If you were to tell someone that his or her writing has a “clarity of style” to it, what would you mean by that? Is it supposed to be complimentary?
I’ve gotten that comment as feedback from more than one reader of my fiction, and I can’t quite grasp what they mean. It doesn’t strike me as a positive thing (doesn’t it mean that a piece of writing is simplistic?) but it never has the tone of a criticism either, so I’m puzzled. Is there a way to interpret this statement positively, or is it a back-handed compliment?
Bonus question: If you’d use the phrase in a positive way, what writers would you apply it to?
I would interpret it to mean exactly what it says, that your writing is clear, direct, to-the-point, and so forth.
People often say similar things about my writing. I always take it as a compliment. How could you not? What’s the alternative, “Your writing is muddled and unclear”?
Then again, I write technical documents, design analyses, things like that. I don’t write fiction. But even if I did, I would still take it as a compliment.
Whether you do the same depends on your view of what good writing should be. I think writing is a tool for communicating, and regardless of whether you’re writing a literary classic that schoolchildren will be reading in 300 years or instructions for operating a microwave, the clearer, more direct, and more efficient, the better.
There are two general types of writing; it’s been categorized as “stained glass” and “clear glass.”
A “stained glass” style is one in which the writing is noticeable – filled with images and metaphors that call attention to the ability of the writer to compose fancy prose.
A “clear glass” style (which is what you’re talking about) is unobtrusive and lets the message be understood clearly.
Both have their uses. Both are good writing.
The opposite is “murky” prose, where the reader has trouble figuring out what’s going on. Some “stained glass” prose is a bit murky if you don’t read it carefully, but truly murky writing is impossible for anyone to read.
What you’re suggesting is the equivalent of saying that since all wheeled vehicles are fundamentally for the purpose of hauling stuff from place to place, all wheeled vehicles should be designed to haul as much stuff as possible.
This is obviously ludicrous. The design of a wheeled vehicle needs to correspond to its purpose. The purposes of a sports car, a golf cart, a bus, a lawn mower, and the million other types of wheeled vehicles vary enormously. Their design must also vary in a million ways.
The same can be said for writing. The purpose of literary writing is not efficiency. Efficient prose in the sense you give would not satisfy that purpose. It might actively interfere with the intended purpose.
Clarity of style is not at all the same thing as efficiency of prose. I agree in the main with what Chuck writes, but I’d state it differently. Clarity of style is a style that does not interfere with the reader’s immersion into the writing. Prose can be liquid and evocative but still be clear in that sense. Elizabeth Hand has a beautiful writerly prose style that is still very clear, e.g. In a very different way, Donald Westlake can create hilarious images with prose that is so invisible that it can be read as twice the pace of most other writers.
Neither clarity of prose, nor any other style type, has much meaning unless what you say with it is worth the reading, of course. Whether you accomplish that I can’t say. But I’d use clarity as a compliment.
