Hi everyone!

What’s Tate Talk™, you ask? It’s a weekly series where we can all come together to talk about annotations, so we can learn and improve our tatesmanship! Check out last week’s installment on Annotating Problematic Lyrics and the previous installment on Avoiding the Stretch. Sign up to write your own Tate Talk™ here.

---

In making our annotations the best they can possibly be, we should focus on our language first. No matter how great of a writer you are, there’s always room for improvement. One of the best ways to make an annotation pop is to write it well. The annotations that shine the brightest are the ones that read the easiest.

Here are some simple tips you can use to keep your writing fresh:

• Be as direct and specific as possible.
• Don’t add descriptive language just to be flowery or to sound smart. Every word should matter!
• Write without restriction, then edit. Refinery happens during the editing process.
• Read your annotations twice, or even read them aloud. Do they make sense?

Rather than talk about grammar in general, I want to hone in on the biggest pain points I’ve seen on Genius. In the examples that follow, the items in the left column represent the unfavorable options and the items in the right column represent the better alternatives.

Note: I am using The Elements of Style (Fourth Edition) by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White as a reference, particularly the comprehensive glossary in the fourth section. (Look out for more from this book coming soon!)

---

• Omit with advantage

As a general rule, if you can remove a piece of a sentence without changing its meaning, remove it. Cutting out unnecessary phrases is the best way to make your writing more concise. Here are some words and phrases you can always omit:

the fact that
the truth is
just serves to
in terms of
as to whether
in many cases
very
certainly
each and every
he is a man who
she is a woman who
interesting
kind of
meaningful
one of the most
personally
to me
along these lines
nice

---

• List consistency

When writing a series of items in a list, make sure the grammar matches for each item.

The traveler carried a satchel, a hatchet, and lifted a barrel.

The traveler carried a satchel, a hatchet, and a barrel.

She was walking the path, singing a song, and carried a bushel of apples.

She was walking the path, singing a song, and carrying a bushel of apples.

---

• Logical ordering

In conveying a lot of contextual information in a single sentence—person, place, date, and time—the order you place each item in heavily affects comprehension. Make sure you order the items in a way that sounds logical when you read the sentence back.

Kanye declared at the 2015 VMAs his plan to run for presidency in 2020.

At the 2015 VMAs, Kanye declared his plan to run for presidency in 2020.

---

• Weak “this”

Beginning a sentence with an ambiguous “this” can leave the reader wondering what you’re talking about. Make sure to be specific about what “this” is.

Becky and Judy attended the Grand Gala Supreme 2016. This was their first big night out in months.

Becky and Judy attended the Grand Gala Supreme 2016. The event marked their first big night out in months.

Desiigner compares himself to Timmy Turner. This means he makes wishes.

Desiigner compares himself to Timmy Turner because they both make wishes.

Just like Timmy Turner, Desiigner makes wishes.

Desiigner compares himself to Timmy Turner; they both make wishes.

---

• ”So” as an intensifier

There is always an alternative.

Her voice sounds so good.

Her voice sounds amazing.

It was so ridiculous when he jumped off the stage.

It was ridiculous when he jumped off the stage.

---

• Narrator, speaker, protagonist

Avoid using these terms in place of the artist’s name. Though it might seem like a method of avoiding confusion when an artist portrays a character, it actually creates more confusion. Instead, explicitly state the artist is portraying a character, but only if you’re certain they are doing so. Otherwise, the artist’s name is the logical default.

The narrator feels a strong connection to the objects her lover left behind.

Alice portrays a character who feels a strong connection to the objects her lover left behind.

Alice feels a strong connection to the objects her lover left behind.

---

• VERSUS

In this section, the left column contains a correct example of the first item and the right column contains a correct example of the second item.

• That vs. Which

“That” tells us about a particular item in a group. “Which” adds information about the only item in question.

The microphone that is broken can’t be used. (There are multiple microphones. The broken one can’t be used.)

The microphone, which is broken, can’t be used. (There is only one microphone and it’s broken.)

• Refer vs. Allude

Allude and refer do not mean the same thing. An allusion is indirect or unintentional, while a reference is specific or intentional.

He said, “She was beautiful, like that lady in the painting.” He was alluding to the Mona Lisa.

He said, “She was beautiful, like the Mona Lisa.” He was referring to the famous Mona Lisa painting.

• Imply vs. Infer

When something is implied, it is suggested. When someone infers something, they are deducing based on evidence.

Her control over her facial expressions implied she was an actress.

Since she was standing behind the cameras in the studio, he inferred that she was an actress.

---

INTRODUCING: Empath’s Emporium

Empath’s Emporium is a new weekly initiative highlighting the best writing on Genius. Each week I’ll pick three Genius annotations that are carefully written and read smoothly. We can appreciate these annotations and their authors with praise and upvotes, and learn how to improve our own writing in the process. By highlighting the mad skills of a few people, we can all benefit!

Keep your eyes peeled for the first installment (coming tomorrow)!

---

What did I miss? What did I do wrong?
Did you make it this far? Good job!
What other tropes should we avoid in our writing? Post below!
Are you confused about any of these rules/suggestions? Ask away!
Have any nit-picks or pet peeves? Speak up!

@genius-editorial-board

@Empath awesome job! This The piece you wrote is a really comprehensive and helpful guide that even editors and mods can learn from.

@Empath fantastic post!!!

@Empath This is something I sometimes struggle with, so Ima use this to edit any tates I’m gonna make

I am using The Elements of Style (Fourth Edition) by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White as a reference

Genius should just send this to all editors tbh. I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen mentions of this book on my hands.

Concision is great but I wouldn’t “always” remove those words (except for “he is a man who” and the like). Sometimes they’re necessary to clarify a point, or serve as an intensifier, or just establish a “rhythm”. I think those should be words or phrases to examine and use critically, rather than blanket “avoids”.

I don’t think either of the “weak this” examples are especially weak. So they’re weak examples of weakness.

Most importantly, I strongly disagree with the suggestion that we should use “Alice is portraying a character who thinks” instead of “the narrator thinks”. The former is a clunky phrase, particularly if repeated across several annotations, and frankly I don’t think the latter confuses anyone. To be honest, this suggestion seems to completely miss the big issue we have and focuses on a relatively small one. If anything, we need to be going the other way, pulling away from suggesting that everything is biographical. Most songs aren’t biographical, so we shouldn’t assume that they are by default. If anything, we should assume that they aren’t, and look for evidence that they are.

Imagine if on a song like “Polly” we had “Kurt wants to rape this girl”. I feel like this is inaccurate, misleading, squicky, and potentially legally dubious.

When songs use narrators, let’s say so rather than continuing this “every song is from the artist’s POV” charade.

I lean towards @Vesuvius, if we gut every annotation of descriptive words we are doing our users a disservice. Of course, this doesn’t apply to someone like Future or Lil Wayne. And I think it must remain objective. “Kendrick Lamar’s brilliant use of assonance” isn’t great, but maybe “Kendrick Lamar applies assonance to build momentum and create the illusion he’s actually rapping faster.” This isn’t J.R. R. Tolkien, but a degree of descriptive language helps engage the reader. Some annotations I’ve seen lately have been either completely gutted of any descriptive language, or written deliberately basic.

I agree with the “narrator” section. Saying something like “Hov is rapping from the perspective of,” or “Eminem imagines the thought process of,” or “Ja Rule inhabits the mind of.”

Also, remember to keep punctuation inside the link.

What do we do with punctuation at the end of a quote, or something in quotation marks? I always used to write it like this:

“Timmy Turner”, he searching for a burner.

But was told this is more appropriate:

“Timmy Turner,” searching for a burner.

@Vesuvius / @Theonlydjorkaeff – i don’t think the point is to gut our annotations of all descriptive words, it’s to omit needless words that people often associate as descriptive words. the words listed in the OP aren’t descriptive.

the fact that

is redundant

in many cases

what cases? just say the cases

interesting

if you have to say something is interesting, it’s probably not interesting

kind of

is fluff—be assertive

Most importantly, I strongly disagree with the suggestion that we should use “Alice is portraying a character who thinks” instead of “the narrator thinks”. The former is a clunky phrase, particularly if repeated across several annotations, and frankly I don’t think the latter confuses anyone. To be honest, this suggestion seems to completely miss the big issue we have and focuses on a relatively small one.

imo using “the narrator” is super confusing. we’re annotating songs. just say “the artist”? i agree with this tho:

If anything, we need to be going the other way, pulling away from suggesting that everything is biographical. Most songs aren’t biographical, so we shouldn’t assume that they are by default. If anything, we should assume that they aren’t, and look for evidence that they are.

@Theonlydjorkaeff your quotation marks example is british vs american punctuation. the second method is preferred, but not required.

@Theonlydjorkaeff Haha oh dear the punctuation thing is a big can of worms.

The logical way to do it is to only include the punctuation if it is actually part of a quote, otherwise it goes outside the quotation marks. That’s the standard way across most of the English-speaking world, including Britain and Australia. It’s also the most common way on the internet, and is the official policy of many collaborative websites e.g. Wikipedia.

Some American style guides say you should put punctuation within the quotation marks, and these are quite popular with HQ staff. This is because typewriters used to not display the marks properly if they went outside the quotation marks.

I’ve strongly advocated – on a number of occasions – that Genius should prefer the logical method to the typewriter method. It makes more sense and it’s more widely used. Language is evolutionary, not something set by academics in Chicago. Alternatively, we should use a live-and-let-live philosophy and just let people use whatever they want, because it doesn’t matter. But at this point I just don’t bother reverting when my “mistake” gets “corrected”.

@Michael I agree, a lot of the terms are largely fluff, particularly “interesting”. But “very”, “certainly”, “each and every” – these words/phrases have legitimate uses. Even “in many cases” is a perfectly valid phrase if there are too many cases to go into depth, for example.

imo using “the narrator” is super confusing. we’re annotating songs. just say “the artist”?

Erm then that’s your opinion but I doubt many people are with you.

Most songs have narrators (except for those without a narrative), not all songs are from the artist’s perspective, therefore “narrator” is a better catch-all than “the artist”.

@Vesuvius – i’d think we can find better words than “very” and “certainly.” i would cut “very” from almost every sentence.

Erm then that’s your opinion but I doubt many people are with you.

Most songs have narrators (except for those without a narrative), not all songs are from the artist’s perspective, therefore “narrator” is a better catch-all than “the artist”.

just like using the narrator is your opinion ;) i don’t think saying “the artist” strictly implies something is from the artists perspective? imo it implies artist license. “the narrator” feels too ambiguous and formal. who is the narrator? the artist? the character?

i feel like i’ve already read this thread 2 years ago

@Vesuvius Great points!

With the omissions list, it’s not that the words/phrases are wrong, it’s that they are almost always used for padding or false emphasis. Can you give examples where “very,” “certainly,” or “in many cases” are used to make the sentence better?

Feel you on the “narrator” vs “the artist portrays” thing, and agree that we shouldn’t be assuming songs are biographical. I actually don’t think either of them is very good, but I prefer some version of “the artist portrays,” or just “the artist.” We list songs' artists on their song pages. When someone pops open an annotation starting with “the narrator,” what indication do they have that the narrator isn’t someone entirely different than the artist? It’s just too vague. I think it’s more important to be explicit so readers can understand. Is there a third version that’s better than “the narrator” and “the artist portrays”?

I don’t think either of the “weak this” examples are especially weak. So they’re weak examples of weakness.

What are some better examples?

@Theonlydjorkaeff Descriptive language is great! It just hurts a sentence when it’s used needlessly. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with your second example.

For British English punctuation vs. American English punctuation, consistency on song pages is the most important thing.

My personal least favorite is “this isn’t the first time that [x] has [done y]” with just a hyperlink to another annotation or an article. The reader should be able to get all the information about that line in one annotation without having to click out.

So “Drake previously mentioned money on ["Song”] (link to annotation)“ not ["This isn’t the first time Drake has talked about money”] (link)."

@Michael The bit I was dismissing was the “confusing” accusation. It’s not confusing. If you’d rather not use “the narrator” then fine, but I find it very hard to believe many people would be confused by it.

Would you actually say “the artist”? I thought that you were using it as a placeholder for “Kendrick” or such.

Options:

“Kendrick confesses to killing a "blacker” man, making him a hypocrite"
“The artist confesses to killing a "blacker” man, making him a hypocrite"
“The narrator confesses to killing a "blacker” man, making him a hypocrite"

The first is misleading because Kendrick isn’t a murderer. The second is needlessly ambiguous because Kendrick is the artist. It’s also misleading because Kendrick isn’t a murderer. The third (although a simplistic interpretation of the line) is accurate.

“the narrator” feels too ambiguous and formal. who is the narrator? the artist? the character?

Any ambiguity plays to our strengths. We don’t need to determine whether or not a song is biographical if we just say “the narrator”. It also helps when the songwriter is not the singer.

“[Artist’s name]” implies that a song is biographical. “The artist” does the same thing, but dances around it. “The character” suggests that it definitely isn’t biographical. “The narrator” is an accurate and common word that does exactly what we want it to do. “The protagonist” (or “the main character” if we’re scared of being too intellectual…) works for songs in the third person. “The subject” works for songs in the second person, or the third person.

Of course, if we can put a name to the narrator/subject, that’s even better. But if we can’t, “the narrator” is exactly the term we want.

For British English punctuation vs. American English punctuation, consistency on song pages is the most important thing.

Disagree. That doesn’t matter at all, and might even be counter-productive. Nobody will notice if there is inconsistency, except perhaps editors who get “corrected” back and forth depending on which was the song page goes.