Avoiding the Cadence of Three
I often suggest that what I call the cadence of three[1] be edited. It’s a currently common stylistic device in fiction to have verbal or noun phrases grouped in threes for emphasis, often as partial sentences. It’s a writing style that’s very in vogue at the moment, along with the use of short, one-line paragraphs.
It’s certainly not wrong. It can be used to crescendo the tension in a scene or act as an atmosphere interrupter, advising the reader Pay attention: there’s something new and important happening here!
But when it’s used too often, it becomes predictable, and readers start to skip over them unconsciously, turning the text into a sort of shopping list that they end up tuning out. Let’s take a look at this example.
I’d stopped caring.
I’d stopped hoping.
I’d stopped giving a damn.
This could be a useful device in a manuscript which normally uses full sentences and paragraphs. It would work if a character had reached a turning point, perhaps at a major event in their story. But if if a writer uses this device frequently, it loses its oomph and just tells the reader Oh yay, another chunk of the page I can skip over! That indicates to them that the content is unimportant, when you want to convey the opposite.
These short lines could be stetted for maximum effect. But if the character is always giving up hope or caring or giving a damn, it might be better to edit the three sentences down to:
I’d stopped caring, hoping, giving a damn.
Or, better:
I’d stopped caring, stopped hoping—even giving a damn.
The top edit is okay, but it still retains the loping rhythm of the cadence of three. The bottom one is better because the three verbal phrases are presented slightly differently:
I’d stopped caring [retains the subject and modal verb of the pluperfect verb had], stopped hoping [repeats only the gerund that is the object of the verb]—even giving a damn [introduces new and interruptive punctuation and drops the repeated verb altogether].
In the second example, I’ve escaped the cadence of three by offering the reader yes, still three options but have provided a sentence with varied structure while doing so.
Doing this keeps your reader’s attention rather than makes them notice unnecessary repetition. Sometimes it is fine, and sometimes the tone and atmosphere absolutely call for that rhythm, in which case I would leave it.
Being aware of this writing tick can improve your writing and, ultimately, present a finer manuscript to your editor. That creates less clutter to be edited and, as a result, may reduce your editing costs, depending on how your editor establishes their fees.
[1]This phrase and explanation may not be used without my permission and attribution to me.
