.

At least the Victorian novels gave way to their readership's desires and moved
to a more concise format. The essays, annoyingly, remain overly wordy as the
academic standards retain their obsoleteness in demanding a set word counts.

Already, the short novels are becoming dominant in the on-line publishing
sites. With any lack, the current tide against the printed humanist\scientific
publishing houses will bare fruit soon and in a decade or two we will be
reading the thesis, facts and analysis rather then the dribble we've become
accustomed to.

Present me your thesis in a sentence and a few bullet points: List the facts;
Lay the arguments; Tie it all up in a paragraph. I don't want long prosaic
discussions or fine poetics.

~~~
ameister14
I totally disagree as regards length; perhaps it's because I read quickly, but
I don't prefer a novella to a novel. Most essays I'm familiar with actually
set a limit on word count, not a floor.

Further, I think it's important for a scientist or philosopher to fully and
completely elucidate his or her point so that any debate over the subject is
based on a complete understanding.

Would you prefer that a study not outline its methodology and full application
of said methodology, and instead simplify by just giving you results? How
would you reproduce it? Would you just blindly start trusting everything
printed?

------
L_Rahman
Writing is the hardest thing I've ever had to do. Once the length of what I
need to write exceeds around a hundred words, it's almost as if my brain stops
working. I'm graduating from college this summer and looking back on it, I'd
go so far as to argue papers were harder than thermodynamics midterms.

What I have going for me is that I'm a pretty good public speaker. The moment
I picture myself behind a podium in front of an audience, ideas organize
themselves into coherent patterns. It's a skill that's been honed over many
weekends of debate practice.

My writing process now looks like this:

1\. Identify thesis 2\. Give a speech 3\. Take bulleted notes 4\. Give the
speech again 5\. Revise bulleted notes 6\. If satisfied with structure begin
expanding bullets into sentences and paragraphs.

~~~
onada
It sounds like you've got a solid form -- for the writing part, it's just
annoying/tedious/takes time to start recording your thoughts as they go.
Writing is a form of thinking, literally, and if you can train yourself to
document your thoughts as you are saying or thinking them, it won't hurt as
much, I promise! Your first draft should always be shit, and then you revise
and rebuild, like you were already doing...

~~~
hythloday
I have the same problem as the person you're responding to, and writing is
_not_ a form of thinking (for me, at least) - generating anything to put onto
the page feels like an insurmountable task. I like the GP's suggestion of
making a speech, I'm likewise much better at vocalizing than writing.

I'm pretty sure there is some underlying difference and it would be good to
know what it is - I was diagnosed with dyslexia when I was 14, which never
really felt like a satisfying answer, though I do have some dyslexic-ish
symptoms (I tend to spell phonetically when I'm very tired and often type
word-correct anagrams - like "never really left like a satisfying answer",
above).

------
onada
It's absolutely liberating to break free from the (very American) 5 paragraph
essay; that's more of a learning tool, really. And you don't need to write a
five paragraph essay on the GRE; I've consistently gotten 97% with my own
versions, and I stopped writing in 5 paragraphs long ago. It's all about
content, synthesis... The 5 paragraph is a start, but we should be taught to
shed it when we're ready!

~~~
jfthiigsegbje
It is taught for a reason though. Having some kind of introduction and thesis
is important. Overly formulaic, etc it is, but understanding what it's
supposed to be teaching is pretty important.

~~~
onada
Totally. I wish that was just the start of the pedagogy, though... It my
beginning comp classes (if I ever have enough time to start teaching again) I
want to teach the five paragraph essay for two weeks, (simple) programming or
technical writing as composition for another two weeks, and other forms of
essay writing (ie. not getting to the final point until the end after a long,
winding description, or a lyrical essay format).

As a side note, poets make great technical writers because they can be so
economic with language. There is something to engage here.

------
Double_Cast

      [1] Reification      vs Abstraction; 
      [2] E-prime          vs Evaluation; 
      [3] Active Voice     vs Passive Voice; 
      [4] Germanic         vs Latin; 
      [5] Specific Diction vs Concatenated Adverbs; 
    

Here's a list of the writing ideas (in no particular order) which I've found
most helpful. Eveything has its time and place. But as a heuristic, left-side
items are better than right-side items. A few explanatory links off the top of
my head:

[1]
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/k7/original_seeing/](http://lesswrong.com/lw/k7/original_seeing/)

[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Prime)

[3]
[http://www.towson.edu/ows/activepass.htm](http://www.towson.edu/ows/activepass.htm)

[4]
[https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm](https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm)

[5] "Adverb are weak. They modify modifiers. Instead, use more specific
verbs." \- my English teacher

~~~
brianzelip
What do you mean by Germanic vs. Latin?

~~~
Double_Cast
[http://www.paulgraham.com/writing44.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/writing44.html)
:

> _use simple, germanic words_

[https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm](https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm)
:

> _The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words
> falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up
> all the details._

pg's essay "Writing, Briefly" mentions it in passing. So I assume that most
HNer's are sorta familiar. The idea is that English words of Germanic
etymology are usually simple, everyday words. E.g. "event, a lot, boring".
English words of Latin etymology are usually flowery, pretentious words. E.g.
"phenomenon, cornucopia, quotidian".

Latin words very abstract and hard to read. They often obscure meaning.
Sometimes, they don't actually have any meaning. Sometimes, they're used as
euphemisms. Germanic words are easier on the eyes and often evoke imagery of
tangible objects.

I added links to my original post, because I realized that a single HN comment
isn't enough to clearly explain my list.

------
caster_cp
Dictating the text is an extraordinary advice! I (still) didn't manage to
build a decent blog, but I do write a lot. When I started to think about the
text as if I were simply going through what I wanted to speak with someone, it
was liberating.

On the other hand, though, I do understand the need to use the five paragraph
structure (or, here in Brazil, the "three sections structure"). I, just as
you, was usually pretty annoyed with these formulaic approaches to text, until
I've had to re-learn all this essay writing stuff for my masters. In my
college, professors and students are pretty close and debate is (really)
stimulated, so I decided to throw my ramblings onto the writing professor (a
very good writer, indeed). I used José Saramago (a portuguese Nobel prize
winner that uses commas as periods, writes giant paragraphs, all the weird
stuff) as my "strong" example, thinking it would shed the formalized structure
argument to pieces and I would rise triumphantly from the talk with a
Portuguese PhD specialized in text analysis. It didn't take me so long to
realize why she had her PhD, and that her point of view was pretty convincing
and, of course, well structured.

Kaboom! And I was illuminated. She agreed with each of my complaints. But then
she proceeded to show me some texts from the beginning of the semester,
comparing them with texts from the end of the semester. They were, in general,
much clearer, concise, straight to the point - in one word, better. She argued
that a course like that was intended to make people that do not write start to
write something intelligible, comprehensible. It was not a course on creative
writing. Therefore, the need for simplified rules and structures.

I do understand that this was the OP's whole point: upon reading his
colleague's text, he judged it based on the rules he had learned. Then, when
he talked to the other teacher, he realized that the main point of a text is
to communicate something, irrespective of the number of paragraphs it has or
the position of the goddamn thesis.

This rambling of mine is just to point to the other side: rules are important
in some specific moments of the development of a proto-writer :)

That happens with all kinds of expressive, communicative actions we humans
perform (in my opinion): photography, painting, music, poetry... All of them
have some (or plenty of)rules. But these rules are not meant to be used as a
"ruler" to judge if a work is good or bad, they are just a compass to guide
the noobs :)

~~~
personlurking
"three sections structure"

Intro, development and conclusion? Será?

------
andrewflnr
The tip about speaking first may be a good one, but it shouldn't be portrayed
as universal. I tend to express myself better through writing, and to be
awkward when speaking. IMO the trick is to drop your inhibitions about writing
crap so you can just get a draft down somehow.

------
jccalhoun
While I totally agree that the 5 paragraph essay format can be restrictive and
is not suited for every situation, I think a good thesis statement in the
first paragraph or two is frequently a good idea. Too often while reading
posts online I often find that I'm most of the way through the post before I
find out what point the author is trying to make. There are cases where
keeping the actual point of the post or story is done as a way of adding
suspense or gaining the reader's interest, it seems like most of the time the
writers of posts like this are rambling or front-loading the piece to such a
degree that it is off-putting and distracts from their message.

~~~
jseliger
_While I totally agree that the 5 paragraph essay format can be restrictive
and is not suited for every situation, I think a good thesis statement in the
first paragraph or two is frequently a good idea_

In many circumstances it is. I wrote an essay that describes the thesis
statement issue: "Paul Graham and not being as right as he could be in 'The
Age of the Essay'" ([https://jseliger.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/paul-graham-
and-no...](https://jseliger.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/paul-graham-and-not-
being-as-right-as-he-could-be-in-the-age-of-the-essay/)).

I've also discovered from teaching college freshmen that having a thesis
statement usually improves the quality of their work product. But experienced
writers working in some genres don't need thesis statements and indeed would
be constrained by them (that's one of pg's points in "The Age of the Essay:"
[http://www.paulgraham.com/essay.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/essay.html)),
and inexperienced writers probably need thesis statements to avoid a document
filled with random thoughts. In this respect thesis statements are like
training wheels.

------
hyp0
I find speaking aloud does result in a better flowing essay.

But I wonder which effects are due to the speaking; and which to how speaking
reminds you that you are trying to communicate to someone, and give them
something of value?

Consider the problem-solving technique of explaining the problem to someone -
which also works well when explaining it to a duck. Would writing a letter to
a duck work as well as telling it? Is the helpfulness inextricably tied to
verbalizing?

~~~
ivan_ah
I agree that keeping the audience in mind is an important aspect of writing,
but for me the relative speed of speaking is the more important aspect.

When I write, I tend to think too much and follow too many of my associations
so the writing process becomes and endless start-and-stop of new ideas with a
"branching factor" of 4-5. I often have to backtrack when I get too off topic.
Think wikipedia browsing binge....

When I speak, I don't have the time to have so associations so the thoughts
become more linear and follow logically one from the other.

Interestingly, I find handwriting (like real pen and paper) can also be good:
in this case the pace is slower than typing, but I have enough time to make
good sentences because my mind has the time to process things in the
background as I'm writing out the words. Think look-ahead optimization...

------
tomblomfield
If the 5-paragraph essay sounds bad, you should take a look at the French
essay-writing style taught in schools and universities. In the first year or
two of elite universities, the structure of the essay is often more important
than the content.

[http://bettizpod.over-blog.com/article-17353773.html](http://bettizpod.over-
blog.com/article-17353773.html)

~~~
thenerdfiles
"The opinion" needs to have a multitude of expressions. Philosophical papers
should be able to re-capitulate the point. _If_ the opinion is expressed
_once_ and _only_ in the introduction, that is a problem — it looks like a
stroke of luck.

Look at Kant's _Groundwork_ or Sidgwick's _Method_ : you have an almost
desperate attempt at finding just the right way and right context in which to
normatively ground a proposition.

Look at Heideggar, look at Nietzsche. Even look at Orwell. The "opinion" is
the "point", and the point has to be teased, flipped, tossed, rejected,
restored, restated. A paper that makes its opinion in one statement is like a
kid in class who accidentally blurts out the right answer.

------
philip1209
I would argue that structured writing with clear organization and simple
diction is the most effective for informing people.

Books like Language Intelligence or manuals of technical writing delve into
the topic fairly well. Watch championship extemporaneous speakers to see how
to create an extended metaphor and build a structured progression of sources
and analysis in a speech.

~~~
thenerdfiles
But a paper about King Lear is not in the business of "informing people". It's
not _informational_ , it's _dialectical_.

------
dmschulman
I like the idea of dictating while on a walk. I use Naturally Speaking to
dictate in the office, but you have to be tied to the computer to do it. As
any freelancer can tell you, getting out of the house really helps the ideas
flow and from a different perspective too

------
brianzelip
> I then email the audio file to have it transcribed by a virtual assistant
> and Booyah!

Do you think he's using "virtual assistant" here as an application, or a human
service? Can anyone recommend one or two examples of each? (Does a software
version exist?)

------
raymondduke
As a copywriter, I know that the better you are at fine writing, the more of a
disadvantage you are in.

When you write to sell, you want the focus to be on the product - not your
smooth talking voice.

Imagine a salesperson using poetry to sell you something. Although it would be
entertaining, it would not help sell the product.

Don't write to entertain. Don't write to make YOU sound better. Write for
THEM.

The problem with academia is it is built around bolstering YOUR ego. In the
real world, having a big ego is counterproductive to working your way up the
ladder. It's like having a broken leg in a marathon.

Don't believe me? Just look at how much trouble people with degrees are
having. They can't find jobs. They don't have social skills. They have big
egos, but can't make money.

And yes, I have a degree. I have a piece of paper that I can tell people I
have. My clients are only mildly interested in the fact that I have one.

~~~
Theodores
Correct - write for them!

The amount of people that can write at the standard people on HN use for a
well thought out comment is low. Very low. This also includes people with
degrees. The vast majority of the population are as articulate with written
language as your average YouTube poster.

Clearly most people can read a higher standard of writing than they can write
themselves, particularly if it is a subject that interests them. If you are
expecting a response on a one to one basis, e.g. an email, then writing at the
top of your craft really might not be the best thing to do. Your well written
feature length English and all of those big words might come across as
intimidating. This factor means you may not get a response. Writing something
simpler, i.e. to not show off one's mastery of the language might get a better
result.

Far too often in academia you have people using big words without really
knowing what they mean, as if they are using the thesaurus a little too often.
Or they use buzzwords and acronyms when simple English will do. It is as if
some people have a false idea of what it is to write properly. They try to
impress but fail. They then enter the world of business and try to write the
same way, caught up in trying to use big words rather than focusing on a
simple message.

So yes, write for THEM. At times, to a wider audience this might mean writing
at a level found in a tabloid newspaper, which is okay if done properly.

------
plg
" I then email the audio file to have it transcribed by a virtual assistant
and Booyah! I have my first draft."

Q: is there software to transcribe instead of sending it to a virtual
assistant (e.g. on the mac?)

~~~
corin_
There definitely is, though how good it is I have no idea. The last one I used
was probably a decade or more ago, I didn't really have a use for it then but
playing with it showed potential (since they learn to adapt to your voice it's
hard to say how good they are without longer use). And I would assume they've
improved considerably since then.

Dragon Dictate is what I tried, and seems to be the biggest name brand in the
area now from what I can see (and has a Mac version) -
[http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nuance-Communications-
Inc-S601X-W00-...](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nuance-Communications-
Inc-S601X-W00-3-0-Dictate/dp/B0095BR602/)

Whether it works well enough to be useful, or if there are better alternatives
than Dragon Dictate, I've no idea.

------
thenerdfiles
Uh. There's

the aphoristic style,

the "5-paragraph" style,

the dialogue,

the trialogue,

the research paper, etc.

A paper should be as simple as necessary, but no simpler. Depending on your
topic, you could have 20 paragraphs, 10 paragraphs. And if what you're writing
is arguably good, length shouldn't matter. At some point in your paper you
should say, "I'm doing a damn fine job here, and my professor should love to
read this."

If you cannot say that, _that_ is a good indication that you should dump the
paper. Not some rigid, lifeless arbitrary numeral. _Numbers are not out to get
you_.

Our education system in the West has done a serious disservice to us by
installing this idea that we should feel bad about making others read what we
write.

It's bloody awful.

~~~
thenerdfiles
There's also the anecdotal/analogical style, the narrative style — of course
you can use any voice you wish to sew multiple styles together.

You should use your topic as a basis for experimenting with different styles,
not as a means to prove your mastery of the language.

 _Papers are not proofs_.

------
michaelochurch
Pardon anyone who thinks I'm taking this off the rails to discuss VC instead
of writing-- you read that right; I don't need a pardon-- but the easy-to-
grade, 5-paragraph stencil essay is a _perfect_ metaphor for the venture-
funded startup: creatively immature, built to impress and fill a templateable
need (funding pitch, acq-hire) rather than to purpose, formulaic and easy to
crank out even on a deadline.

Ok, I won the thread and I'm taking it home with me.

