4 ms·
Sure, I wouldn't recommend anyone ever take any writing guide as some kind of scripture to be followed dogmatically. As with any art, there are no real rules, o
by erellsworth 4y ago
Sure, I wouldn't recommend anyone ever take any writing guide as some kind of scripture to be followed dogmatically. As with any art, there are no real rules, only guidelines.
Unless, of course, you're taking a class, in which case the rules are whatever the professor says they are. There's a reason academic writing isn't often very enjoyable to read.
- eesmith 4y agoThen Strunk and White isn't a good initial reference as they are pretty dogmatic in their many rules. White referred to "the remembered sting of [Strunk's] kindly lash", and likened the rules to a sergeant "snapping orders to his platoon." How are readers supposed to understand those orders aren't real? I don't understand the relevance of "academic writing" as 1) Strunk and White is widely recommended to authors in general, 2) 10+ million copies sold aren't mostly going to academia, and 3) examples from the book show a bias against what Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_writing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_writing characterizes as "academic writing". Eg, "The Elements of Style" really does not like the noncommittal academic writing style of the following (quoting from https://archive.org/details/elementsofstylew00stru/page/14/mode/2up?q=rule https://archive.org/details/elementsofstylew00stru/page/14/m... ): > The Taming of the Shrew is rather weak in spots. Shakespeare does not portray Katharine as a very admirable character, nor doe Bianca remain long in memory as an important character in Shakespear's works. and instead prefers: > The women in The Taming of the Shrew are unattractive. Katharine is disagreeable, Bianca insignificant.