Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHeadGal
A recent conversation with a colleague went something like this:
Him: "When I edit your work, I'm making it better, not just making stylistic changes."
Me: "But I don't agree you are making it better. You fill it with these affectations I would never write. You do things like bury the subjects of sentences behind long introductory phrases."
Him: "You may be talking about good writing in other fields. This is legal writing."
Is this just a generational problem? In my mind, good writing transcends the professional field. Why do some professions or genres of writing become so firmly entrenched in certain styles and affectations that people who have been using them for years become convinced that their writing is "good" just because the rhetorical style matches the rhetorical style that has been used before?
|
Justice Cardozo would have been a good writer in any field, so your editor is a dufus. The only aspect of legal writing which tends to defy other good writing is the tendency to shy away from elegant variation, as ambiguity is usually a bad thing, but in artistic writing it is often desired.