[The New York Times, September 14, 2024. Click for a larger view.]
I no longer subscribe to the Times, but I’m still willing to look at the paper. I hesitated to post this bit, but I ran it past Elaine, and she had the same — instantaneous — response:
Why but ?
The conjunction makes no sense, because there’s no contradiction. What might work better:
The Democratic vice-presidential nominee has lamented the angry splits within families over politics. Indeed, he and his Republican brother rarely speak.But (ahem) if you read the article, it’s easy to understand that it’s Tim Walz’s brother Jeff who’s on the outs with siblings:
The breach in the Walz family has been painful, according to the men’s sister, Sandra Dietrich, who lives in Nebraska, where the siblings were raised. Jeff Walz has said he has not spoken with his brother, beyond a brief phone call, in years.A cousin is quoted as saying that in 2016 Ms. Dietrich and Jeff Walz were not on speaking terms.
“They all have their own opinions, and I have mine,” Ms. Dietrich said. “They’re my brothers and I love them.” She added that she was a Democrat and planned to vote for her brother and Ms. Harris.
“We’ve always agreed to disagree,” she continued. “That’s where I’m at with Jeff. I just wish things were different — that it didn’t wreck people.”
I’m not sure how to rewrite to remove the suggestion that the enmity here is mutual. Perhaps it is. But the article strongly implies that it’s Jeff Walz who at one point or another has cut off contact with his siblings. Here’s a possible revision if that is the case:
The Democratic vice-presidential nominee has lamented the angry splits within families over politics. Indeed, in recent years his Republican brother has had little contact with his Democratic siblings.Pinboard
All OCA How to improve writing posts (Pinboard)
[This post is no. 126 in a series dedicated to improving stray bits of professional public prose.]