Cutting 30 Percent

Your first draft is too long. This is not a guess — it is a near-universal law of writing. First drafts contain throat-clearing, redundant examples, hedging, wordy phrases, and entire sections that exist because the writer needed to think through them, not because the reader needs to read them. The fix is systematic cutting. Target 30% reduction from your first draft. This sounds aggressive. It is not. Once you start looking, you will find that most of the cuts are painless — the text is better without the removed material, not worse.

Why 30%

The 30% target is not arbitrary. It comes from decades of editorial practice and reflects a consistent observation: first-draft writers include roughly a third more material than the reader needs.

Where the excess comes from:

  ~10% — Wordy phrases that can be shortened
  ~10% — Redundant sentences and repeated points
  ~10% — Entire paragraphs or sections the reader does not need

You will not hit exactly 30% every time. Some drafts need 20% cut, some need 50%. The number is a forcing function that makes you take cutting seriously rather than trimming a word here and there and calling it done.

Three Levels of Cutting

Cutting happens at three levels: paragraphs, sentences, and words. Work from the largest unit to the smallest. Cutting an entire paragraph saves more than agonizing over individual word choices in a paragraph that should not exist.

Level 1: Paragraphs

For every paragraph, ask one question: "Does this need to exist?"

A paragraph earns its place if it does one of these things:

  - Introduces a concept the reader needs for what follows
  - Provides evidence or an example that supports the main argument
  - Gives the reader actionable information (a command, a configuration, a decision)
  - Addresses an objection or question the reader will have

If a paragraph does none of these, delete it. Do not rewrite it. Delete it.

Paragraphs that usually fail the test:

  - Historical background the reader does not need
    "REST was first proposed by Roy Fielding in his 2000 dissertation..."

  - Restating the obvious
    "Testing is important for software quality. Without tests,
     bugs can reach production and cause problems for users."

  - Meta-commentary about the document itself
    "In the next section, we will explore the various options
     available for configuring the cache layer."

  - Hedging paragraphs
    "Of course, every situation is different, and what works for
     one team may not work for another. Your mileage may vary."

Each of these paragraph types feels necessary while writing. They feel like transitions, context-setting, or responsible caveats. But the reader does not need them. The reader needs the answer.

Level 2: Sentences

After cutting paragraphs, look at each surviving sentence. Ask: "Does this add information that the previous sentence did not?"

Before (3 sentences):
  "Connection pooling is a technique for managing database connections.
   Instead of opening a new connection for every query, the application
   reuses existing connections from a pool. This reduces the overhead
   of establishing new connections and improves performance."

After (1 sentence):
  "Connection pooling reuses database connections instead of opening
   new ones per query, which reduces connection overhead."

Three sentences became one. The information content is the same. The reader's time investment is a third.

Redundant Sentences

Watch for sentences that restate the previous sentence using different words. This happens more than you think, especially after a complex explanation where the writer instinctively restates to make sure the reader understood.

Before:
  "The timeout should be set to 30 seconds. In other words, the
   maximum time the client will wait for a response is half a minute."

After:
  "Set the timeout to 30 seconds."

The second sentence in the original adds zero information. It restates the same fact in different units. Cut it.

Sentences That Announce Instead of Deliver

A common pattern is writing a sentence that announces what the next sentence will say, followed by the sentence that actually says it.

Before:
  "There is one important configuration change you need to make.
   Set max_connections to 100 in the PostgreSQL config."

After:
  "Set max_connections to 100 in the PostgreSQL config."

The announcement sentence is a verbal tic. The reader does not need a preview of the next sentence. They are about to read the next sentence.

Level 3: Words

After cutting paragraphs and sentences, tighten individual phrases. This is the most granular level of cutting, and where the 30% target gets filled.

Wordy                              Concise
──────────────────────────────────────────────
in order to                        to
due to the fact that               because
at this point in time              now
in the event that                  if
a large number of                  many
has the ability to                 can
is able to                         can
make use of                        use
on a regular basis                 regularly
in a manner that                   [restructure the sentence]
for the purpose of                 to
in close proximity to              near
with the exception of              except
the vast majority of               most
take into consideration            consider
come to the conclusion             conclude
it should be noted that            [delete]
it is important to realize         [delete]
the reason is because              because
despite the fact that              although

These substitutions are mechanical. You do not need to think creatively — just pattern-match and replace. After doing this a few times, you will stop writing the wordy versions in the first place.

Before & After Examples

Example 1: Explaining a Configuration

Before (87 words):
  "It is important to understand that when you are configuring
   the application's logging system, you will need to make sure
   that you set the log level to an appropriate value. In most
   cases, for a production environment, it would be advisable
   to set the log level to WARN or ERROR. This is due to the
   fact that lower log levels like DEBUG or INFO can potentially
   generate a very large number of log entries, which could
   have a negative impact on performance."

After (32 words):
  "Set the log level to WARN or ERROR in production. DEBUG and
   INFO generate high log volume that degrades performance.
   Reserve lower log levels for development and staging
   environments."

63% reduction. The after version is more direct, more specific, and easier to act on.

Example 2: Describing a Process

Before (72 words):
  "The deployment process involves several steps that need to
   be completed in a specific order. First, you need to run the
   test suite to make sure all tests pass. After that, you
   should build the Docker image. Once the image has been built
   successfully, you can then push it to the container registry.
   Finally, you will need to update the Kubernetes deployment
   to use the new image."

After (30 words):
  "Deploy in this order:
   1. Run the test suite
   2. Build the Docker image
   3. Push to the container registry
   4. Update the Kubernetes deployment"

58% reduction. The process was hiding in a paragraph. A numbered list is the correct format for sequential steps.

Example 3: Explaining a Trade-Off

Before (61 words):
  "One thing to keep in mind is that while this approach does
   offer significant advantages in terms of simplicity and ease
   of implementation, it does come with some trade-offs that
   should be taken into consideration. Specifically, there is a
   performance penalty associated with this method, particularly
   when dealing with large datasets that contain a substantial
   number of records."

After (22 words):
  "This approach is simpler to implement but slower on large
   datasets. In our benchmarks, queries over 100k rows took
   3x longer."

64% reduction. The after version adds a specific benchmark that the before version lacked, despite being a third of the length.

Resistance to Cutting

The hardest part of cutting is not knowing what to cut — it is being willing to cut it. Writers resist cutting for predictable reasons.

"But I spent time writing that paragraph."
  — The reader does not care about your effort. They care about their time.

"But it adds nuance."
  — If the nuance does not change what the reader does, it is not useful nuance.

"But someone might need that context."
  — If most readers do not need it, move it to a footnote or appendix.

"But the document will be too short."
  — Short documents that answer the question are better than long ones
     that bury the answer. There is no minimum length for usefulness.

"But I need to sound thorough."
  — Thoroughness is covering all necessary points, not using many words
     to cover each point.

The Cutting Process

Here is the process in practice:

1. Copy your draft (keep the original — you can always restore)
2. Read each paragraph and delete any that fail the "does this
   need to exist?" test
3. Read each sentence in surviving paragraphs and merge or delete
   redundant ones
4. Search for wordy phrases from the substitution table and replace
5. Read the result aloud — if it flows better short, the cuts were right
6. Check word count — aim for 70% of the original

If you are struggling to reach 30%, look for these specific patterns:

  - Any paragraph starting with "It is important to note..."
  - Any sentence starting with "In other words..."
  - Any paragraph that restates the previous paragraph
  - Any section that provides background the reader was not asking for
  - Any example that makes the same point as a previous example

Knowing When to Stop

Cutting has diminishing returns. After removing the obvious excess, you reach a point where further cuts sacrifice clarity or completeness. Signs you have cut enough:

  - Every remaining paragraph has a clear, unique purpose
  - No sentence can be removed without losing information
  - The document flows naturally when read aloud
  - You are now debating individual word choices, not structural cuts
  - A test reader did not ask "where's the part about X?"

If a test reader says "this is too terse" or "I needed more explanation of Y," you have cut too deep in that area. Add back the specific thing they needed.

Common Pitfalls

• Trimming words when you should be cutting paragraphs. Start with the largest unit. Polishing sentences in a paragraph that should be deleted is wasted effort.
• Cutting examples but keeping abstractions. Technical readers need examples more than explanations. If you must choose, keep the example and cut the explanation.
• Removing trade-offs and caveats. Cutting means removing unnecessary text, not removing nuance. Keep the information that changes what the reader does.
• Not keeping the original draft. Always cut from a copy. If you cut too aggressively, you need to be able to restore specific sections.
• Confusing short with good. Short is a means to clarity, not an end in itself. If the short version is unclear, it is too short.
• Stopping after one pass. The first round of cuts reveals new redundancies. Do at least two passes.

Key Takeaways

• Target a 30% reduction from your first draft. It sounds aggressive but is almost always achievable.
• Cut at three levels: paragraphs first, then sentences, then words. Work from largest to smallest.
• For every paragraph: "Does this need to exist?" For every sentence: "Does this add new information?" For every phrase: "Is there a shorter way?"
• Wordy-to-concise substitutions are mechanical. Memorize the common ones and they stop appearing in your drafts.
• Resistance to cutting is emotional, not logical. The reader's time matters more than your effort.
• Keep the original draft. Cut from a copy. You can always restore.