Most copywriters claim to be able to write anything in any voice; they say that they can ghostwrite for anybody in any piece. There is some validity to it, I guess - good writing is about developing a voice, and it’s important to have some conscious control over it. But I do think that writers taking this approach are missing part of the point. Namely, that each piece of writing, whether it be a blog post, a website page, or even a press release, has a soul and voice of its own.

Yep, it sounds kooky, I’ll admit that. But it’s definitely not a new concept. Any artist, I think, whether it be music, painting, ceramics, screen writing, or even copywriting (GASP!), will tell you the best pieces of art create themselves. That is, that the artists do their best work acting not as much as a creator, but as a conduit, through which the art expresses itself.

I’m not sure if I’d go that far, but the concept still stands: each piece has a voice of its own, and a good part of writing it well is finding that voice, not superimposing a new one. That doesn’t mean, of course, that you should forego the work of your own creative process, put a blindfold on, and just start pounding on the keyboard (I think that’s where a lot of modern art goes wrong). But I think it does mean that while you go through your own writing process, you should view it not as all there is, but as one part of a composition.

You can’t completely control a piece of writing, as much as some people would like to think. Or, that is, you can’t completely control it if you want to produce the best stuff. Sound simple? Good. I’m glad. Best of luck. Sound stupid? Let me know in the comments section.

Some say that presentation is everything. As a writer, working on substance more than looks, I disagree; I think that when it comes to startup websites and startup blogs, there’s a lot to be said for content. But I will concede this: I think writing is helped along by presentation. I see that in my own copywriting work - if a site has a smooth, simple, and well-planned layout, my job is so much easier to do, and to do well. If a site doesn’t have a clear design, it’s hard to form a clear message. Simple as that.

I don’t think it’s just me, either. Take a recent example, my buddy Andrew Hyde. He’s somewhat of a startup celebrity… he’s done some good stuff within the community, and has developed a good following for it. He runs a blog at http://andrewhyde.net, and just launched a new design with it. The old one was alright, but it was a generic template, and frankly, it had a scattered feel - lots of information, not a lot of space. Andrew’s writing reflected it too… he was kinda all-over-the-place (I even hassled him about it in this podcast). The new design, though, is great. And Andrew’s writing has followed along - it’s more refined, more purposeful, and more exciting now. In fact, I think his is one of the best “new” blogs anywhere on the web.

Of course, Andrew has a lot to do with that. But I don’t think there’s any doubt it has a lot to do with the design change too. Simple lesson, then, that I don’t think Andrew would argue with: Better design=Better writing. Remember that.

I’m gonna try and make a point here, so hang with me for a sec. I believe, even insist, that the word should be spelled startup, NOT start-up. And truthfully, it’s sort a sticky argument to make, mostly because the rules about when to use hyphens between fragments are vague; it’s more a matter of common use, rather than about the properties or origin of the words. So basically, it’s up to the masses to decide what sounds best. People seem divided on start-up vs. startup, so I’ll give my case:

First of all, don’t get me wrong, I love the hyphen - it’s a fantastic tool to breakup a sentence (more on that later), and a fantastic word-combining tool when you want to employ two words by themselves, as individual statements, yet associate them to form a singular thought. Like a section of blue sky against a section of green mountain to form the idea of a horizon in a painting, rather than blue mixed with green to form the idea of an ocean. Or a more literal example: eye-opener is (properly) hyphenated because the two words, eye and opener, paint the picture of dramatic understanding on their own, and only need to be loosely associated to intonate their connection. However, on the other hand, eyewitness is (properly) combined into one word because while eye and witness are words on their own, they don’t form a coherent picture on their own… they work only together, united as one thought and one image.

By the same token, start and up may be words on their own, but like eye and witness, they don’t paint a picture on their own; there’s no real artistic value to having them separated. They’re more fragments that come together to form a single word with a single purpose, and thus, I think they should be constructed that way… as one word. Startup. It doesn’t mean the combination of its two words. It means, simply and powerfully, a new company or idea growing out of its infancy.

What’s more, to build the case in other ways, startup preserves the hyphen for times when you need it - between sentence fragments, or between word fragments. It preserves an artistic tool so you can use it when you want to use it, and not overuse it. Plus, as a bonus, I think startup sounds better and looks better than start-up. Putting a hyphen in there takes a smooth, strong and simple word, and turns it into a lurching semi-word with bad timing. And as you know from reading the blog, timing is everything.

So, in the grand scheme of things, there are worse faults than writing start-up. But I think it’s wrong, and what’s more, I think people shouldn’t do it. From now on, I sincerely hope startup becomes the standard. If you could help with that, I’d sure appreciate it. Thanks!