When reading a book one begins at the beginning; this book has a foreword, but even before then we see the publication information -- this tiny totem of knowledge on English writing was written in 1869. Our discussion begins there, with the idea of a time context that cannot be reached.
Most present day writers have no concept of the forces which impacted the literature of past centuries. It is certainly strange to think that the core of any style guide would survive the rise of Modernism and Postmodernism (as well as Structuralism and Poststructuralism) and still retain the bulk of its source material. In this essay, we will review chapter by chapter the underlying structural aspects and attitudes that shape this text. In this way, we will attempt to discover what, if anything, has lead to its undeniable popularity amongst both English writers and teachers of English writing.
We will begin with the foreword, a brash rhetorical appeal to writers, authoritative and emotional. Although the techniques being used to argue the worth of the source material may seem indirect, they are not ineffective. “Writing is hard,” (ix) is a statement one has trouble disagreeing with, provided they are reading a style guide of their own volition. The foreword continues to assert a vague set of aesthetic principles that shape this view of writing as if they represent the most direct solution to the emotional and psychological problems great writers face. Then, the foreword lists the changes that have been made to the text – they are mostly quite trivial, although I find the integration of egalitarian gender views into the text to be fascinating from a social justice perspective, this seems a tangential to the purpose of the text which is to simplify the task of writing in a concise and accessible fashion.
After the foreword, the introduction from the 1979 edition introduces the voice of the book’s second editor: E. B. White (the first being William Strunk Jr., the first edition’s author). White starts by giving the reader an impression of Strunk’s personality and affect in relation to the source material, something he had written and printed as a small textbook for his students to use. Before long, we discover that White’s attraction to the material stems from a combination of its brevity and clarity. These are the two main ideas behind the many enumerated seemingly arbitrary rules of this book. Writers who follow the advice given in The Elements of Style essentially venerate these two principles.
At this point, I feel compelled to discuss how these views of writing relate to what present day writers call Current-Traditional Pedagogy. The idea that simple and direct prescriptive advice appeals to writers has already been argued setting up a platform for Strunk to deliver some set of rules designed to transform bad writing into good (“weak” or ineffective vs. “strong” or effective writing). This is the essence of a Current-Traditional Pedagogy. Although unpopular in some academic circles, these unique sets of rules must be judged based on their unique implications.
Chapter One makes a strong impression on the reader. I cannot find in it a single rule I do not already follow, a single exception carelessly omitted or a single idea I do not already fervently believe. Clarity is the only constructive purpose of language – the conventions discussed in this chapter allow readers to distinguish concepts from each other and place them within the framework of sentences in an unambiguous fashion. It explains, in the simplest manner possible, how one might take an abstract idea and express it in words.
Perhaps it rushes through its discussion of grammar. I would have appreciated discussions of prepositional phrases and how to choose them properly, adjectival order and categorization, and/or the frequent role of verb particles in ambiguous phrasings, but no text is perfect. What this chapter does address, it addresses in a careful yet concise manner. It assumes a level of grammatical competence and a certain familiarity with terms, but this is not so unreasonable given that it has been edited so as to be used by college students. Also, there is a glossary in the back; I find this chapter to be a useful resource.
However, Chapter Two begins discussions of a more complex facet of language: style. Breaking from the prescriptive or the conventional is always dangerous. For the most part, Chapter Two continues to encourage writers towards concise and accurate English usage – in this chapter an additional idea is introduced to explain how different stylistic choices impact writing. Instead of claiming propriety exists in stylistic choices regarding verb usage, Strunk uses the words “weak” and “strong” to discuss the formal impact of language – through these terms, Strunk argues that doubt and ambiguity must be reserved for when they are needed most instead of merely labeling all usages of modal auxiliaries as bad.
I only found one instance wherein this chapter deviated from what I would consider to be the briefest and most accurate discussion of the subject matter. “15. Put statements in positive form” (19) is bad advice. When writing stories or poetry, one should occasionally emphasize the absence of an object or action. If I was writing about absence it would be appropriate for my discussion to reflect that negativity. Rather than that, I could find no fault with the advice of this chapter.
Chapter Three has been made obsolete by the recent codification of language style through organizations such as MLA and APA. Four represent lists of common “errors” and should be ignored outside of their time context.
Although the fifth chapter was written by White, it represents the culmination of all these dogmatic rules into a coherent structure. Style is finally explained as a concept in such a way that allows the reader to grasp why stylistic choices impact the affect of their writing. Without guides such as this it would be impossible for some of us to fully grasp the scope of linguistic possibilities. By restricting the realm of possibilities to those of a size and quality that the mind can grasp Strunk and White allow writers to make real progress at the task, the craft of writing.
Most present day writers have no concept of the forces which impacted the literature of past centuries. It is certainly strange to think that the core of any style guide would survive the rise of Modernism and Postmodernism (as well as Structuralism and Poststructuralism) and still retain the bulk of its source material. In this essay, we will review chapter by chapter the underlying structural aspects and attitudes that shape this text. In this way, we will attempt to discover what, if anything, has lead to its undeniable popularity amongst both English writers and teachers of English writing.
We will begin with the foreword, a brash rhetorical appeal to writers, authoritative and emotional. Although the techniques being used to argue the worth of the source material may seem indirect, they are not ineffective. “Writing is hard,” (ix) is a statement one has trouble disagreeing with, provided they are reading a style guide of their own volition. The foreword continues to assert a vague set of aesthetic principles that shape this view of writing as if they represent the most direct solution to the emotional and psychological problems great writers face. Then, the foreword lists the changes that have been made to the text – they are mostly quite trivial, although I find the integration of egalitarian gender views into the text to be fascinating from a social justice perspective, this seems a tangential to the purpose of the text which is to simplify the task of writing in a concise and accessible fashion.
After the foreword, the introduction from the 1979 edition introduces the voice of the book’s second editor: E. B. White (the first being William Strunk Jr., the first edition’s author). White starts by giving the reader an impression of Strunk’s personality and affect in relation to the source material, something he had written and printed as a small textbook for his students to use. Before long, we discover that White’s attraction to the material stems from a combination of its brevity and clarity. These are the two main ideas behind the many enumerated seemingly arbitrary rules of this book. Writers who follow the advice given in The Elements of Style essentially venerate these two principles.
At this point, I feel compelled to discuss how these views of writing relate to what present day writers call Current-Traditional Pedagogy. The idea that simple and direct prescriptive advice appeals to writers has already been argued setting up a platform for Strunk to deliver some set of rules designed to transform bad writing into good (“weak” or ineffective vs. “strong” or effective writing). This is the essence of a Current-Traditional Pedagogy. Although unpopular in some academic circles, these unique sets of rules must be judged based on their unique implications.
Chapter One makes a strong impression on the reader. I cannot find in it a single rule I do not already follow, a single exception carelessly omitted or a single idea I do not already fervently believe. Clarity is the only constructive purpose of language – the conventions discussed in this chapter allow readers to distinguish concepts from each other and place them within the framework of sentences in an unambiguous fashion. It explains, in the simplest manner possible, how one might take an abstract idea and express it in words.
Perhaps it rushes through its discussion of grammar. I would have appreciated discussions of prepositional phrases and how to choose them properly, adjectival order and categorization, and/or the frequent role of verb particles in ambiguous phrasings, but no text is perfect. What this chapter does address, it addresses in a careful yet concise manner. It assumes a level of grammatical competence and a certain familiarity with terms, but this is not so unreasonable given that it has been edited so as to be used by college students. Also, there is a glossary in the back; I find this chapter to be a useful resource.
However, Chapter Two begins discussions of a more complex facet of language: style. Breaking from the prescriptive or the conventional is always dangerous. For the most part, Chapter Two continues to encourage writers towards concise and accurate English usage – in this chapter an additional idea is introduced to explain how different stylistic choices impact writing. Instead of claiming propriety exists in stylistic choices regarding verb usage, Strunk uses the words “weak” and “strong” to discuss the formal impact of language – through these terms, Strunk argues that doubt and ambiguity must be reserved for when they are needed most instead of merely labeling all usages of modal auxiliaries as bad.
I only found one instance wherein this chapter deviated from what I would consider to be the briefest and most accurate discussion of the subject matter. “15. Put statements in positive form” (19) is bad advice. When writing stories or poetry, one should occasionally emphasize the absence of an object or action. If I was writing about absence it would be appropriate for my discussion to reflect that negativity. Rather than that, I could find no fault with the advice of this chapter.
Chapter Three has been made obsolete by the recent codification of language style through organizations such as MLA and APA. Four represent lists of common “errors” and should be ignored outside of their time context.
Although the fifth chapter was written by White, it represents the culmination of all these dogmatic rules into a coherent structure. Style is finally explained as a concept in such a way that allows the reader to grasp why stylistic choices impact the affect of their writing. Without guides such as this it would be impossible for some of us to fully grasp the scope of linguistic possibilities. By restricting the realm of possibilities to those of a size and quality that the mind can grasp Strunk and White allow writers to make real progress at the task, the craft of writing.