The Internet Made Your Writing Boring — The Cultural Tutor

David Perell

Abstract

An hour and a quarter on a single spectrum — maximalism to minimalism — and where a writer should sit on it. The claim is that we are in a minimalist era following a maximalist one, that the pendulum swings across centuries, and that both ends have a virtuous side and a harmful one.

• Judging writing bad because it needs a re-read is an obsession with efficiency rather than a judgement about quality.
• Simplification is a tool rather than a virtue; keep simplifying and everything ends up identical.
• A word processor is an invisible hand on style, flagging correct old writing as wrong.
• What makes a writer better is rewriting rather than drafting, and most people never reach the second pass.
• A single precise word replaces a clumsy explanatory sentence, so precision and brevity are not opposites.
• Deliberate fluff is what makes writing memorable; compression can be correct and forgettable at once.

Everything below follows the conversation in order, from the spectrum itself through the case for maximalism, into the attention economy and the word processor, out through practice, rewriting, and the best version of minimalism, and finally into vocabulary, etymology and the build toward a climax. For anyone building a personal brand the useful instruction is the smallest one: read old and obscure things, and stop reading only what everybody else reads.

Chapter summaries

00:39 - The craft question is where a writer sits between maximalism and minimalism

The whole craft question is where a writer sits on a spectrum from maximalism to minimalism, and the goal is a style that takes the best of both.

"What I want to do is I want to spend this entire conversation talking about"

— 00:39

Once the spectrum is visible it appears everywhere — clothes, chairs, buildings, graphic design, speech, thought. We sit in a minimalist era following a maximalist one, and the pendulum swings across centuries, which means older prose was often clearer than the recent past.

05:38 - Both styles have a virtuous side and a harmful one

Both styles have a virtuous and a harmful side; the caricatures are page-long ornate sentences versus short sharp choppy prose.

"do you define minimalism and maximalism? There there are different ways to approach this. I"

— 05:36

A style is not good or bad in itself: each has a mode that serves and a mode that fails. The ornate caricature swaps door for portal; the terse caricature is the famous dollar-word-versus-ten-dollar-word school. Reality is blurrier than either caricature.

06:56 - Writing maximally means risking bigger words and heightened diction

Writing maximally means being willing to risk bigger words and heightened diction; some things simply cannot be said in a minimalist way.

"when you write in a maximalist way, which I think I think means being willing"

— 06:56

Bigger words, heightened diction, and the risk that goes with them. Some things simply cannot be said in a minimalist way, and precise word choice captures nuance that a generic word erases.

09:16 - Elevated prose can make dry technical material move a reader

Elevated, richly built prose can make even dry technical subject matter move a reader emotionally.

"the first time I I read"

— 09:16

Breadth of vocabulary and imagination add a weight and a life that a stripped-back register cannot reach. A nineteenth-century critic's long, precise sentences about how to build a wall reportedly moved the reader to emotion — on a subject with no emotion in it.

11:47 - Judging writing bad for needing a re-read is an obsession with efficiency

Judging writing bad because it must be re-read is an obsession with efficiency, not a real fault.

"Now, this is this is this may be the thorn in in our sides during"

— 11:47

Convenience culture treats I can't get it instantly, so why bother as a quality test, which it is not. Getting to know difficult prose is likened to getting to know a person: the worth does not arrive on first contact. The aim is that one point, not a blanket attack on modernity.

14:19 - Difficult prose stops feeling difficult once a reader is trained on it

Difficult prose stops feeling difficult once you train yourself on it; the barrier is unfamiliarity, not intelligence.

"this is this is the funny thing. Once you get used to it, that kind"

— 14:19

The barrier is unfamiliarity rather than intelligence. Train on it and it stops feeling difficult, which reframes the whole complaint as a statement about the reader's diet.

15:26 - Simplification is not itself a virtue

Simplification is not itself a virtue — keep simplifying and everything ends up looking identical and personality is gone.

"of the things that I think is going to show up throughout this conversation is"

— 15:26

Simple is a descriptive word being used as a value judgement, and stripping distinctiveness converges everything on sameness. Vibrant, deep brand logos were flattened over time into plain, easy-to-read marks that lost what made them theirs. Simplifying can be good; the failure is worshipping it.

17:12 - Maximalism brings a weight that conversational prose cannot reach

Maximalism brings a sense of weight and gravity that stripped-back conversational prose cannot reach.

"I just want to touch on that second point cuz this is really important and"

— 17:12

The instinct to decorate is natural to making things by hand — the machine age is what reframed ornament as primitive — and even the physical form of a book shapes the writing it invites.

24:57 - The attention economy actively suppresses new maximalism

The attention economy actively suppresses new maximalism online — the simpler and catchier wins the first two seconds.

"factor as it were is is the internet and and maybe this is something which"

— 24:57

The simpler and catchier thing wins the first two seconds, which suppresses new maximalism structurally rather than culturally. Clickbait is not new: writers two thousand years ago complained people were tricked into believing claims the slightest inquiry would disprove.

27:31 - Short posts stay simple and a slower space gets reserved

Keep short-form platform posts simple, but reserve a space (a long newsletter) for slower, more maximalist writing.

"let me say this wi with w with with with"

— 27:31

Simple does not equal bad, and a dedicated owned surface is what lets a writer stretch where the feed will not allow it. Advised repeatedly to keep it short, the writer found there was more to say — editions run to six or seven thousand words and readers enjoy them. Simple is a beautiful but dangerous word.

29:35 - The word processor made writing too perfect and cost it personality

The shift from typewriter to word processor made writing "too perfect" and cost it personality.

"project that I want to do is I want to look at what happened when"

— 29:35

The claim is about friction: what could not easily be corrected was left in, and what was left in was the voice. Removing the cost of revision removed the accidents, and the accidents were the only part of a page that could not have been written by somebody else.

30:28 - Minimalism at its worst is a standardising absence of personality

Minimalism at its worst is a lack of personality, edge, variation and experimentation — it standardises.

"minimalism. And I think what you mean and what I mean by minimalism in its"

— 30:28

When everyone writes to the same default, distinctiveness disappears and the prose reads as if it came from one factory. Ten books off a shelf feel written by the same person — which is a different complaint from simplicity or terseness.

31:26 - A word processor is an invisible hand on style

Word processors are an invisible hand on style — flagging correct old writing as wrong and suggesting "improvements".

"um, with that being said, word processing, I don't I don't think I've told you"

— 31:26

Flagging correct old writing as wrong, suggesting improvements nobody asked for. The tool has a style and it applies it quietly, which makes it an invisible hand rather than an obvious constraint.

36:11 - A distinctive style can be built, and the tools make it harder

A distinctive style can be consciously built, but the tools of the age make deliberate rule-breaking harder.

"a good example of someone who has more"

— 36:11

Personality in prose often comes from chosen deviations — unusual capitalisation, archaic spelling — that software now marks as mistakes. A historian spent years mastering a new prose style because existing writing was not powerful enough for his subject, and capitalised surprising words on purpose.

40:15 - Among people who write, practice has collapsed over a century and a half

Among people who actually write, we may be less literate than 150 years ago because we practise the craft far less.

"In a sense, yes. So I I should be very clear about what I mean."

— 40:15

Literacy is not binary: deep reading and writing are skills that decay without daily practice, and the day is now full of alternatives. Earlier writers spent whole days reading and writing with no competing media, and recorded speeches from decades ago read as markedly more complex. Average literacy rates have risen, which is a good thing.

42:43 - Typing is not the art of writing and skimming is not the art of reading

Typing is not the art of writing and skimming is not the art of reading — they only look like the same activity.

"add a layer to this that I think we spend more time typing for writing"

— 42:43

They only look like the same activities. Typing is not writing and skimming is not reading, and confusing them is how practice appears to be happening while it is not.

45:55 - What makes a writer better is rewriting rather than drafting

What makes a writer better is not writing first drafts but rewriting — shaping sentences and asking how to make each one better.

"On the writing tack, there's a popular modern writer who I think is really good."

— 45:55

Not first drafts — rewriting. Shaping sentences and asking how each one could be better is what improves a writer, which means the improvement happens on the second pass and most people never get there.

47:44 - Letter-writing built a depth that texting cannot

Letter-writing built depth that texting and email cannot; putting words down still lets you go deeper and deeper.

"Yeah, exactly. or your texts, you know, when I text you, like, you know, hey"

— 47:44

The medium set the depth, and the current one sets a shallower default. A letter had to carry weeks in one go; a message expects an answer within minutes and is written to that expectation.

52:20 - Minimalism at its best is an engineer's elegance

Minimalism at its best is an engineer's elegance — strip everything unnecessary and pack maximum effect into few words.

"Let me defend minimalism real quick because I think I'd love to do that as"

— 52:20

A single word can be chosen to carry several meanings at once, compressing a whole argument into it. A bestselling habits book's one-word title reads as carrying three at once — smallest unit, explosive power, and central thing. It is offered as a genuine defence of minimalism.

55:00 - Modern pedantry is a shackle on creativity

Modern minimalism's pedantry is a shackle on creativity, yet needless padding remains the oldest recognised fault.

"again we're using this word kind of broadly. I think an element of modern minimalism"

— 55:00

Treating a typo as a severe fault is misplaced pedantry — spelling has no real relationship to writing quality. The pedantry is a shackle on creativity, and needless padding remains the oldest recognised fault.

58:05 - The instruction is to write authentically rather than in a style

Do not try to be maximalist or minimalist — write authentically, in your own words; the worst sin is being boring.

"I don't think anyone should necessarily try to be maximalist, so to speak, or try"

— 58:05

Do not try to be either. Write authentically, in your own words, and remember that the worst sin is being boring — humans are biologically unequipped to tolerate it, and variation is a law of the natural world.

1:00:05 - The single best move is to read differently

The single best move is to read differently — old and obscure — and stop reading only what everyone else reads.

"get there? Well, as I said, the this is the almost the best piece of"

— 1:00:05

Read old and obscure things, and stop reading only what everybody else reads. It is offered as the single highest-return move available, and it operates on inputs rather than on technique.

1:01:47 - The opposite of a writer's habit is their strongest emphasis

Whatever is the opposite of what you usually do becomes your strongest tool for emphasis.

"One thing that comes to mind for me is the yin-yang symbol. Why? So, in"

— 1:01:47

Contrast against your own baseline is what flags importance: the deviation is the signal. In a mostly maximalist essay a burst of short blunt sentences reads as focus here, and one flowery paragraph inside minimalist prose does exactly the same work.

1:03:30 - Learning what words actually mean is the underrated skill

Learn what words actually mean — an unusual word can name a feeling a generic word cannot.

"well, learn more words. And I don't mean flick through a thesaurus and be like,"

— 1:03:30

Precise vocabulary enriches writing even at the cost of a reader occasionally looking a word up, and convenience atrophies imagination. The advice is to know what words mean, not to flick through a thesaurus for something that sounds pretty — the cost is real and accepted.

1:04:19 - The roots of words hold ideas waiting to be found

The roots of words hold ideas waiting to be found; etymology is a genuine source of essays.

"Let me build on that. Sure. Not just learning more words but learning the etmologies"

— 1:04:19

It converts vocabulary from a lookup problem into a supply of material, and the supply does not run out. Every word has a history, so the constraint is attention rather than availability.

1:07:03 - A word learned is the world seen in higher resolution

Learning a word lets you see the world and yourself in higher resolution; maximalism can therefore be more precise than minimalism.

"It's sort of like colors, right? Like there's colors between red and orange. But when"

— 1:07:03

Maximalism can therefore be more precise than minimalism — the extra words are not decoration but the finer gradations the plainer version cannot make. A single precise word replaces a clumsy explanatory sentence — precision and brevity are not opposites.

1:08:51 - Language is clay rather than a set of fixed pieces

Treat language as clay to be moulded, not a Lego set with fixed pieces and an instruction manual.

"think I think it's it something I've been trying to drive out without being able"

— 1:08:51

Rules of syntax, grammar and spelling can be broken deliberately if the result works — the rule of cool: if it looks good, it works. A revered dramatist invented words; capitalising unusual words in a post simply reads as intentional and lands. The result has to actually work.

1:09:38 - Great speeches come from disproportionate preparation

Great speeches come from disproportionate preparation, not spontaneity.

"where when to get that vibrancy to to get that energy that that authenticness that"

— 1:09:37

The apparent ease is the product of the invisible work, which is the oldest observation about craft there is — and it is worth restating because the fluency on display is exactly what makes the preparation behind it impossible to see.

1:11:56 - Every phrase gets built toward a single climax at the end

Build every phrase toward a single climax placed at the very end.

"you see all the buildup there, but the entire paragraph is building up to these"

— 1:11:56

Inside a build-up, the order of the parallel items is immaterial — their volume and diversity matter more than each literal meaning. What the ear is tracking is accumulation, and accumulation has no preferred sequence.

1:14:08 - Deliberate fluff is what makes writing memorable

Deliberate "fluff" is what makes writing memorable; compression can be correct and forgettable at once.

"you could say the majority of what"

— 1:14:08

Compression can be correct and forgettable at the same time, which is the whole argument in one sentence and the reason the spectrum matters at all.

Personal Branding Lessons

A conversation about style as a choice rather than a default. The moves below are the practical half.

Risk the bigger word when a generic one erases the nuance

Some things cannot be said in a minimalist way at all. Precise word choice captures texture that a generic word flattens, and reaching for it means accepting the risk that a reader will have to slow down — which is a cost worth paying rather than a failure. 06:56

Reserve a slower space for the writing that cannot be short

Keep the short-form posts simple, because the format rewards it, and hold a separate space — a long newsletter or its equivalent — for the denser work. The answer is two formats rather than a compromise that serves neither. 27:31

Write by hand to get the variation back

Writing alone with pen and paper produced more variation and a greater willingness to experiment than writing into a system that corrects as you go. The friction was doing something: what could not easily be fixed stayed in, and what stayed in was the voice. 34:53

Rewrite rather than draft

Writing first drafts does not make a writer better. Shaping sentences on the second pass and asking how each one could be improved does — which means the improvement happens in a stage most people never reach, however much they produce. 45:55

Write authentically rather than in a style

Do not try to be maximalist or minimalist. Write in your own words, and remember that the worst available sin is being boring — people are biologically unequipped to tolerate it, and variation is a law of the natural world rather than a stylistic preference. 58:05

Read old and obscure rather than what everyone reads

The single highest-return move in the conversation, and it operates on inputs rather than technique. Reading what everybody else reads produces writing that sounds like everybody else's, without any decision having been made. 1:00:05

Use the opposite of your habit for emphasis

Whatever you usually do, its opposite becomes your strongest tool for emphasis. It is a relative principle rather than an absolute one — the same device lands differently depending on what it is interrupting, which is why borrowed emphasis so often falls flat. 1:01:47

Build every phrase toward one climax at the end

The whole paragraph builds to a single point placed at the very end. Inside that build-up the order of the parallel items barely matters — their volume and variety do more work than the literal meaning of any one of them. 1:11:56

Questions

Each answer ends at the moment in the recording where it is given.

What is the difference between minimalism and maximalism in writing?

They are the two ends of one axis, not a right and a wrong way to write. The caricature of maximalism is the page-long ornate sentence stuffed with heightened words; the caricature of minimalism is short, sharp, choppy prose built from plain ones. In practice it blurs, because each pole has a mode that serves and a mode that fails, and the useful move is to choose where on that scale you sit rather than to crown either extreme. 05:38

Is writing that you have to read twice actually bad writing?

Not automatically. Judging prose bad because it cannot be absorbed instantly is an efficiency reflex, not a real test of quality — some writing was never built for a single fast pass, the way knowing a person takes more than one meeting. Difficult prose also stops feeling difficult once you train on it; the barrier is usually unfamiliarity, not intelligence. That said, the point is aimed only at the convenience test, not offered as a defence of genuinely muddled writing. 11:47

Why does so much modern writing sound the same?

Because a stack of forces all push one way at once: a culture that treats simpler as automatically better, shared tools that correct everyone toward one register, mass media that erased regional variety, and platforms that reward whatever is grasped in two seconds. Keep stripping distinctiveness and everything converges — ten different books can end up reading like one hand. Sameness is the cost of worshipping simplification, and it is the opposite of a differentiated voice. 30:28

How does the spellchecker or grammar tool change the way I write?

More than most writers realise. Paste canonical old poetry into the dominant word processor and it comes back underlined as wrong, with tidier synonyms suggested — an invisible hand nudging you toward one approved register. Shared fonts, templates and automatic correction sand off the deliberate deviations where voice actually lives, so the deviation reads as an error rather than a choice. Writing with the correction off, at least on the first pass, keeps the stumbles and odd choices that make prose yours. 31:26

How do I get better at writing if it is not just about writing more?

By rewriting rather than merely writing. First drafts are intuitive and top-of-mind; the improvement happens in the second pass, shaping sentences and pressing on precision and articulation. If volume alone made you better, everyone who fires off tens of thousands of emails would be a great writer, and they plainly are not. Returning to still words on a page, stepping away and reworking them is where depth comes from — which is the habit publishing in the open can build. 45:55

How do I make my writing less boring and more distinctive?

Stop aiming at either extreme and write in a way that is genuinely yours, because authentic prose is you appearing on the page and a minimalist default flattens everyone toward one voice. The stakes are high: humans are least equipped to tolerate boredom, and variation is a law of the natural world, so sameness registers as wrong even below notice. Distinctiveness is not decoration here — it is the whole point of a personal voice. 58:05

What should I read to develop my own style?

Old and obscure material, and deliberately not what everyone else in your space is reading. Inputs become outputs: read only the crowd's material and you will write and think like the crowd. Picking up an unfamiliar writer on an ordinary subject can reveal a permission you did not know you had — that a thing could be written about that way at all. Treat wide, unusual reading as the explore side of the ledger, the source that sets your ceiling. 1:00:05

How do I use contrast for emphasis in a piece?

Deploy the opposite of your dominant register for the stretch that matters. In prose that runs almost entirely ornate, a burst of short blunt sentences reads as a signal to focus here; in otherwise spare writing, a single lush paragraph does the same. Whatever your baseline is, its opposite is your emphasis tool. The move needs a consistent baseline to deviate from, so it only works if most of the piece holds one register. 1:01:47

How can learning new words actually make my writing better?

A precise, sometimes unusual word can name a feeling or idea a generic one cannot, and words are the boundaries perception draws between things — so more of them means finer distinctions, the way the real gradations of colour sit between the few named bands of a rainbow. Learn what words mean rather than flicking a thesaurus for something that sounds pretty, and a single rare word can replace a whole clumsy sentence. The cost is that a reader may occasionally reach for a dictionary, granted as real but acceptable. 1:04:19

Sources

The Internet Made Your Writing Boring — The Cultural Tutor

The sections above follow the episode's own order. Each timestamp is the point in the recording where the idea is discussed, so the post reads as a map of the conversation rather than a rearrangement of it.

Quotations come from the episode transcript with spoken filler ("okay", "right", "you know", "um", "actually", "kind of", "sort of") and false starts removed. No words are added: square brackets mark anything inserted for sense, and an ellipsis marks any cut. British spellings are restored, and speech-to-text errors were repaired against context only where the intended word is unambiguous. Where a line appears both in a cold-open teaser and in its place in the conversation, the timestamp cites the second — the point at which it is actually said.

Quotes are stamped with the moment they are said rather than with a speaker's name.