December 2007

We all know that a cliché is a trite or overused expression – that is the definition of a cliché. It is worth observing, however, that most clichés would not have become clichés if there were no truth to them. Furthermore, when these expressions were first used, perhaps a very long time ago, they were considered original and witty. The first few times someone said, "It's not exactly rocket science" or "It's a no-brainer" to describe something that is easy or obvious, it was a clever phrase. Then, because it was clever, everyone picked up on it. Thus, clichés are not lacking in cleverness; they just cease to be clever when they've been around long enough to lose their originality.

Most of us use clichés quite often in daily conversation, probably without realizing that we do. Ordinary speech is spontaneous; it isn't usually "crafted." We don't stop to think of some especially clever and original way to express what we want to say. In traveling from brain to mouth, thoughts take the express route. Therefore, if we have absorbed a particular way of expressing an idea (possibly because we have frequently heard the same expression), that is what we blurt out.

We may even become habituated to trite similes and metaphors. If, say, some new product has become so popular that everyone seems to be buying it, we will say, "It's selling like hotcakes." That is a cliché we've heard to describe anything that is selling very well. Some people who use the phrase are probably unaware that hotcakes are pancakes, and almost nobody gives much thought to why "selling like hotcakes" means "selling fast." Why would pancakes sell faster than anything else? Why not, "It's selling like cinnamon rolls"? The point is, though, that we could find a fresher image – or we might just say that it is selling exceptionally well.

Public speakers who grasp and hold our attention avoid clichés; what holds our interest and earns our applause may be as much their original and creative "way with words" as what they say. Hearing them speak is like listening to a verbal virtuoso, making us think, "Wow! I wish I could talk like that." A few people seem to have an almost natural "gift of gab"; even their casual conversation is peppered with original, witty, and sometimes amusing phrases and metaphors. I had a few college professors like that (though only a few). However, most fascinating, cliché-free speeches are not off the cuff but were first written, by the speakers themselves or by a speech-writer.

That brings us to the role of clichés in writing. Ideally, we should avoid them, but this is easier said than done. (An astute observer might now note that "easier said than done" is a bit of a cliché.) As I've noted, clichés were originally clever expressions, and we tend to remember them. When we are writing and trying to think of ways to express our thoughts, we may therefore settle automatically on a trite (and thus overused) way of expressing them. For instance, if we want to state the idea that someone has acted prematurely or has not taken matters in their logical order, we will write that he "put the cart before the horse." The image is apt and concise; it says what we want to say – but it is strikingly unoriginal.

I have often done this sort of thing myself, and I usually recognize at once that my metaphor has been used so often that it is a cliché. Since I don't want the exert the effort to think of a fresh way of saying the same thing, I will insert proverbial – "He put the proverbial cart before the horse." That is, of course, no improvement; all it does is acknowledge that I know I'm using a trite expression and am too lazy to think of a more original phrase.

Now, one way writing should differ from speech is that it should reflect the opportunity we have to ponder our choice of words. When we speak, we spontaneously use the first word or phrase that comes to mind; when we write, we can deliberately modify our first impulse, choosing something that is more original and probably better. Clichés fall into the category of words and phrases that demand this kind of reconsideration. As William Safire observed in one of his "fumblerules" (rules that violate the very principle that they state): "Avoid clichés like the plague." We should shun (or at least minimize the use of) not only trite expressions that have been around for a very long time but also (and especially) those that are currently in vogue – the fad phrases that people are using in an effort to show that they're up-to-date with the latest jargon, when they are, in fact, showing how unoriginal they are. Among the current phrases are "thinking outside the box," "pushing the envelope," and, yes, "it isn't rocket science."

A word of caution is appropriate here. Self-conscious writers often go to extremes in pondering every word or phrase they use. They automatically reject nearly all the words and phrases that come to them spontaneously and seek substitutes. Many of my students write this way, convinced that the natural vocabulary that they use in speech is not adequate for a composition (even though they are often quite articulate when they are expressing their ideas orally). Their essays appear to have been written with a thesaurus open next to them – and perhaps they were. They take natural, clear, spontaneous wording and substitute something that is unnatural, usually pretentious, and sometimes completely inappropriate. That's not what I mean when I advocate avoiding clichés.

What I mean is to be wary of parroting worn-out expressions. Shunning clichés is important for several reasons. The first is the "yawn factor." Use enough trite expressions, and the reader will drift into something resembling a coma, paying little attention to what has been written. Secondly, clichés lack emphasis; there's no way that a phrase that the reader has seen or heard hundreds of times is going to stand out. Finally, readers are likely to decide, at least on some subconscious level, that the lack of originality in the presentation indicates that the author doesn't have any original ideas either. That assumption may be false, but lack of originality in style suggests lack of originality in thought.

So, folks, you don't have to be a rocket scientist or to reinvent the wheel, but if you think outside the box, your deathless prose will be fresh as new paint, and you will have readers in the palm of your hand, hanging on your every word.