appropriate and some are not. If the writer is familiar with his subject
and deeply in earnest, the appropriate figures will rise spontaneously in
his mind. If they do not, little is gained by seeking for them.

3. The effectiveness of a comparison, whether literal or figurative,
depends upon the familiarity of the reader with one of the two things
compared. To say that a petrel resembled a kite would be of no value to
one who knew nothing of either bird. Similarly a figure is defective if
neither element of the comparison is familiar to the readers.

4. Suitable figures give picturesqueness and vivacity to language, but
hackneyed figures are worse than none.

5. Elaborate and long-drawn-out figures, or an overabundance of short
ones, should be avoided.

6. A figure must be consistent throughout. A comparison once begun must be
carried through without change; mixing figures often produces results
which are ridiculous. The "mixed metaphor" is a common blunder of
beginners. This fault may arise either from confusing different metaphors
in the same sentence, or from blending literal language with metaphorical.
The following will serve to illustrate:--


1. [Confused metaphor.] Let us pin our faith to the rock of perseverance
and honest toil, where it may sail on to success on the wings of hope.

2. [Literal and figurative blended.] Washington was the father of his
country and a surveyor of ability.