Just speculating here, but I suspect that becoming a good writer comes in two steps. First, you must get from actively bad to neutral. Second, you get from neutral to good.
I have no idea how to do the second part. I think I can advise you on the first, because although the great writers have their unique voices, the bad writers typically keep making the same mistakes. (Trying to do the second part before mastering the first part results in bad writing. You need to get rid of the bad habits first.) This is the first part:
Most importantly, write shortly and to the point. Text can be shortened on multiple levels: sentences contain extra words; articles contain extra sections. Does the meaning of the sentence change substantially if you skip this word? If not, skip it. Would the article still make its intended point without this section? If yes, remove it. (If it breaks your heart, maybe move it to a footnote, or decide to keep it for a follow-up article.)
An example of a section that can be removed is introduction. Instead of “in this article, I will tell you what X is”, simply start by describing X. (Generally, meta goes last, if at all.)
Use simple words rather than complicated ones, if the meaning is the same. Short sentences rather than long ones. Don’t make the text needlessly costly for the reader.
Group sentences to paragraphs (one thought per paragraph), and paragraphs to sections. Makes the text easier to navigate. (Too long text—insert pictures.)
In fiction, I would say: use sensory words. Describe what the characters see or hear or feel, not just their opinions or thoughts. In non-fiction, specific examples are better than abstractions (give examples first, generalize later), and illustrations can help.
Don’t try to impress. That usually backfires. Anything “artistic” or “high-status” probably just sucks, e.g. modern journalism.
If it is possible to explain to a child, do it that way. Your task is to transmit thoughts, not signal your sophistication. Impress by concepts, not by choice of words.
If you use equations, explain what the individual symbols mean. Even mathematicians may not necessarily be familiar with conventions in your branch of math.
(In the second part you go against some of this advice, e.g. you insert jokes even if they are not strictly necessary, you use complicated words as a kind of insider jokes, etc. But the difference is that you only do that on purpose and at the right place, not habitually.)
Just speculating here, but I suspect that becoming a good writer comes in two steps. First, you must get from actively bad to neutral. Second, you get from neutral to good.
I have no idea how to do the second part. I think I can advise you on the first, because although the great writers have their unique voices, the bad writers typically keep making the same mistakes. (Trying to do the second part before mastering the first part results in bad writing. You need to get rid of the bad habits first.) This is the first part:
Most importantly, write shortly and to the point. Text can be shortened on multiple levels: sentences contain extra words; articles contain extra sections. Does the meaning of the sentence change substantially if you skip this word? If not, skip it. Would the article still make its intended point without this section? If yes, remove it. (If it breaks your heart, maybe move it to a footnote, or decide to keep it for a follow-up article.)
An example of a section that can be removed is introduction. Instead of “in this article, I will tell you what X is”, simply start by describing X. (Generally, meta goes last, if at all.)
Use simple words rather than complicated ones, if the meaning is the same. Short sentences rather than long ones. Don’t make the text needlessly costly for the reader.
Group sentences to paragraphs (one thought per paragraph), and paragraphs to sections. Makes the text easier to navigate. (Too long text—insert pictures.)
In fiction, I would say: use sensory words. Describe what the characters see or hear or feel, not just their opinions or thoughts. In non-fiction, specific examples are better than abstractions (give examples first, generalize later), and illustrations can help.
Don’t try to impress. That usually backfires. Anything “artistic” or “high-status” probably just sucks, e.g. modern journalism.
If it is possible to explain to a child, do it that way. Your task is to transmit thoughts, not signal your sophistication. Impress by concepts, not by choice of words.
If you use equations, explain what the individual symbols mean. Even mathematicians may not necessarily be familiar with conventions in your branch of math.
(In the second part you go against some of this advice, e.g. you insert jokes even if they are not strictly necessary, you use complicated words as a kind of insider jokes, etc. But the difference is that you only do that on purpose and at the right place, not habitually.)