Member-only story
Complexity is No Excuse for Bad Writing
Early in my technical-editing career I sat in a room full of geologists and watched them slowly come to grips with the terribleness of their writing. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t take some satisfaction in the experience. It validated my belief that the inscrutability of bad science writing doesn’t come from the complexity of the subject matter, but instead from the poor quality of the writing.
Bad science writing is just bad writing. Period. The “science” adjective doesn’t change that.
I was sitting in the classroom as an “official” observer for a weeklong training conference. The geologists were all experts in their fields. Great people who were far smarter than I am. They wanted to do well at their jobs, and they treated the training with seriousness and professionalism.
Partway through the second day, the instructor asked for volunteers to read some research they were currently working on. One brave soul raised his hand — eagerly, in fact. I don’t know if the eagerness was eagerness to get constructive feedback or eagerness to show off his work. I just know he seemed very eager.
The eager geologist started out reading with confidence. After a minute or so he verbally stumbled, trying to improvise fixes to his clumsy writing. Then there was a long pause as he stared down with his face screwed-up…
