3 ms·
I like the 2nd of your options the best. It has the property that if you delete the parenthetical, it's perfect, while avoiding all of the other issues you ment
by bckr 5y ago
I like the 2nd of your options the best. It has the property that if you delete the parenthetical, it's perfect, while avoiding all of the other issues you mentioned, and still explaining who Kyoko is.
Perhaps more importantly, when said aloud it feels natural. This is a good rule of thumb for improving ambiguously good writing.
edit: another option:
... didn't only draw the eyes of Kyoko (the character)...
- astrobe_ 5y agoPerhaps the relative importance of these elements is actually swapped: the subject is the character's eyes, the fact that this character is named Kyoko is secondary. So: ...didn't only draw the character's eyes (Kyoko).... This parenthesis is only "necessary" because later they say Kyoko is cute. That said, leaving out the name of the character at first would have worked better, I believe. The parenthesis is a distraction from the topic of that paragraph, which is all about technique, and then later on the light note. It's absolutely not a big deal here, but for most types of user documentations, it's important to go straight to the point and avoid distractions. Schools tend to train for the opposite (fill at least 2 pages etc.).