When I was young words scared me. Suffering from dyslexia the patterns of letters were enigmas. After being diagnosed with my condition I found myself reassured in what I was capable of if I applied myself. After years of being placed in to remedial classes I was suddenly understood why I was struggling so hard and redoubled my effort to express myself on paper as clearly as I could verbally.

Covering games on the Internet my words are often the first thing people see of me. I am constantly aware that, for a new visitor reading my work on this site (or any of the others that I contribute to), expressing myself as clearly as possible is a priority. Dyslexia can make this process hard at times. Even numerous proof readings will see grammatical slips, and I can’t fault those who sometimes can’t make it past these errors. I struggle to believe that my words are indecipherable (as one commenter has suggested) but with so many over avenues for information there is no reason for me to expect anyone to read my work if I present any hurdle to understanding.

Reading other writers’ work I have started to take issue when it is apparent their primary goal is not to present a massage but to seem intellectually superior. One of the most intelligent people I meet in my life was a one of my university lecturers, Prof. Susan Condor, who supervised me through my undergraduate dissertation. Our meetings about my work were invariably inspiring. She gave me confidence that despite my dyslexia (and with the help of Word) my submissions were among the best she was overseeing that year. With these comforting words she added a piece of advice that has been cemented in my brain ever since, that it doesn’t matter how great your command is of the English language, as long as you possessed sufficient vocabulary to express yourself. The intelligence is in what you say, not how you say it.

Of course writing for an audience does bring with it a need to be entertaining. Repetition of vocabulary and phrases soon becomes boring, and a lack of metaphor and imagery quickly makes any article feel stale. But many of the larger gaming press sites have begun imposing restrictions on the words writers can use. Editors argue that overused phrases (visceral, immersive, interesting, fun to name but a few) demonstrate and authorial laziness. In a desperate drive to set the writing of their own sites apart they eliminate clear and descriptive words from their vocabulary, forcing writers to use five words where one could suffice.

I would never say that overusing a word is good. As I go over my own work one thing that remains paramount for me is ensuring I avoid falling in to repetitive patterns in my language, and that vague terms (such as ‘fun’) are placed in a context that clarifies my meaning. But by completely eradicating such words from a writer’s vocabulary is to force them to convey themselves unnaturally. Some times the literal contortions such a restriction places on authors can prove to be a catalyst for better work, but usually it simply results in strange phrasing, overly verbose prose or the adoption of obscure synonyms.

I cast my mind back to my own experiences at university once again and wonder how differently the meeting with Prof. Condor would have gone if she had said, “Well I like your theories Alex, but if you could just stop using the word ‘participant’ I think your work would stand out more”. It would have been true; eliminating this one word would have set it apart. Changing this single term however would not have improved the quality of the study, is would simply have had readers perplexed by the bizarre language I would have used in order to get my point across.

 Certainly I am guilty at times of not being clear. I try to be, and when using words that do not provide enough explanation to convey my point I elaborate. Blacklisting words in an attempt to force creativity and clarity artificially. I would never stifle anything that encourages creativity, but rules that limit expression in its clearest form is a crutch to help poor writers (and tired editors) not the audience. As long as a writer’s work is clear and the thoughts behind it interesting then the language they use to achieve this should have no need to be restricted.