I think "go deeper" is replaced with a contextual question that shows you understand so far and invite the person to speak further. On simplifying your art, I

I think "go deeper" is replaced with a contextual question that shows you understand so far and invite the person to speak further. On simplifying your art, I assume they're getting at leaving readers to fill in parts with their imagination. There is some notorious shredding of Dan Brown writing I've seen which might help convey it. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/authors/dont-make-fun-of-renowned-dan-brown/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/authors/dont-make-fun-of-r... i.e., describe rough hands to infer a life of manual labour or a deliberate pace to imply age, rather than just tell people the age, job title and so on. A landscape photographer I know advises looking at the scene and finding a way to simplify it. Then again. And again. So, recomposing the scene to avoid an extra tree, or more rocks or something else distracting. When editing a digital image, it can involve spot-removing rocks from sand or blemishes that only distract the eye. Found this on Reddit: As Dr Seuss said: "A man with two heads must have two hats and two toothbrushes. Don't give him hair of purple seaweed and live fireflies for eyes."