Student Writing Tip #2: Exclamation Marks

 

frog surprise

Though it is true that even the most information-laden pieces need energy, that energy should come from words, not punctuation.  Just as a human being cannot live well in a perpetual state of excitement, few writing pieces bear up well under a constant stream of commands by the author to be excited or surprised. Readers soon weary of the ubiquitous exclamation so that eventually it loses its power and simply becomes a distraction. Use the exclamation mark sparingly; this handy punctuation tool can assist in adding emphasis, but only if used appropriately.

Weak writing depends on punctuation to convey meaning.  Punctuation enhances and supports a piece; it does not carry the piece.  If you want to show excitement, then show it through description and pacing of narrative.  The following examples demonstrate how that might be done:

Example #1

It was a quiet day.   I walked along the lane and contemplated all the birthdays I’d had in the past.  Some had been fun and  some had not been very enjoyable. However, none of them had been dull.  I began to feel  sorry for myself. Very soon this feeling passed because a group of friends was waiting for me at the end of the lane.  This was going to be a good day after all.

Example #2

I walked home that day, as I did every other.  This was going to be the dullest birthday I’d ever had. No one remembered me.  No one gave me a present or threw me a party.

I refused to cry in public, but tears welled in my eyes and threatened to flow.  I brushed them away so I could see where I was going.

What was that up ahead? Johanna, Bill, Andrew and so many others, waiting for me!  They were laughing, carrying balloons and wearing party hats.  Right in the middle of the park they were throwing a party. I could tell this was going to be the best birthday ever.   

Both example describe the same scene.  The second example is more effective for several reasons. These have to do with punctuation, descriptive language and pacing.

The first paragraph has seven periods and one comma.  The second has many commas and periods.  There is also an exclamation mark and one question mark.  Not only do these various signs give clues to reader about how to read the piece, but they also provide visual interest.

In the first paragraph the narrator tells us about feelings but doesn’t give us any insight into those feelings.  The second example gives details and uses specific descriptive words so the reader can see what the writer imagines.

Now, think of the emotional pace in each example.  In the first example, the emotion is flat. Neither the words nor punctuation provided any energy.  In the second example, however, there is a definite movement in energy.  It begins low and peaks, then subsides again.  The exclamation mark does help to indicate where the piece peaks but it does not do this work alone.  The writer has built to this point and then gently allows the reader settle into a quieter mode again.

Exclamation marks can be very useful, as the use of exclamation shows in the second example.  However, the true power in a piece comes from the writer’s craft, from the use of words that convey emotion and action. Exclamation marks enhance, but do not replace, good writing.

Student Writing Tip: First Paragraphs

fishing

(This piece is excerpted from Rhythm Prism‘s language arts book:  The Artist Inside)

When writing nonfiction, start with a first paragraph that lets readers know what the piece is about. Not only should the first paragraph state your purpose, but the very first sentence should be dynamite. Get your readers’ attention right away so they want to stay with you.

Whether writing fiction or nonfiction, keep in mind that you are communicating. At every point in your piece readers must be persuaded to listen. Address readers in a way that makes them want to continue reading.

When writing fiction, you have more flexibility with your first paragraph than you do with nonfiction. In fiction, you are allowed to mystify the readers. However, you are never allowed to bore them. Mystify them if you will, but make them want to find out more about the mystery.

Whether you are writing fiction or nonfiction, your first paragraph is the bait with which you hook readers. Among writers, the first sentence is often referred to as ‘the hook’. Writing a powerful ‘hook’ is the best way to launch a great piece.

Quality Schools for All

(Adapted from another site; originally published in 2012)

It’s natural to want the best for our children. So, when the New York Times runs articles about school zoning in New York City, I am somewhat sympathetic to parents who insist that their children (and therefore their neighborhoods) be included in the most desirable districts. At the same time, I am aghast at the construct of these arguments. Seemingly absent from the discussion is an awareness that it is intrinsically immoral to splice neighborhoods so that real estate values and social distinctions are reinforced.

An oft-cited rationale for gerrymandered school districts is that the middle class will stay only if its children are allowed to attend “good” public schools. Implicit in this rationale are a number of assumptions: there are not enough good schools in the system to go around; real estate values are directly related to school values; and school zoning gives the middle class some control (through their political agents) over the quality of education available to their children.

I would have little grounds for challenging these arguments if the schools in question were private and the citizens who used the private schools paid taxes into a general fund for public education. But the coveted schools are not private; they are publicly funded. The funds are not derived from neighborhoods; they are derived from city, state and federal governments.

If equity were the principle that governed school attendance, then there would not be a system which locked children into “good” and “bad” districts. Privileged parents would not be able to secure their children quality education by moving into a good district; underprivileged parents would not be forced to send their children into crime-ridden, under-performing schools.

By law, every child is entitled to free public education. The education is free in the sense that no tuition is charged, but it is not truly “free” education. Children are often not free to attend any school, but are strictly confined to a neighborhood school. In a free system, a child would be given school choice (not intended here as a euphemism for charter schools); the free market would prevail. In that case, children would presumably flee from “bad” public schools and swamp “good” public schools.

As it is, passions run high when middle class parents are faced with the prospect of losing a place in a “good” school. What does it say about some schools that parents argue so forcefully to keep their children out? It’s a civic disgrace that such discussions continue, year after year. Generation after generation parents are forced to operate in a system of rationing, with winners and losers.

Why can’t everyone be a winner?

There will always be distinctions of class and money between people. Schools are the one place where society can smooth some of those distinctions, can level the playing field so every child has a chance at a bright future. The current educational system in New York, and many cities, does not advance this goal. As long as the expectations of an elite middle class are subsidized by public funds, social and economic stratification will be reinforced, not mitigated.

The antiquated and iniquitous school districting model should be abolished. Children, and parents, should be allowed to vote with their feet. As cities adjusts to this new dynamic, perhaps the motivation will arise to make all schools “good”, instead of just those few schools that serve the  middle class elite.