Hahahaha! Yes, metaphors do feed our thinking and our writing. Still we should not use them a lot because then it looks like we didn't do the writing or the thinking.
The famous journalist Bernard Levin writing on cliches -
If you cannot understand my argument, and declare ``It's Greek to me'', you are quoting Shakespeare; if you claim to be more sinned against than sinning, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you recall your salad days, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you act more in sorrow than in anger; if your wish is farther to the thought; if your lost property has vanished into thin air, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you have ever refused to budge an inch or suffered from green-eyed jealousy, if you have played fast and loose, if you have been tongue-tied, a tower of strength, hoodwinked or in a pickle, if you have knitted your brows, made a virtue of necessity, insisted on fair play, slept not one wink, stood on ceremony, danced attendance (on your lord and master), laughed yourself into stitches, had short shrift, cold comfort or too much of a good thing, if you have seen better days or lived in a fool's paradise -why, be that as it may, the more fool you , for it is a foregone conclusion that you are (as good luck would have it) quoting Shakespeare; if you think it is early days and clear out bag and baggage, if you think it is high time and that that is the long and short of it, if you believe that the game is up and that truth will out even if it involves your own flesh and blood, if you lie low till the crack of doom because you suspect foul play, if you have your teeth set on edge (at one fell swoop) without rhyme or reason, then - to give the devil his due - if the truth were known (for surely you have a tongue in your head) you are quoting Shakespeare; even if you bid me good riddance and send me packing, if you wish I was dead as a door-nail, if you think I am an eyesore, a laughing stock, the devil incarnate, a stony-hearted villain, bloody-minded or a blinking idiot, then - by Jove! O Lord! Tut tut! For goodness' sake! What the dickens! But me no buts! - it is all one to me, for you are quoting Shakespeare.
That's great! Perhaps cliches are rejected if and when the rest of the writing is as predictable. I've always felt that a well-placed cliche works if you gain the reader's trust.
Substack recommended this read, and I'm glad I did. For beginning writers, the cliche is crutch [I know] but a needed one. When the cliche shows up, I encourage them to write out the moment. Cliche's communicate. Bottomline. Their weight is noise, however that gets in the way of message and meaning. There's simply too much of it. I use the cliche moment to ask the writer to pull back the curtain to explore why they leaned on the cliche crutch. Sometimes, lazy better writers put a cliche out there and upon a reread roll their eyes before you do. And sometimes, the cliche is needed for the narrative. Sometimes. But in those cases, the cliche needs to be earned - in otherwords a darn good reason to be there. And when it is earned it lays down another emphasis. Humor, pathos, deeper comprehension. At the end of the day, nobody's perfect. Excellent article. Thanks
Clichés are your friends! They are clichés because they're familiar and time-worn (-tested), and what better way to break the ice with a reader than with something familiar.
Hey, very good point! A well-turned cliché can be like a familiar face in unfamiliar surroundings. But please, no "furrowed brows" or "sun-kissed cheeks" on those familiar faces. 😉
In my view, most things in this world have a time and place. There are exceptions, of course—particularly in the manifestations of evil. But who, I ask, appointed these self-styled arbiters of good taste, propriety, and so-called literary purity?
We often hear talk of “good writing” and “bad writing,” as if language itself must bow to an elite tribunal of critics and academics. Do they forget that characters reflect real people, with their foibles, contradictions, and imperfect speech? Storytelling—true storytelling—requires the flaws and textures of life. To demand otherwise is to craft lies wrapped in elegant sentences.
Some authors insist that “honest” writing grants license to vulgarity, gratuitous sex and violence, and every grotesque idea the human mind can muster. They have their market, to be sure. Yet believable stories need not wallow in degradation to achieve truth. Realism is not the same as obscenity; honesty is not exhibitionism.
For me, the truest writing mirrors humanity without apology but also without celebration of its basest instincts. It reveals light and shadow alike, and in doing so, connects the reader with truths he already senses within himself.
I paraphrase the sentiment of Father Flanagan, I am not convinced that bad writing truly exists—at least not as the snooty, self-anointed elites would define it. What we often mistake for “bad” is sometimes the raw sound of authenticity unpolished. Yet there are stories that fail: those lacking imagination, spirit, or the spark of genuine storytelling.
Language need not be perfect to be powerful. It must only be alive.
I like the way you preface some statements with "in my view" and "For me." We're told to weed out those qualifiers, but they convey a sense of other viewpoints. I would go further than you and say that language is for the people--all sorts--and that includes the "elite tribunal" as well as the peasants of what you call genuine storytelling. We're all in this together.
Here’s the real quandary! What if the cliche is the only way you can find to say what you mean? Has sincerity vanished along with the study of grammar? Is every sincere wish or thought for someone now reduced to a Hallmark card, delivered as an obligation? I’ve been criticized for cliches and platitudes that were all sincerely meant. Are words of love and caring and hope now to be reduced to “one time only” use? Protected by copyright — penalties for unauthorized use?
At this point all writing is derivative whether intentionally or not, cliches are a natural part of writing and not avoidable. We just need to be more intentional about them. I think it's ridiculous to expect there to be no cliches at this point in history.
Total agree that "cliche experiences" are the stuff of a good life unlike "cliche expressions". With respect to the latter, is "bright blue sky" *really* a cliche? I think one has to have an attempt at metaphor to qualify as a cliche ("furrowed brow"). "Bright" and "blue" are just two applicable adjectives appearing one after another. No deductions for that in my world. :-)
Cliches are both handy and often "right on." If we struggle not to use them and always come up with something fresh, we risk sounding snobbish, fake, pretentious and "full of ourselves." Even in your article about cliches you started out using them. For example:"make the case," "turn of phrase," and, "to be clear." You are making me want to read some Shakespeare and look for a cliches. No complaints about his writing. I wonder what we would learn looking at it from this viewpoint.
You say “no clichés,” but I say, “Don’t bite the hand that feeds your metaphors.
Hahahaha! Yes, metaphors do feed our thinking and our writing. Still we should not use them a lot because then it looks like we didn't do the writing or the thinking.
Good one.
The famous journalist Bernard Levin writing on cliches -
If you cannot understand my argument, and declare ``It's Greek to me'', you are quoting Shakespeare; if you claim to be more sinned against than sinning, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you recall your salad days, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you act more in sorrow than in anger; if your wish is farther to the thought; if your lost property has vanished into thin air, you are quoting Shakespeare; if you have ever refused to budge an inch or suffered from green-eyed jealousy, if you have played fast and loose, if you have been tongue-tied, a tower of strength, hoodwinked or in a pickle, if you have knitted your brows, made a virtue of necessity, insisted on fair play, slept not one wink, stood on ceremony, danced attendance (on your lord and master), laughed yourself into stitches, had short shrift, cold comfort or too much of a good thing, if you have seen better days or lived in a fool's paradise -why, be that as it may, the more fool you , for it is a foregone conclusion that you are (as good luck would have it) quoting Shakespeare; if you think it is early days and clear out bag and baggage, if you think it is high time and that that is the long and short of it, if you believe that the game is up and that truth will out even if it involves your own flesh and blood, if you lie low till the crack of doom because you suspect foul play, if you have your teeth set on edge (at one fell swoop) without rhyme or reason, then - to give the devil his due - if the truth were known (for surely you have a tongue in your head) you are quoting Shakespeare; even if you bid me good riddance and send me packing, if you wish I was dead as a door-nail, if you think I am an eyesore, a laughing stock, the devil incarnate, a stony-hearted villain, bloody-minded or a blinking idiot, then - by Jove! O Lord! Tut tut! For goodness' sake! What the dickens! But me no buts! - it is all one to me, for you are quoting Shakespeare.
That's great! Perhaps cliches are rejected if and when the rest of the writing is as predictable. I've always felt that a well-placed cliche works if you gain the reader's trust.
A delightful part of reading/hearing Shakespeare is the familiarity of his phrases resonating through the centuries.
beautiful ! thanks !
WOW!!!
What joy to read this!
Wow!
Afraid to write a word because Shakespeare used them all first‼️😱
Maybe Shakespeare himself used phrases that HIS contemporaries recognized as cliches.
Well done‼️ (Uh, oh! I’m sure someone wrote that before.)
It would be interesting to know how many are original and how many Shakespeare heard and made famous.
Just what the doctor ordered! Can't thank you enough!
Totally !
Substack recommended this read, and I'm glad I did. For beginning writers, the cliche is crutch [I know] but a needed one. When the cliche shows up, I encourage them to write out the moment. Cliche's communicate. Bottomline. Their weight is noise, however that gets in the way of message and meaning. There's simply too much of it. I use the cliche moment to ask the writer to pull back the curtain to explore why they leaned on the cliche crutch. Sometimes, lazy better writers put a cliche out there and upon a reread roll their eyes before you do. And sometimes, the cliche is needed for the narrative. Sometimes. But in those cases, the cliche needs to be earned - in otherwords a darn good reason to be there. And when it is earned it lays down another emphasis. Humor, pathos, deeper comprehension. At the end of the day, nobody's perfect. Excellent article. Thanks
Clichés are your friends! They are clichés because they're familiar and time-worn (-tested), and what better way to break the ice with a reader than with something familiar.
Hey, very good point! A well-turned cliché can be like a familiar face in unfamiliar surroundings. But please, no "furrowed brows" or "sun-kissed cheeks" on those familiar faces. 😉
On the Question of “Good” and “Bad” Writing
In my view, most things in this world have a time and place. There are exceptions, of course—particularly in the manifestations of evil. But who, I ask, appointed these self-styled arbiters of good taste, propriety, and so-called literary purity?
We often hear talk of “good writing” and “bad writing,” as if language itself must bow to an elite tribunal of critics and academics. Do they forget that characters reflect real people, with their foibles, contradictions, and imperfect speech? Storytelling—true storytelling—requires the flaws and textures of life. To demand otherwise is to craft lies wrapped in elegant sentences.
Some authors insist that “honest” writing grants license to vulgarity, gratuitous sex and violence, and every grotesque idea the human mind can muster. They have their market, to be sure. Yet believable stories need not wallow in degradation to achieve truth. Realism is not the same as obscenity; honesty is not exhibitionism.
For me, the truest writing mirrors humanity without apology but also without celebration of its basest instincts. It reveals light and shadow alike, and in doing so, connects the reader with truths he already senses within himself.
I paraphrase the sentiment of Father Flanagan, I am not convinced that bad writing truly exists—at least not as the snooty, self-anointed elites would define it. What we often mistake for “bad” is sometimes the raw sound of authenticity unpolished. Yet there are stories that fail: those lacking imagination, spirit, or the spark of genuine storytelling.
Language need not be perfect to be powerful. It must only be alive.
“Language need not be perfect to be powerful. It must only be alive.” Yes.
Very well said M. E. Brodeur.
I like the way you preface some statements with "in my view" and "For me." We're told to weed out those qualifiers, but they convey a sense of other viewpoints. I would go further than you and say that language is for the people--all sorts--and that includes the "elite tribunal" as well as the peasants of what you call genuine storytelling. We're all in this together.
Here’s the real quandary! What if the cliche is the only way you can find to say what you mean? Has sincerity vanished along with the study of grammar? Is every sincere wish or thought for someone now reduced to a Hallmark card, delivered as an obligation? I’ve been criticized for cliches and platitudes that were all sincerely meant. Are words of love and caring and hope now to be reduced to “one time only” use? Protected by copyright — penalties for unauthorized use?
At this point all writing is derivative whether intentionally or not, cliches are a natural part of writing and not avoidable. We just need to be more intentional about them. I think it's ridiculous to expect there to be no cliches at this point in history.
If you use a cliche in the middle of the woods and nobody is near, does it make a sound?
Food for thought! ;-)
Total agree that "cliche experiences" are the stuff of a good life unlike "cliche expressions". With respect to the latter, is "bright blue sky" *really* a cliche? I think one has to have an attempt at metaphor to qualify as a cliche ("furrowed brow"). "Bright" and "blue" are just two applicable adjectives appearing one after another. No deductions for that in my world. :-)
I agree!
If I put cliches in dialogue, I don't worry because people really say that stuff, and often.
Cliches are both handy and often "right on." If we struggle not to use them and always come up with something fresh, we risk sounding snobbish, fake, pretentious and "full of ourselves." Even in your article about cliches you started out using them. For example:"make the case," "turn of phrase," and, "to be clear." You are making me want to read some Shakespeare and look for a cliches. No complaints about his writing. I wonder what we would learn looking at it from this viewpoint.
A refreshing perspective on the universality of common sentiments. Thank you.
Ah, “No love lost” in your assessment.
100% agree with you! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for this. Anyone who name checks Á rebours has instant credibility with me.
Cliches speak to the subconscious - and most people don't like dealing with those types of issues...