Then 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] kind

Then 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.