Sociologist Sudhir Venkatesh discusses the nuances of non-specialist writing and offers guidance on how sociologists can reach broader audiences.
I often receive email from sociology graduate students or faculty members, asking, “Should I get an agent?” What they really want to know is how to widen their readership. Some may be hoping that communicating with non-academics will improve their writing. Most of us need to improve our communication skills. And, if the constant kvetching in departments is any indication, few of us enjoy writing for journals and university presses. I have an agent—she is not simply a broker, but one of the sharpest intellectual minds that I have come across. With her encouragement, I have found writing for a lay public to be deeply satisfying. I’ve gained a much greater appreciation for the sociological craft, but I’ve learned that drifting beyond conventional sociology has its perils. With this in mind, I have a few thoughts for anyone interested in reaching broader audiences.
Learn how to use editors. Malcolm Gladwell and Steven Levitt make social science writing look easy. But, they have an army of editors who help them to craft ideas. Academic journals mostly ignore the editing process—and it shows. Consequently, working with editors in non-academic publishing can feel a bit intrusive. The work suddenly becomes collaborative. Learn to see editorial input as helpful; if your editor doesn’t understand your writing, you haven’t figured out your message.
The notion that non-specialist writing is simplistic is false.
Be realistic. Almost always, people tell me they want to pitch a first piece to The New Yorker. Good luck! It takes years of writing for blogs, magazines, and editorial pages to catch the attention of New Yorker editors. Think realistically. Contribute to a local paper or work on a blog for six months. When I wrote a monthly column for The Daily, I learned how to develop a public voice. When it came to writing a book, I was more prepared.
Feel your ideas. All readers respond emotionally to ideas. Outside the academy, many prefer characters or puzzles. They can be drawn in (or not) by the writer’s emotional tone. Journal articles also have an emotional aspect. No intellectual justification exists for: “Introduction, Literature Review, Data/Methods, Findings and Discussion” in academic journals. This convention gives us confidence, but certainly other formats could satisfactorily transmit sociological ideas. Similarly, writing for non-specialists will require adherence to conventions, like introducing a character from your study. Don’t be afraid to show some opinion or emotion along the way. If you ‘feel’ your argument, chances are that the reader will understand it.
Have a vision; build a community. Identify your motives clearly. Why do you want to write beyond the discipline? Is it money, fame, status, policy impact? Social scientists are often embarrassed or ashamed about having such motives, but we shouldn’t be. You may end up feeling lonely as you move outside the profession: your colleagues may be skeptical. They will question your scholarly rigor. It will take some inner strength to ensure that their insecurities do not become your guides. So, cozy up to others with experience writing for non-academic audiences. And, remind yourself of your intentions. This will keep you focused when times get tough.
Understand and accept the nature of non-academic criticism. Academic writing is often criticized as being dry and obtuse. General readers have little tolerance for methodological obscurities and other academic conventions, no matter how robust. They are drawn to the writing—is it clear, does it meander, does it make you want to turn the page? These concerns may not impact your ability to be a rigorous researcher. But they may help you identify weaknesses that need to be addressed in order to communicate your ideas.
Writing well is not dumbing down. The most powerful ideas in sociology are clearly stated and easily understood. The notion that non-specialist writing is simplistic is false. The better you understand your own ideas, the more readily you can articulate them for different audiences. Taking the perspective of the reader is an advanced skill. I ask aspiring writers to experiment with different writing styles. Perhaps it is first-person narrative (my own preference), or social-historical methods (Orlando Patterson), analysis of government records (Diane Vaughn), or thought exercises (Barry Schwartz). Whatever the format, the key is to distill a central message or theme, and to keep the writing focused for the intended audience.
