≡ Menu

Editor Says “Interesting Words” Matter

An average story that is well-written will hold my interest lots longer than a good story that is poorly written. I realize, in making that statement, that I am probably in the minority. Story always trumps technique. Nevertheless, I still find myself reading books with pencil in hand, hunting for new words or creative phrases.

Which is why novelist Merrie Destefano’s recent Interview with Mick Silva, editor for Waterbrook Press, was so illuminating. Take this exchange:

MERRIE: What types of books are you looking for right now?

MICK: I’m looking for round books. Round ones that will fit square holes. If you know what I mean.

MERRIE: I think all my books have been round. Somebody needs to teach me how to write a square book. Actually, could you elaborate a little?

MICK: Yeah, that was fairly obtuse. I like books that use interesting words. Like obtuse. Which means an author with an above average vocabulary. (By the way, Freerice.com is a great place to spend 5 minutes a day to learn new words.) I like unusual books, e.g. round books. If all books are one way, I like the one that’s not. But I need authors who are willing to fit a square hole. That means their glorious words have to be malleable, not sacred, invoked to help the reader, not to manipulate her, and to respect the balance between accommodating to fit the market and designing for widest accessibility.

I can attest that Merrie’s books are round. In a good way. But what I find most interesting here is Mick’s admission that he likes books “that use interesting words.”  Frankly, I cannot remember ever hearing an editor express that. Of course, editors look for “strong writing” and “control of the language.” But what does that mean? I have never heard it distilled into one’s use of “interesting words” or having “an above average vocabulary.”

Of course, the line between using “interesting words” and being overly florid is fine. One book’s assortment of “interesting words” is another’s need for pruning. Which, I’m guessing, Mick meant by “words hav[ing] to be malleable, not sacred, invoked to help the reader, not to manipulate her.” Translation: the use of “interesting words” should be for the reader’s benefit, not the writer’s glory.

So how does this appreciation for “above average vocabulary” square with the “story is king” mantra? I’m not sure it does. Editors will tolerate “average vocabulary” if the story’s good. But does “above average vocabulary” boost interest in an average story? I doubt it.

Either way, as one who obsesses over words and phrases, (and keeps a running file of the same name), Mick’s statement was encouraging. Now, if only I could get over the hurdle of reading good stories that are poorly written…

{ 6 comments… add one }
  • Nicole April 5, 2010, 2:38 PM

    Mick owns the ability to do just as he answered. Articulate and diplomatic, he's one of the good guys in publishing.
    Sometimes it's difficult to find the balance he described. Some writers like to "show off". Others of us tend toward the vernacular in our preferred genre writing.

  • Merrie Destefano April 5, 2010, 4:02 PM

    Mike,
    Thanks so much for mentioning Mick's interview here. I think I fall in the same category you do. I love beautiful language. I don't care if it's in a book, screenplay or accidentally overhead in someone else's conversation. The perfect phrase or image will capture my attention almost immediately. For me personally, I think there's music in beautiful writing and I also think each writer has a different song [voice] that makes their writing unique. I love discovering new writers, partly because I'm always eager to hear their new song.

  • Kathleen April 5, 2010, 8:39 PM

    Tasty fodder for an old farm girl, new to this world. Chewing cud. Thank you.

  • Jay April 5, 2010, 10:58 PM

    I think there should be room for both extremes. I tend toward the more complicated writing but I can understand why people/writers prefer the simpler way. I'm too concerned that I would be insulting my readers' intelligence if I "dumb it down" (to word in negatively) so that it's easier to digest — perhaps I tread too carefully in that regard. I idolize Bradbury in this regard. He was criticized for his sentence structure. That's like complaining that Beethoven isn't the Beatles. Each have their own goals and market.

  • Ame April 6, 2010, 8:37 PM

    i cannot get past a pooly written text … ask my husband … i'll start blurting out, "OMW, the grammar is horrible!" "they can't use punctuation!"

    to find a story, though, that is so expertly written … that the reader is not sidelined by either grammar or punctuation or poor choices of words or spelling … and is able to be drawn into the story – that's priceless. the story blends into me, and i become entranced … rather than having to continuously hold it away from me to decipher the poorly written text.

Leave a Reply