Agreed. We could point out that, for the last 30-odd years, Strunk and White's "Elements of Style" has served as the homogenizing cudgel used to beat every writ

Agreed. We could point out that, for the last 30-odd years, Strunk and White's "Elements of Style" has served as the homogenizing cudgel used to beat every writer's voice into submission. But, by and large, the influence of EoS has been a good thing. It's helped a lot more people than it's hurt. Serious and professional writers generally write for two things: clarity and insight. Stylistic preferences shouldn't stamp out a writer's ability to make a good point. They should help him express that point more clearly. That's usually to the writer's (and readers') advantage. Writers who break the rules, and who know what they're doing, are fine. Most rule-breakers don't know what they're doing, however. For every David Foster Wallace, there are a thousand writers who aren't aware they're hard for most people to read.