ITEC: Objective Standards for Nonfiction Writing

If you want to write powerfully, embrace objective standards. Over my thirty years of writing and editing, I’ve developed a set I call ITEC, which stands for Important (or Interesting), True, Essentialized, and Clear.

My writing process involves much more than these four principles, but my focus here is on the nature and value of ITEC. (If you’d like to learn the full, step-by-step process—from choosing a topic and specifying your audience to editing your piece and preparing it for publication—take a writing course at Objective Standard Institute.)

The elements of ITEC are as follows.

Important (or Interesting)

Is the theme (i.e., the overarching message) of your article important or interesting? Does it matter to you and your audience? If so, is this evident in the first few sentences—and throughout the piece?

If the material is not important, neither you nor your readers should waste time on it. Time is life. To waste time is to waste life. That’s why the “I” comes first.

If the material is important, you should make this clear upfront and keep it clear throughout. How will the ideas you present help people to think more clearly, live more fully, achieve their goals more effectively? If your piece answers that question, it passes the “Important” test.

Sometimes, of course, the importance of an article is evident in its very subject or title (e.g., “Keys to Choosing a Career You’ll Love” or “How to Beat Cancer”). But often it requires explanation. In any event, you should know and convey why your article matters.

True—in Two Senses

The “True” in ITEC pertains not only to whether the ideas you’re conveying correspond to reality (which obviously matters), but also to whether your article demonstrates or sufficiently indicates that they do.

Does the article provide examples to concretize the abstract ideas presented? Does it provide evidence or information that integrates without contradiction into the reader’s existing knowledge so he can see that your claims and arguments are substantially supported (if not proved)? If so, the piece passes the “True” test. If not, it needs work on this count.

In the case of an essay or article, you may have space only to indicate why a position is warranted or a conclusion is true, not to prove it. The latter aim typically requires a book. So don’t set your bar too high. But do marshal the best examples, evidence, and arguments you can in the space you have to make your case.

Essentialized

“Essentialized” means the piece includes only material that helps to convey its theme.

Don’t edit or censor yourself while writing the rough draft, as doing so retards the creative process and leads to stilted prose (for more on this, see Ayn Rand’s Art of Nonfiction). But, during the revision and editing process, if you find that you’ve included material that isn’t essential to conveying your theme, cut it. And be ruthless. A cluttered article burdens the reader’s mind and weakens your work.

If you know something is nonessential but hesitate to cut it because you like the material and don’t want to lose it, that’s good news! It means you have material for another article. Cut and paste it into another document, and let it go for now. You haven’t lost a thing. And you have a seed for a future flower.

Clear

Clarity is the most important standard of all. Not only is it a fundamental value for the reader; you can’t know whether an article or element meets the other standards unless it is clear enough to determine the matter one way or the other. Is your theme important? You can’t tell unless it’s clear. Is a given point true? Ditto. Is this element essential? Once again.

The “Clear” in ITEC pertains both to the article as a whole and to all of its parts. Each element should make sense. Each should integrate with the others. All should add up to a non-contradictory whole. For instance, paragraphs and sentences should be well-structured so their purpose and meaning are clear. The meaning of concepts and phrases should be clear (avoid jargon, package-deals, etc.). Examples should be clear. Transitions should be clear. Everything should be clear.

Contrary to the nauseating pretense running rampant in academia, unclear language does not smarten things up. It dumbs things down.

Respect your reader’s mind. You want him genuinely to understand the observations and integrations that support your conclusions. So use clear, straightforward language. If and when you must use technical terminology (and only when you must), define it clearly in plain language.

If you find that you can’t make a clear and simply worded case for your position on a given subject, either you have insufficient knowledge to write about it, or something is amiss in your reasoning. Take a break from writing. Do some additional reading and thinking on the subject. Try explaining the ideas to someone in your target audience—that often exposes problems and generates solutions. Then return to writing, see how it goes, and repeat as necessary. If it’s important enough to you, you’ll clarify the matter in time.

That’s ITEC. I hope you find it useful!

(For examples of works that meet or substantially meet these standards, see essays or books by Greg McKeown, Richard Mitchell, Henry Hazlitt, and Ayn Rand. Or peruse articles at The Objective Standard, all of which are edited by ITEC criteria.)