[Industrialblog,
November 15, 2003]
Editorial trade secret: Add two subheads and a pull quote
Here is a cool little article where a writer, in love with reading, mistakenly believes readers love reading. Most don't.
To quote a professor from college, "Most readers are dull and lazy and need to be shaken up a bit." Oh, quoth I. Never occurred to me to say, "For what purpose."
Somewhat roundabout introduction
But I read two of the guys' novels (read this one if you're in a very patient mood) and took a semester long course with him, so I'm pretty sure I know the answer.
Readers don't pay attention to what they read and what they observe and what they think. They don't think about their thinking, or their interactions. They live automatically and thus are subject to forces that act on them, instead of acting purposefully with as much knowledge as possible. And they miss the beautiful details of life.
Subheads would just encourage skimming and thus would waste readers' time when they should be challenged. The key is not just communication through content, but communication by forcing a behavior change through form. That's how you really reinforce the lesson.
Nearly shi*canned
By the way, I was nearly fired in a publishing company for proffering this argument. You see, I argued that our job as business newsletter writers wasn't just to offer sound business advice, news and case studies — but to write these in such a way as to force our readers to think more critically, more carefully, by not making the information or the lessons easy to glean.
Irony, ambiguity, subversion — these I argued were the keys to good writing and producing good readers. You see, a true writer is one who produces the reader he wants.
No dice, quick read or perish, punk
My boss was not amused. He'd been to grad school himself, explained that everything I think I knew everyone else around here knew better, and so did our readers. They just want quick information and they'll do serious reading on their own time.
Fair enough, I thought. Then it hit me, oh but wait ...
Excuse this tangent
There's another theory, too. Another author of reader-friendly novels suggested that reading is difficult to begin with, and it's complicated by the fact that people have to try to understand what someone else wrote without any kind of verbal cues. (The novel to read is here.)
Subheads help readers skim a story, reinforces critical ideas and prepares the reader's expectations. As a third writer, but the second with whom I've studied said, writing well is a question of anticipating readers' expectations and then surprising them, not confusing them. (The novel to read is here, but don't blame me if you stop reading halfway through.)
And readers like writers who help them. And business owners pay writers who readers like. Who doesn't want to get paid?
Prepares writers, too
Another key: Subheads help writers organize their thoughts. They force the writer to think out an outline, and then you can tweak the outline, rather than repeatedly rewriting the story.
Oh, but I was on an anecdote.
Slap, slap, slap
Then it hit me. I'm gonna get fired if I don't get off my pretentious literary high-horse and write clearly.
And then it really hit me. Subheads were the key. Headlines, kickers, subheads, pull quotes. I could build the entire story on these, and just write copy to fill in the remaining space.
Of course, to get everything to fit, I had to leave some stuff out. Then it hit me. Slap, slap, slap.
Instead of spending time explaining things, I'd stop explaining altogether. Instead, I'd just hint at things that I implied the reader already knew.
It worked. Before you knew it, I was barely writing any content at all and my bosses thought I was doing great!
Bonus quiz question: In the phrase "Then it hit me," what does "it" stand for?
What about the two subheads and the pull quote?
We had a feature in our newsletters that was really short, probably 250 words. Someone suggested that you really needed two subheads and a pull quote to properly write this feature. So I tried. Turned in the copy with two subheads, a pull quote, and about 100 words.
Result: My boss nearly fired me. "You idiot!" he screamed. "These stories are short enough without your cutting all the copy out. Who the hell hired you?"
I ducked and covered, and thus survived, but just barely. There were bullet holes on the wall behind me.
Happy ending: Thank you, subheads
It all worked out in the end, somehow. Just lucky, I guess. Worked there another six years. And I owe it all to my friend, the subhead.
Source: Somewhat faulty memory.
To quote a professor from college, "Most readers are dull and lazy and need to be shaken up a bit." Oh, quoth I. Never occurred to me to say, "For what purpose."
Somewhat roundabout introduction
But I read two of the guys' novels (read this one if you're in a very patient mood) and took a semester long course with him, so I'm pretty sure I know the answer.
Readers don't pay attention to what they read and what they observe and what they think. They don't think about their thinking, or their interactions. They live automatically and thus are subject to forces that act on them, instead of acting purposefully with as much knowledge as possible. And they miss the beautiful details of life.
Subheads would just encourage skimming and thus would waste readers' time when they should be challenged. The key is not just communication through content, but communication by forcing a behavior change through form. That's how you really reinforce the lesson.
Nearly shi*canned
By the way, I was nearly fired in a publishing company for proffering this argument. You see, I argued that our job as business newsletter writers wasn't just to offer sound business advice, news and case studies — but to write these in such a way as to force our readers to think more critically, more carefully, by not making the information or the lessons easy to glean.
Irony, ambiguity, subversion — these I argued were the keys to good writing and producing good readers. You see, a true writer is one who produces the reader he wants.
No dice, quick read or perish, punk
My boss was not amused. He'd been to grad school himself, explained that everything I think I knew everyone else around here knew better, and so did our readers. They just want quick information and they'll do serious reading on their own time.
Fair enough, I thought. Then it hit me, oh but wait ...
Excuse this tangent
There's another theory, too. Another author of reader-friendly novels suggested that reading is difficult to begin with, and it's complicated by the fact that people have to try to understand what someone else wrote without any kind of verbal cues. (The novel to read is here.)
Subheads help readers skim a story, reinforces critical ideas and prepares the reader's expectations. As a third writer, but the second with whom I've studied said, writing well is a question of anticipating readers' expectations and then surprising them, not confusing them. (The novel to read is here, but don't blame me if you stop reading halfway through.)
And readers like writers who help them. And business owners pay writers who readers like. Who doesn't want to get paid?
Prepares writers, too
Another key: Subheads help writers organize their thoughts. They force the writer to think out an outline, and then you can tweak the outline, rather than repeatedly rewriting the story.
Oh, but I was on an anecdote.
Slap, slap, slap
Then it hit me. I'm gonna get fired if I don't get off my pretentious literary high-horse and write clearly.
And then it really hit me. Subheads were the key. Headlines, kickers, subheads, pull quotes. I could build the entire story on these, and just write copy to fill in the remaining space.
Of course, to get everything to fit, I had to leave some stuff out. Then it hit me. Slap, slap, slap.
Instead of spending time explaining things, I'd stop explaining altogether. Instead, I'd just hint at things that I implied the reader already knew.
It worked. Before you knew it, I was barely writing any content at all and my bosses thought I was doing great!
Bonus quiz question: In the phrase "Then it hit me," what does "it" stand for?
What about the two subheads and the pull quote?
We had a feature in our newsletters that was really short, probably 250 words. Someone suggested that you really needed two subheads and a pull quote to properly write this feature. So I tried. Turned in the copy with two subheads, a pull quote, and about 100 words.
Result: My boss nearly fired me. "You idiot!" he screamed. "These stories are short enough without your cutting all the copy out. Who the hell hired you?"
I ducked and covered, and thus survived, but just barely. There were bullet holes on the wall behind me.
Happy ending: Thank you, subheads
It all worked out in the end, somehow. Just lucky, I guess. Worked there another six years. And I owe it all to my friend, the subhead.
Source: Somewhat faulty memory.
The function of subheads has always been typographical -- subheads prevent magazine, newspaper and now Web pages from getting too grey and intimidating readers. Books don't have to worry about excessive greyness as much. That's why you see subheads in them less often.
Fiction writers haven't used subheads as much, but two examples come to mind of chapter headings being used as subheads: V. by Thomas Pynchon and Miss Lonelyhearts by Nathaniel West. In both cases, the chapter headings create a feel of the novel-as-comic-book, taking the serious events of the novel and making them seem packaged and artificial. A third example, If on a Winter's Night a Traveler by Italo Calvino, uses the chapter headings (similar to how subheads can be used) to create a poem.
Limits of subheads? Like any other device, really limited only by the author's imagination. No reason one couldn't write an entire story in subheads that contradicts or reacts ironically with the copy. Or they can be used to clarify and to assist skimming.