Category — Uncategorized

a famous writer, I can’t remember who at this point, once advised that you stop writing — either for a break or for the day — not at the end of a thought, but in the middle. the idea is that it’ll still be there when you get back (despite your fears otherwise), and when you do get back to it, you’ll start in the middle of something. no staring at a blank screen wondering what to do next, and no writers block. just the continuation of flow, and even from session-to-session and day-to-day, a good rhythm.

why am I passing this along? not just because I think it’s good advice, but because I think it highlights a point about good copy: you need rhythm. all good speeches have it. all good comedy has it. all good poetry has it. all good novels, even, if they’re well-edited, have it. and more than anything, all good copy needs to have it. rhythm.

rhythm isn’t just about saying the rights things, it’s about saying them in the right order (and at the right time). it’s about communicating ideas in an easy, effortless, and attractive way. get it wrong, and the reader has to work for what you’re communicating (if they understand it at all). get it right, and the reader not only effortlessly receives your point, but gets it with the thrill that only great communication and understanding can bring.

in other words, good rhythm not only helps someone understand your idea, it helps them become an advocate of it. for startups, new tech startups especially, that’s important.

most writers (and most hacks, for that matter), are taught to use powerful words. words that wow the reader. words that are beautiful, and replace other, less desirable (and presumably) less effective words. one example: love replaces like. simple enough, and used enough, especially when you read poetry (or novels, for that matter).

but here’s the rub. in copy, we aren’t shooting for beauty; we’re shooting for effectiveness (they’re not the same thing, though they’re often synonymous). we aren’t trying to wow the reader; we’re trying to be honest. many times, in this case, the “less powerful” word (though that distinction is obviously pretty fucked), is more effective. take an intro paragraph for example, and the love v. like comparison. “we’d love for you to look around the site” sounds disingenuous to me. it sounds whimsical, idealistic, and fake. “We’d like you to look around” sounds better. it sounds real… like the real people behind the site actually mean it. the word like may be less powerful, but when honesty outflanks beauty, like outflanks love.

make sense? if not, here it is simply: for effective copy, dial down your vocabularly. write like you’d talk. to a friend.