I used strong verbs: "studied," "shuffle" (second
I used details (specificity) selectively, according to my focus. My focus was on "Grandfather." I included specifics and concrete nouns, but only subordinated to my focus.
Note that I did not mention other food items, because they would hae marred my focus: Grandfather and Moon Day. The point is, nothing is an end in itself, but is always subordinated to good writing, which includes: focus, subordination, unity, coherence, completeness.
Note that the essay, though short, seems complete. In other words, the reader does not feel (or should not feel) that anything of substance has been left out; because whatever is important to my focus (and my length) has been left in.
Obviously if my length were longer, say ten pages, I would then brainstorm for more details and subordination: descriptions of the family, the backyard, my grandfather, etc. But in terms of my self-imposed limits (several short paragraphs), the reader feels that nothing of importance is missing.
The test is the writer becomes the ideal reader. I ask myself, "Is there anything missing?" My answer is No. The writer, if not skilled enough, may be wrong in his or her answer. Only readers can judge. But this seems to be complete to me.
As for revision, one change I made was to shorten the second version. As I "saw again" my first version, I saw places that were, short as it was, still redundant (repetitious, saying the same thing unnecessarily twice). I shorted the opening. I took out the part about eating cold cuts, because I implied that anyway in my revision.
Other changes were in vocabulary: I replaced "emaciated" with "venous" (vein-lined). Some choices are based on subjective judgment, itself based on wide reading. "Emaciated" sounded too long and cumbersome; "venous" got the job done faster. I added another strong verb, "studied" (compared to just "see"). At the end, I replaced "senile" with "senescent."
Actually, I thought of "senescent" (old) the first time but thought it might be too long a word for a simple essay and typed "senile" instead (like "venous," it was shorter). But "senile" had a too negative connotation (not strong in the head) and changed back to "senescent" (a more neutral word meaning simply "old" or "aging"). Also, the extra "s" sound created a nice sibilance in the final sentence (a final sentence should always be strong): "Grandfather'S Slow SeneScent shuffle beneath an autumn moon on a Still September night."
Note also that I replaced "underneath" with "beneath": again, I prefer shorter words if possible, even if only one syllable shorter.
No comments:
Post a Comment