{"id":7123,"date":"2025-12-02T17:32:37","date_gmt":"2025-12-02T17:32:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/josephrauch.com\/therauchreview\/?p=7123"},"modified":"2025-12-02T17:32:37","modified_gmt":"2025-12-02T17:32:37","slug":"what-is-good-writing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/josephrauch.com\/therauchreview\/articles\/what-is-good-writing\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Good Writing? \u2014 The Beauty of Effort"},"content":{"rendered":"

When attempting to evaluate writing quality, many of us tend to focus only on subjective measures. What we enjoy is \u201cgood.\u201d What we don\u2019t enjoy is \u201cbad.\u201d<\/p>\n

Dig through these subjective layers, however, and you will discover a foundation of objective quality. Even if we are incapable of being 100% objective in our analysis, there is value in the pursuit of objectivity.<\/p>\n

Eleanor Jones, a freelance writer<\/a>, told The Rauch Review, \u201cI can see this even in books I haven’t enjoyed. For example, Sally Rooney’s \u2018Conversations with Friends\u2019 uses simple prose to evoke certain emotions and reflections. I can appreciate that the novel is of good-quality, even if it’s not something I enjoyed myself.\u201d<\/p>\n

If not enjoyment, what exactly defines good writing? Jones touched on these qualities, and we\u2019re about to go deeper.<\/p>\n

What is Good Writing? \u2014 Effort is the Root<\/h2>\n

Generally speaking, we can agree that effortful writing tends to be better than lazy writing. Thoughtfulness, for example, is a form of effort. When writers care deeply about reaching the peak of their quality potential, the signs of their effort will shine through in the text.<\/p>\n

A thoughtful writer will hire editors.<\/p>\n

A thoughtful writer will edit their own work several times.<\/p>\n

A thoughtful writer will take in feedback and improve.<\/p>\n

Good writing is also about the absence of bad writing, which is easier to define. Bad writing is hard for the intended audience to read, boring, overly self-indulgent.<\/p>\n

Effort is about the facilitation of good writing and the elimination of bad writing. Talent helps, but almost anyone can put in the effort.<\/p>\n

8 Qualities of Good Writing: The Fruits of Effort<\/h2>\n

Our book reviews stress a version of the three Cs philosophy on good writing:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Compelling<\/li>\n
  2. Clear<\/li>\n
  3. Concise<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Most articles on good writing include a discussion of three Cs or something similar. We will be including the three Cs in this article, but we wanted to start with advice that is less common and, therefore, should be more valuable.<\/p>\n

    This section is about writing guidelines that apply to all forms of writing: journalism, content writing, copywriting, technical writing, etc. Below we have a shorter section on philosophy that applies only to long-form writing.<\/p>\n

    1. Alignment of Content, Style and Audience<\/h3>\n

    It takes time and effort to consider what an audience wants and then write for them successfully. When reading a good article or story, most readers will feel served: informed, enlightened, delighted.<\/p>\n

    With this article, I am trying to write for other writers, readers and critics who are also debating good writing. As I\u2019m writing, I\u2019m constantly thinking about how I can serve the people within this audience. Because the piece\u2019s main purpose is to be helpful, I\u2019m not going into tangents, even ones that might be entertaining.<\/p>\n

    2. Repetition That is Balanced and Intentional<\/h3>\n

    Bad repetition happens by accident, both at the line level and larger structure. Editors notice bad repetition. Readers notice really<\/em> bad repetition.<\/p>\n

    Some degree of unintentional repetition is inevitable and difficult to control. As I\u2019m writing this article, I know I\u2019m going to use the word, \u201cto,\u201d many times. I\u2019m not planning out every \u201cto.\u201d The rules of English dictate that the word is necessary in many types of sentences. This type of repetition is neutral, neither good nor bad.<\/p>\n

    For the vast majority of words, however, there are relatively easy ways to manage usage and employ deliberate repetition at the line level. Spacing, frequency and placement are the crucial factors in balancing and conveying this technique to readers.<\/p>\n

    While writing this article, I\u2019m looking back at words I\u2019ve repeated, especially at the beginning and end of sentences. In the previous sentence, I wrote, \u201cWhile writing this article,\u201d because I didn\u2019t want to repeat \u201cAs I\u2019m writing\u201d from a previous paragraph. I might later feel comfortable repeating \u201cAs I\u2019m writing\u201d because there will be more space between instances. Even if the article ends up being long and providing plenty of space, I would limit the instances of \u201cAs I\u2019m writing\u201d to two.<\/p>\n

    I am also avoiding the excessive repetition of certain types of sentences and punctuation marks. Too many long or short sentences in quick succession can create a stale experience. With the exception of periods, punctuation marks lose power the more they are read. At this point in my draft writing, I have written two em dashes and one colon. I don\u2019t think I\u2019ll be writing another em dash. Perhaps one more colon would be OK.<\/p>\n

    Earlier in this piece I wrote three consecutive sentences that started with \u201cA thoughtful writer will\u2026\u201d My hope is that this deliberate, rhythmic repetition will resonate with readers, that the declarations will gently echo in their minds as they continue.<\/p>\n

    3. Claim Attribution and Accuracy<\/h3>\n

    Not every claim merits attribution. If I declare that 2+2=4, I doubt you\u2019ll find value in me linking to a web page that shows my work.<\/p>\n

    For claims that can be debated, attribution is a marker of due diligence and journalism. As much as possible, writers should be providing links and\/or footnotes for statistics, news citations, dates, quotes and educational resources.<\/p>\n

    But providing the attribution isn\u2019t enough. Good writing means vetting these sources. Are they accurate? Have you compared sources?<\/p>\n

    4. Attempts at Originality<\/h3>\n

    It\u2019s impossible for every aspect of a piece to be original. It is possible, however, for at least one aspect to be original. Two books may have the same broad story idea, but their characters are totally different. Two articles may cover the same piece of news, but one reporter has a different source. Readers can see efforts at being original.<\/p>\n

    5. Consumer Ratings?<\/h3>\n

    Consumer ratings are a tricky metric. Rather than attempting our objectivity approach, people often rate written content based on what they like. On the other hand, effort increases the chance of content aligning with an audience\u2019s preferences.<\/p>\n

    Take consumer and critic ratings with a grain of salt. Remember that your opinion matters, too.<\/p>\n

    6. Is It Compelling?<\/h3>\n

    The first of our three Cs, of course good writing needs to make people feel something, to care about what\u2019s happening. Are there stakes? Will readers get something out of reading?<\/p>\n

    7. Clarity<\/h3>\n

    If the intended audience can\u2019t understand a piece at the line or structural level, it\u2019s not good.<\/p>\n

    8. Concise<\/h3>\n

    What are the essential beats of conveying information or telling a story? How much fluff is acceptable beyond those essentials?<\/p>\n

    Being concise is different from being short. A 1,000-page book could be concise if every scene is essential for developing the necessary plot and characters. A novella may have fluffy passages that describe a setting ad nauseam. What is essential, and what is too compelling to omit? Put yourself in the intended reader\u2019s shoes and think about what they need to know.<\/p>\n

    Good Writing Guidelines for Long-Form Mediums: Character Development and Story Structure<\/h2>\n

    In many types of short-form writing, character development and story structure are not present. Take the McDonald\u2019s tagline, \u201cI\u2019m lovin\u2019 it.\u201d This piece of short-form copywriting doesn\u2019t have characters or a story. Still, we can agree the text is effective because we remember it, and it embodies many of the good writing qualities I mentioned in the previous section of this article.<\/p>\n

    When you read an appliance manual that is clear and easy to use, you\u2019re experiencing high-quality technical writing. Only the instructions are necessary. Characters and a narrative would not define the fundamentals of good technical writing.<\/p>\n

    Poetry<\/a> is another medium that can feel high-quality without characters or story. When our poetry editor reviewed our short poem, \u201cslit light<\/a>,\u201d she didn\u2019t scan for character development and story structure. With poetry, there isn\u2019t necessarily an expectation for these elements, especially for short poems. Instead our editor evaluated prose, line structure and rhetoric.<\/p>\n

    Longer text usually means more expectation of characters and stories. Despite some readers thinking of these features as exclusive to fiction, most long-form prose formats can and should include character arcs and\/or a narrative. Creative nonfiction, journalism and content writers may not have the power to imagine whatever they like, but they can structure facts to tell a story. In a memoir, the real-life narrator is a character. When journalists report on people, they can illustrate how their subjects are changing.<\/p>\n

    With short-form and long-form fiction, standards are higher because authors have the power to make anything happen. A disappointing ending can be edited. Plot holes can be filled. Characters can be eliminated or fleshed out more deeply.<\/p>\n

    Now that we have this context in mind, let\u2019s try to objectively define good writing for character development and plot.<\/p>\n

    What is Good Character Writing?<\/h3>\n

    A reasonable consumer expects character writing depth to be proportional to featured time and cast size. In a story with only two main characters, each should be fleshed out in a way that covers our below criteria. For a story with a large cast, it\u2019s OK and perhaps preferred for minor characters to exist solely for background, plot function and dialogue.<\/p>\n

    With a well-developed character, consumers should have a clear understanding of these points by the end of a story:<\/p>\n