From The Writer's Desk: A Salon of the Mind

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In the series, "From The Writer's Desk," I'll describe what I do for a living as a writer and ideas I have for advancing my craft.

Imagine a lounge of celebrated writers and keen intellects from all across history. Shakespeare's there, naturally, and Sartre's off smoking in a corner arguing with Descartes. Think of it as a salon of the mind.

A classic piece of advice in journalism and in writing in general is to write with an audience in mind. As a crime reporter, I sometimes kept the murder victim I was writing about or the family of the victim in my thoughts. When crafting stories for magazines, I know that each often has a very distinct readership they want to reach and so I tailor my pieces to match. Charlie Petit at the Knight Science Journalism Tracker noted that one key difference between standard journalists and many bloggers might be the divergent approaches they adopt for the audiences they have in mind — a formal manner for use with professional editors, or the more informal voice one might reserve for friends and relatives.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


One problem I face as a journalist is that as a rule of thumb, I generally write to a junior high school reading level. That sufficed for the first 10 years of work, but now that I've settled into journalism a bit, I want my writing to grow beyond constant mental conversations with 8th-graders.

At first I considered writing stories that mimicked the styles of writers I wanted to emulate just as beginning artists often try copying masterpieces to learn. The very idea revolts me, though, as I want to create my own voice, not just ape someone else's.

That's how I hit upon the idea of a salon of the mind. When I write a more ambitious story now, I try running it by them. The aim is to not write like your models, but to write what they might want to read; to learn the voice of others only to learn how to create your own voice.

Don't fill up this salon with your favorite writers, or at least I don't. Fill it up with the most critical writers you can think of to improve your writing in the areas you might be weakest — Oscar Wilde and Truman Capote seem to be among the sharpest critics in my salon.

Don't limit yourself to real people. How about Sherlock Holmes as depicted by Jeremy Brett, or by Benedict Cumberbatch, or by Neil Gaiman in "A Study in Emerald [PDF], or by your own imagination?

If there are certain aspects of your writing you want to improve, draft the best writers you can think of as coaches — work on dialogue with David Simon or Aaron Sorkin, for instance. And consider more than just writers — what might David Hume think, or David Bowie?

And do be careful to keep Norman Mailer from Gore Vidal.

You can email me regarding From The Writer's Desk at toohardforscience@gmail.com.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe