It's not the length; it's what you do with it

We’re always told to get to the point with our writing. Cut the crap get to the juicy bits. That’s why journos love bullet-points; it gets rid of flowery PR phraseology and doublethink.

Writing short pieces is a real talent, deciding what bits to cut without destroying the flow or narrative. I’m a huge fan of short writing whether in emails, releases or even signs and letters.
Anyway with this in mind, I’ve found two of the most amazing sources of synopsised writing in existence and they’re not necessarily where you’d expect to find them.

The first I found whilst on a bus reading The Times last night. I’ve never devoured a newspaper cover to cover before but on this occasion I had too much time and too little reading material and I started on the lonely hearts column. It’s incredible. The beautiful thing is not just the complete pictures that you build of people from their profiles but also the information that people are giving away without realising it. It’s a heart-warming and sometimes hilarious outlet of humanity.

The second source is a site called Four Letter Film Reviews and pretty much does what it says on the tin. In four words or less, describe and review a film that you’ve seen. Some of the reviews on the site are genius examples of cutting to the quick.

Here are some for Titanic:
Everything including kitchen sinks
Selfish bitch steals float
Steaming pile of ship

Batman:
Dark knight for cinema

Kramer vs Kramer:
I bet Kramer wins

Take a peek, have a linger and make a promise to yourself to cut the waffle. Or don't. It's your decision I suppose, not that I care. I guess what I'm trying to say is, well, if you want to write more effectively then do, and if not, then don't. It's just one of those things, y'know, different writing styles and all and it's not my position to say, but I would...............I think