The Elements of Style (Fourth Edition), Strunk Jr. and EB White
4.18 on Goodreads
As the title suggests, this covers not only points of grammar, but the author’s own attitude towards editorial style and what he considers to be good writing. Because of this, it has a few things to say that may be considered contentious. It also happens to come highly recommended by none other than Stephen King. So there's that.
From an editorial perspective, I have a few personal bugbears within this book, but overall, I think Strunk makes sense, and his advice, if followed, can’t help but ensure you use good English grammar (provided you are an early twentieth century person looking to impress a similar audience of persons—yes, persons, not people, the book said so!). The problem lies in the fact that while the advice is often good, much of the prescriptivism within relies heavily on late 19th-century conceptualisations of grammar.
Much of the advice also preaches to the choir without ever putting in the effort to really explain itself. The author lovingly reminisces over how his professor, whose wisdom the book espouses, would often repeat his 'guidance' rather than elaborate on it. White lovingly recalls his professor's orations: 'Rule Seventeen. Omit needless words! Omit needless words! Omit needless words!' but coming from a background in education (specifically, teaching English), I am not convinced by this man's pedagogical approach. And I wouldn't be the first to point out that repeating platitudes can do nothing at all to support novices in fully understanding them. Which words can be considered needless? Upon whose authority? In which context?
The thing about this book that most grated on my nerves isn't the book itself per se, but the allegiance so many writers and editors still have to its crusty old pages. Sure, it had a dusting down for the fourth edition, but this thing still repeats the advice of a professor whose understanding of the world and the English language were both firmly planted in 1918. Alongside its truisms are pedantic imperatives to follow antiquated grammar rules which will turn perfectly good sentences into impassable behemoths. These zombie rules will be overlooked by seasoned writers and editors alike, but will threaten the fledgling writing of the less experienced writers who seek out its wisdom, which is truly reprehensible.
In the course of this review, I have found myself gradually downgrading my star rating to the point where I have questioned the sense of many a famed writer for their taste in style guides. I suppose I simply cannot resist the allure of controversy.
What are others saying about it?
‘just as useful today as it was when it was compiled’ I was tempted to omit the five stars that came with this declaration and let the reader interpret it as they will. For all the acclaim this style guide seems to have collected over the years, it remains contentious. Most professionals will recommend Strunk and White's guide to novices, but there are a sizeable chunk of them who are less enthused about it:
‘One can only wonder by whose authority these two gentlemen were anointed God’—I too, wonder at this.
My favourite review of this alleged pinnacle of writing advice books came from 'Patricia' on Goodreads:
Final verdict:
Two stars. As others have said, there are better, more relevant guides out there. I should add as well that the ebook had some truly horrific formatting—headache inducing—and errors in the examples used to illustrate some of its points. So if you are going to take the risk and buy this book, then for the love of all that's holy, buy the physical copy. This way, if you do not get along with it, it can at least be used as a door stop or something. Patricia had some excellent suggestions.
If you're curious, contrarian, or just a little masochistic, you can buy it on Amazon here (ad).
Commentaires