It seems as if the most common use of the term“early stage” is reserved for describing cancer, Alzheimer’s Disease, and similar diseases. When I hear someone use the term I anticipate that I am about to hear about a friend or relative being diagnosed with an illness.
However, when the word incipient is used, my mind goes to a completely different place. I anticipate hearing about a novel about to be completed, a new business plan, or a career about to take off. It’s strange, because the word incipient means the same thing as early stage; they are synonyms for each other.
This is a good example of how the choices available in language give a writer the opportunity to be expressive without employing a long, wordy explanation. When I was studying screenwriting the instructor was emphatic that “less is more” when it comes to dialogue in a screenplay. The screenwriter doesn’t want to explain everything, but needs to leave some of the task to the viewer. Watching a film employs the task of filling in the gaps. The same can be said for a good novel.
I’m in the midst of the second book of the Stieg Larsson trilogy, The Millennium Trilogy. One of the criticisms I have of Larsson’s writing is that he says too much. He leaves nothing to the imagination of the reader. Some of his lists become tedious and distract from the story line. The use of a term such as “compulsive shopping” or “endless purchases” would have sufficed to tell me that the uber-shopper bought a huge quantity of clothing on a shopping venture. Or maybe he could have described her as being overwhelmed with the boxes and bags of clothing purchased as she moved from her car to her apartment. Instead, Larsson enumerates each item in a shopping list. It feels like a juvenile writing style.
Similarly, the use of a word like incipient can set the stage for what follows, and is so much more powerful than spelling out the fact that what is happening is just the beginning stage of something yet to occur.
Unfortunately, one of the down sides of the use of incipient is its resemblance to the word insipid, which means weak or unimpressive. It is easy to confuse the two, completely changing the meaning of the thought. The writer must know (her) audience before employing a word which easily could be misconstrued. That thought raises the issue of the use of more esoteric words in writing. Are they meant to impress the readers, while only serving to confuse them? Or is the use of the word something which truly enhances the thought and is justifiable on that basis?
Writing is an art, but it is also a craft. The use of language is something of which the author must be aware and alert. An entire piece can be destroyed by the inappropriate use of a word. Or…a piece can be enhanced to the level of brilliance by the clever employment of a word which sets the unique tone for the piece.
Photo Credit: laPlace
