July 15th, 2020

Editing For Theme: Search-and-Employ

By Barbara Linn Probst

The characters are fresh, the scenes are full of tension, and the story has come to a satisfying resolution. One step remains before you declare: Done. It’s that final check. You click on the little magnifying glass in the top right-hand corner of the page and search for over-used words.

Your mission: to find and eliminate.

You’re on the hunt for those unnecessary qualifiers (started to, seemed to, began to), attempts to create urgency (all of a sudden, just then), clichés, and personal pets.

“Personal pets” vary and thus can’t be found on a website. (That’s what makes them personal.) For me, they’re all those shrugs and nods and sighs—the lifting of shoulders and eyebrows, tightening of lips, dipping of chins, narrowing and widening of eyes—and any phrase that includes the word breath or pulse.

Your list may be different, but you have one. We all do.

“Search and destroy” will make your writing cleaner and more professional. However, that may not always be the right strategy.

When “Often-Used” Might Be Okay

There are times when an often-used word might not be an over-used word— its frequency signaling, instead, a recurring motif with hidden possibilities.

For example: When I was putting my novel Queen of the Owls through the search-and-destroy process, I discovered that I’d used the word hair much more often than I’d thought. Instead of assuming that this was something to be fixed (meaning: get rid of it). I took another look at when and where the word appeared.

To my surprise, it was rarely just a description of someone’s appearance. Rather, hair always signified something, revealed something about a character. Hair pulled back or allowed to tumble freely. A lopsided haircut or a perfect French twist. Brand-new glittering highlights, indicating a change (and a risk) for my bookworm protagonist.

I realized that hair played an evocative, symbolic role in my protagonist’s journey.

Instead of eliminating or reducing references to hair, I decided to make them more intentional. Precisely because it was a highly-used word, hair could serve as a shorthand for important story elements of constriction and freedom that had more power through a proxy like hair than they would have had if they were explicitly named. The references to hair allowed the reader to feel what I was trying to convey.  A classic show, don’t tell.

Search-and-Destroy vs Search-and-Employ

I wondered which of my other pets might offer a similar possibility. Could there be an untapped role for nod, shrug, gaze, stare, lift? Was there a way to view them as allies rather than weeds?

It struck me that shrug and nod—prime candidates for many search-and-destroy missions—are gestures that tend to occur during conversation, nonverbal indicators of a character’s response. They mean something.

Jane nodded. Again. “Why are you always agreeing with me?” Ellen snapped. “Instead of saying how you actually feel.” 

Jane’s nod and Ellen’s response show us their relationship. The next time Jane nods, we’ll feel the frustration that Ellen feels and be ready for something new to happen.

Dan shrugged. “No,” Carolyn said. “Don’t brush me off like that. Not this time.”

Dan’s shrug shows his indifference, revealing the power dynamic in the relationship. Carolyn’s response shows that she’s about to challenge that.

The scene requires Dan’s shrug; eliminating it would change or weaken the impact. But perhaps Dan can examine the edge of his cuff or mutter “whatever.” Or Carolyn can react to his shrug, even though it’s not on the page. “Stop doing that thing with your shoulder.” The gesture can— and should—remain, even if it’s not named. Destroy would be the wrong response. Embody, maybe. Or indicate.

So far so good, but what about those classic “search and destroy” words like totally, just, only, really, suddenly, started to, seemed to—words that are serve no real purpose?

Clearly, not every often-used word or phrase is a hidden gem. Some really do need to be used sparingly or eliminated altogether. A ban on suddenly, all at once, just then, seemed to, started to, and began to seldom has a down-side. The phrases nearly always make writing weaker rather than stronger. A good “test” is to take the words out and see if the sentence still works.

In other cases, the problem is simply excessive use. Unlike the dead-weight of started to, these are perfectly good words (like shrug) whose “problem” is that they’re used too often, thus diluting their effect.

If that’s the case, the solution is to find equivalents or near-equivalents; this creates not only variety, but nuance and precision. The test is to try synonyms or related words and see how they affect the meaning of the passage.

Some words and phrases can go either way—best eliminated or best enhanced— depending on the context. 

Context Matters

Okay. So how can you decide?

One guideline is the presence of a specific referent. My personal demons— raised eyebrows, tightened lips, tilted heads—have proven useful when assigned specific roles, rather than used indiscriminately.

If a tilted head is the signature trait of one particular character, or occurs only when a specific emotion is being conveyed (such as skepticism or doubt), then it becomes intentional rather than generic. The author is in control of the phrase, instead of the other way around.

Another guideline is the phrase’s capacity for evocative economy. Tightened lips can be a concise way to remind the reader of things she already knows about the character or the relationship among the characters. By using a phrase the reader is familiar with an entire history is quickly evoked, without interrupting the story movement. The fact that the phrase has been used several times before is an asset, not a liability. 

Let’s make this post actionable!

Identify some high-frequency words and phrases in your manuscript and ask yourself if you need to destroy or employ:

  • Which are dead weight and ought to go?
  • Which would deliver more punch and precision if variations were used?
  • Which have untapped evocative potential precisely because they recur?

We can't wait to read your answers in the comments!

*  *  *  *  *  *

About Barbara

Barbara Linn Probst is a writer of both fiction and non-fiction, living on a historic dirt road in New York’s Hudson Valley. Her debut novel, Queen of the Owls (April 2020), is the powerful story of a woman’s search for wholeness, framed around the art and life of iconic American painter Georgia O’Keeffe.

Endorsed by best-selling authors such as Christina Baker Kline and Caroline Leavitt, Queen of the Owls was selected as one of the 20 most anticipated books of 2020 by Working Mother, one of the best Spring fiction books by Parade Magazine, and a debut novel “too good to ignore” by Bustle. It was also featured in lists compiled by Pop Sugar and Entertainment Weekly, among others. It won the bronze medal for popular fiction from the Independent Publishers Association, placed first runner-up in general fiction for the Eric Hoffer Award, and was short-listed for both the First Horizon and the $2500 Grand Prize. Barbara’s book-related article, “Naked: Being Seen is Terrifying but Liberating,” appeared in Ms. Magazine on May 27.

Barbara is also the author of the groundbreaking book on nurturing out-of-the-box children, When The Labels Don't Fit. She has a PhD in clinical social work, blogs for several award-winning sites for writers, and is a serious amateur pianist. Her second book releases in April 2021. To learn more about Barbara and her work,  please see http://www.barbaralinnprobst.com/

20 responses to “Editing For Theme: Search-and-Employ”

  1. Miffie says:

    Thanks, Barbara! I’m glad to see a fresh perspective on this. I love the idea of the targeted ‘untapped evocative potential’ of certain otherwise overused words. Great post!

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      I'm so glad! Every good rule has its inverse, no? Not all "frequently used words" are to be destroyed. I think the challenge is to discriminate between those that don't evoke anything and are just habits, and those that have "untapped evocative potential." I'd love to know what new gems you discover in your own writing!

  2. Jenny Hansen says:

    Thanks for this post Barbara. I really feel like that edit after the first draft is when you find out what the real theme is and can really unearth what your subconscious knew all along. It's one of the most exciting times, isn't it?

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      I'm SO with you, Jenny, about getting in touch with what your subconscious mind is up to! It's as if it does its work while you're busy with other things (arcs, plot points, etc) but then when you go back and connect the conscious brain and the unconscious brain, so many wonderful things come to the surface! And yes, there are different points in the process when different lenses are needed. Thanks so much for enriching the conversation!

  3. John Peragine says:

    Doing sweeping cuts of words is never a good idea- I go through on a word to word basis. Much gets cut but not all.

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      I agree, John! Sometimes a "rule" will indicate that a particular word is over-used in the manuscript, but when I really look at the context, it isn't because each instance is purposeful and no other word will do. As you say, it's a case-by-case thing. Many darlings have to die, but not all!

  4. Thank you for this post. I'd adopted this attitude, but it wasn't as conscious as it should have been. Now I'm in a place of understanding. I do use signature traits, the act of wielding words with purpose rather than using them as non-verbal filler. In a recent short story, a character utilized the head tilt as would a spider examine a fly. When I recognized how creepy it was I built on it and my protagonist reacted in kind. Thanks to this post, though, I'll more carefully consider my other overused words. I do have a justified (I hope) use for certain words (just, only, really). I write in Deep 3rd, thus the narrative reflects the character. One main character avoids such words, but the other is an imaginative and excitable fifteen year-old girl. I often sprinkle them into her narrative at particular times.

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      I love how thoughtfully you've considered this! As you imply, we can't lump all often-used words into a single category. Some tend to be extraneous (e.g., really, just) while some are essential indicators of mood, personality, etc. The first time your creepy character tilts his head, there's probably a lot of context and detail so the reader gets what that gesture indicates. Later, you only need to mention it for us to shiver!

  5. barbdelong says:

    Thanks for this post, Barbara! I immediately pounced on your word "hair," because I realized that hair is mentioned throughout my story and has a direct correlation to both my main protagonists' characters. I'm editing my first draft and will pay close attention to how and where I talk about their hair so I'm intentional, as well as other oft-used words I would normally search for. I love it when a blog hits me square in the eye.

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      Oh, that makes me so happy! As Jenny and I were saying (above), sometimes an often-used word is part-intentional, part-intuitive (and of course the intuitive brain can be very smart). But then we go back with that conscious mind to check each instance to make sure it's not too frequent, is always purposeful and well-timed. I think there are words that many of us tend to over-use (realized, turned, only, not to mention all those pounding hearts and racing pulses) that may need to be cut back. But there are also story-specific words whose "overuse" works! So glad the post hit home for you!

  6. Rick George says:

    Haha--just did a "began to" search in my 300-page manuscript, found eight instances, eliminated five. I'm beginning to thank you for the reminder.

    • Jenny Hansen says:

      I totally use that one, Rick. Laura Drake is the one who trained me out of it. Began to, started to, going to...she convinced me to let the character just DO.

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      Only five? Not bad! I always find a lot of "started to" and "turned to" and "realized that," which of course add nothing. As always, Laura Drake is spot on! And I have a personal tendency to have characters who nod, shake heads, frown, smile, and shrug. So I think there are some tics that a lot of us have and others that are personal pets! My list keeps growing, unfortunately 🙂

  7. Jenny Hansen says:

    Barbara, you might want to take a pass from the top because I approved a few comments. 🙂

  8. dholcomb1 says:

    Some great points here.

    denise

  9. I took you up on your suggestion, Barbara.

    "Begin to" - only a few in my 83,000 manuscript. Ha! See how good I am?

    "Started to" - oops. A few more (dozen) there.

    "Just" - holy moly. I'm aware that it's an overused word, and I tried to avoid it, but it's just so, y'know, easy to use.

    Now my 82,000 ms will be much simpler for my next search and employ. Thanks!

    • barbaralinnprobst says:

      We all have our own pets! Now I double-dare you to see if we share some others: turned, stare, felt like, seemed to ... oh, I could go on and on!

  10. A tip: after I have almost everything written, polished, listened to, and in what I consider final form, I run it through AutoCrit - and all of the counting it does for me. Duplicate words. Overused words. Two-, three-, and four-word phrases repeated (ouch - unless deliberate). Unusual words. Cliches. Generic words. My own personal word list.

    Each and every one of these gets put through a wringer: Context. Intent. The possibility of synonyms, and a consideration of nuance. Number of repetitions. Whether the repetition is by accident or design.

    In other words, everything that has bitten me before.

    This is my reason for having a lifetime membership - my brain is tired more than lazy all the time due to chronic illness and disability, so I let it serve up the most convenient word WHEN WRITING. But I'm not going to let them stand - not without a raze-to-the-ground fight.

    Because my readers deserve the best I can provide on the LANGUAGE side of the writing.

    This takes a fair amount of time per scene, but I think of it as the best investment of that time I can make, because the final product is improved in so many ways. I look for strong verbs instead of verb + adverb combinations, better nouns instead of modified nouns, and also places where I can do what you mentioned, reinforce a motif or thread I want to keep.

    And I don't have to count or do the time-consuming searches because AC is merciless.

    Last tip: after the scene is polished through this process, I put it through several of the steps one final time - because I have had the experience of working on synonyms and nuance, and finding out that to reduce the count of one way of saying things, I have increased the count of another!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


2014-2020

Subscribe to WITS

Archives