Spunk & Bite

[Andrea Emerson]

What's the difference between Pulitzer winners and spunky writers like Seth Godin, A.J. Jacobs and Jen Lancaster? (The spunky ones sell more books.)

Why? Because perfect grammar and sentence construction may still amount to bad writing if it fails to engage and jolt readers awake.

Which is why I've traded my copy of Strunk & White -- the de-facto authority on sensible writing practices -- for a copy of Spunk & Bite, "a writer's guide to bold, contemporary style" by Arthur Plotnik.

Plotnik explains it like this:

"Even bloggers, even Match.com troubadors, must realize that in today's forest an undistinguished post falls soundlessly....language or style that is less engaging, less stimulating than the competition, is, frankly, dead on arrival....if your goal is to break away from the pack, some über force, some jack-rabbit anima has to inhabit your writing."

What do you think? What are some ways you inject personality and spunk into your writing?

[Cindy Dunston Quirk]

I usually take a poke at myself somewhere in the article. I find self-deprecating humor to go over well.

[Elaine Whitesides]

I tend to write best when there is some strong emotion behind what I have to say. Although sometimes I am afraid I will say something I later regret. Oh well. My greatest hope is that the reader sees my writing as simply my voice and hears it in their head as my part of the conversation.

There is also the issue of content. Who in their right mind can make something interesting out of something dull, boring or, ultimately, mind-numbing. Well, the answer to that is a writer who is not in their right mind. A writer who sees it from another angle and sheds light there - be it through humor or irony or sarcasm.

I agree the days of absolute proper English are in the ebb phase. However, I still believe that some rules will never become outdated as writing is communication and clarity is king.

Say what you mean and mean what you say - however you want as long as the message is clear.

Sometimes there is spunk and sometimes there is bite. But there should always be heart in the words.

[Robby Slaughter]

When voicing his opinion on distinctive writing, Plotnik's own voice is painful. That quote, for example, carries four particularly tired clichés. Must writing about writing be so insipid?

I adore a fresh approach to sentence construction and alluring imagery but find no inspiration in ignoring the consensus of grammar. When you know the rules, you can dismiss the rules. Experts may wish to experiment with artistic flourishes, but I am firmly opposed the the amateurization of professional writing.

[Andrea Emerson]

Thanks, everyone, for your feedback.

@Robby - re: "When you know the rules, you can dismiss the rules" -- I love that. You make great points.

[Jeff Bowe]

Engaging writing can push the rules of grammar and mechanics. We don't speak pure and proper English, so writing that reflects speaking can be more entertaining and I have no problem with it. I agree with Cindy that a little self disclosure is also good. What is inappropriate and unacceptable is misspellings which are a too often a function of lack of attention or education.

[John Belden]

I think I echo others when I say, you should KNOW your Strunk & White (and "Eats Shoots and Leaves") before you advance to Spunk & Bite.

Finding ways to make your good writing stand out is not a sin, but no amount of style can make up for lack of substance. Dressing up bad writing in hip garb only makes it worse.