Systematic Blogger

When one begins to write any sort of prose he/she must find something important enough to write about. Now when I talk about importance I am not only talking about how important the topic is to the reader, but more specifically, and with greater influence, how important the topic is to the writer. We can all sit down and crap out a bullshit paper that serves the necessary needs for an instructor or our peers. That is the easy part, the hard part is writing something that we find truly important and relaying its importance to the reader in a way that they can productively receive our message. What I have said may sound easy to some, but for me it is sometimes difficult to relay a message in a constructive and completely comprehensible manner. If you find the later to be your discomfort in writing than you might want to investigate different avenues for successfully getting your point across. In this anxiety of portraying the importance of what I intend to say without any confusion I can fall back on two books that have helped me and may help you: Joseph M. Williams’s Style: Towards Clarity and Grace and William Strunk Jr. and E.B. Whites’ The Elements of Style.

Strunk and White provide a quick reference handbook for elements of style. Now if you are looking for a more in-depth view into the intricacies of style this guide may not prove to be as useful as others. The Elements of Style gives us a quick fix to our stylistic discrepancies; it does not go into great detail to explain why, how, or when we should use these “elements of style” but just to use them. For example, rule 4 on page 5 of Strunk and White says, “Place a comma before a conjunction introducing an independent clause” (Strunk and White pg. 5). After reading this, one could say that ‘yes, this is an important rule in style,’ but at the same time one could not ask why this is important because nothing other then the rule and a brief example is offered. Who do we ask if the answer we seek is not offered? We must ask ourselves if these authors are the definitive authority on the subject, but if not, who. Unfortunately there are many open-ended rules such as the one I provided, so it is up to the reader to decide whether he/she wants to use them. If you are at all familiar with traditional grammar and punctuation edict then this book will be a quick refresher in adolescent grammatical detail.

Williams’s Style: Towards Clarity and Grace follows the same structure as the previous instructional guide, but in a more explanatory and significant way. He gives us the traditional rules of grammar but with longer and more usable explanations. He does not simply state the rule and than give an example, he also tells us why, when, or where the rule should be used. In Chapter 7, Concision, Williams explains that, “To write clearly, we have to know not only how to manage the flow of ideas but also how to express them concisely” (Williams Pg.115). This is an example of Williams instructing and showing the reader how one might write clearly—not just telling them as did Strunk and White. Continuing with the idea of Concision Williams clarifies two more exponents of the same equation, but before he gives them he explains that, “These two principles are easier to state than follow,” this comment alone lets the reader infer that any confusion about new material will be met with sufficient examples and will help the reader make sense out of what he/she is reading. Williams’s Style: Towards…is a much better guide to style and clarity than what his opponents had provided. I recommend that when one is looking for a descriptive and explanatory guide to writing this book should be among one of first choices to read.

Blog #4
When I read some blog’s on Strunk, White, and Williams, the general theme I got was that these books seemed mundane and boring. But others expressed similar thoughts I had on the subject. For example, Ken wrote, “Rather than only telling us how to improve our writing, Williams shows.” I agree, Williams’ shows us how to hit the ball; Strunk and White just tell us to hit the ball correctly. Another similar ideal that came to mind when one of my peers brought it up is the detail of recurring information. In Style Towards Clarity and Grace, when Williams brings up a new topic with old information he reviews the old information first so that there is no confusion with new and old info. In Chapter 7 he refers back to Chapter 2 when he explained new factors to take into consideration when dealing with metadiscourse, “In Chapter 2, we described metadiscourse as the language we use when we refer to our own thinking and writing as we think and write—."

As I read what my classmates’ had written I found a general dislike for these two books. Chrissy says, “I find these books a necessary evil. They are boring. Nobody is honestly enjoying them. But I suppose we will all learn something.” In some ways I find this to be agreeable. Strunk and White were boring, but they were meant to be simple and uninteresting. Williams provides more explanation to his ideals, which might be more interesting for some. I have to admit that I cannot say I enjoyed Williams the way one would enjoy their favorite novel but I did find some interest in his assertions about clarity and style.

In retrospect, the class and myself will take from Elements of Style, and Style Toward Clarity and Grace what they will. Of coarse their decision is completely relative to the grammatical disposition that they find themselves in. Based on the gravity of the problem, they have a choice to implement any step, whether from Williams or Strunk and White, that will efficiently bring a temporary end to their frustrations.

Williams vs. Strunk and White


When comparing Strunk and White with Williams I thought the best way to go about it would be to use an analogy outside the conceptual thinking of comparing two books. Instead I intend to think of them in terms of comparing ideals or philosophies. I found that the best way to analyze would be to compare the books as one would compare two separate denominations of Christianity, particularly Scientology and Catholicism. As we all know any denomination under Christianity follows very similar guidelines in respect to the Ten Commandments. In Catholicism the Ten Commandments provide rules that should be followed in strict adherence. In other denominations, particularly Scientology, a more lax or contemporary structure of the Ten Commandments is provided for its members to follow. So, just to be clear, in one hand we have a set of rules that says if you do not follow these specific instructions to a ‘T’, you are risking the possibility of going to hell. In the other hand we still have the same set of rules but a different way of practice and application. I feel that this analogy will provide the best comparison for these two books of academic writing.

From Strunk and Whites’ perspective, the rules that they provide are closer to Catholicisms' ideals of strict devotion, no variation, and no exceptions to the rule. When I began reading Strunk and White I thought to myself, ‘I remember these rules from middle-school and they are laid out just as emphatically as when I was taught by Mrs. Applebee.’ As I read, a picture formed in my head of grammar rules carved into two stone tablets. The way these rules sounded through Strunk and White was that if they were ever broken or distorted, one would go to the hell of bad prose. In the end I pictured Strunk and White looking like two grammatical Moses, with white beards, long robes, and pocket protectors, preaching to students of English about how these rules are forever set in stone and should never be broken.

Contrary to popular belief I think Williams to be the best guide or resource in our struggle to find an applicable book for writing clarity. Similar to Scientologists Williams can be viewed as some one who knows and respects the formal rules but realizes that in this day and age they can be reestablished to better fit the time. Like Strunk and White, Williams provides for us similar, if not the same, rules that we have come to understand as guidelines for grammar. But unlike Strunk and White, Williams interprets these rules in a contemporary style that can be read and applied more realistically. His guidelines welcome flexibility and change. Something his opponents failed to do when explaining the rules was compensating their understanding with in-depth examples and a less constricting, more malleable form of alteration. Williams takes into consideration old and new problems writers are faced with. He understands that one formal rule after another can not productively be applied to the plethora of problems that stagnates the modern writer in his or her composition process.

Williams: 2nd half of Style: Towards Clarity and Grace

The second half of Williams’, “Style….,” is just as informative and helpful as the first. He proceeds in his explanation of coherence, respectively titled Coherence II. In the second, more in-depth chapter about coherence, Williams, closes the book, excuse the pun, on the topic. Towards the end of the book he adds new, refining fundamentals towards clarity and grace.

In chapter six Williams reiterates paragraph structure from chapter 5, but adds a third variable to the paragraph = issue + discussion concept. He expands the equation by adding point in-between issue, and discussion, creating, paragraph = issue + point + discussion. An issue or topic is essential to all prose, and as Williams explains ones’ topic sentence does not half to come immediately at the beginning of the paragraph, also, it can have modifiers strengthening the issue. As Mr. B. described, “these things work in sequence with one another.” In a paragraph the point modifies the “topic” or issue for discussion. Williams dives deeper by adding that if the introductory paragraph gives cause to the entire argument or document then the point should appear at the end of the paragraph. Simultaneously, if the point is in a paragraph, that is part of the body, then it should come after the issue or at the end of the paragraph. Not only is this chapter significant because it elaborates on paragraph structure but it also completes the clarity paradigm by giving us the “Model Entire” (pg. 108).

In chapter seven, Concision, Williams helped me realize to fundamentals that I have abused. It has come to my attention that I have often past over these fundamentals due to my cognitively trained collegiate habit of writing to fill space. These lines from Williams’ text, “Usually compress what you mean into the fewest words,” and “Don’t state what your reader can easily infer,” are obviously self-explanatory, but when we are trained to write in a system of higher education there are unspoken rules that encourage us to use complex and unneeded words. Furthermore, this not only confuses the reader but also the syntax, making it nearly impossible to understand whatever knowledge the writer is trying to relate.

As the book winded down Williams incorporated Length, Elegance, and Usage into his projection of clarity, although ten, Usage, on the history and progression of writing and clarity not the literal term of the title.

This book is a substantially wise contribution to style. Unlike Strunk and White it does not suffer from the same mundane ambiguousness’s. Style: Toward Clarity and Grace not only gives us different ways on ‘how to hit the ball correctly,’ but also how to stand, how to hold the bat, how much to choke up, and how to compensate in our writing when we are thrown a figurative curve, slider, changeup, or fastball.

Williams: 1st half of Style: Towards Clarity and Grace

The stylistic tools that we have recently come into connect with have and will become useful strategies for the ambitious writer and the exploratory reader. In the first half of ‘Style: Toward Clarity and Grace we come into contact with some new and old writing strategies. New for those of us who are starting to learn about clarity and old for those of us who have understood these principles at one time but because of a lack of use have grown rusty with atrophy over the years.

For me to grasp every concept in Williams’ text at a first glance was difficult. In sections I was rusty on some of the terminology and so they required a second reading. It seemed to me that the most rudimentary concepts procured my confusion. Later, after rereading, I found that these concepts were cognitively stored; subject --> verb = character --> action. These functions are the most basic fundamentals. Most of us use them out of a conditioned habitual response. Through the years, consequently, even the most basic writing principles can grow weak if they are not put to good use.

Of coarse we all want our work to make a point and for that point to be understood by our reader. Whether it is about a cow, a mad-cow, or a psychopath, we want to make a definitive point. A clear, cohesive, and concise point that will not confuse, hinder, or disrupt our flow of understanding when we are trying to convey it to our audience. In our quest for these helpful clarifying principles we should all take special effort to form our ideas around our reader, form them in a way that our reader will not miss the point, form them in a way that will relay our understanding in a productive discourse. For these reasons we must discipline ourselves in the fundamentals and principles of cohesion, specifically, ‘Managing the Flow of Information.’

As one reads through chapter three, managing the flow of information sounds reasonable and easy enough to apply but as an important attribute to cohesion it should not be easily thought about. Taking it for granted will only result in a poor beginning, incomprehensible topic strings, unnoticed topics, and other faculties that could confuse the reader. Encompassed within these negatives are their positives; beginning well, successful topics and successful topic strings, and ultimately prose that can be understood.

Syntax and punctuation have given us sentence order and correct use of grammar. Together these give us a template for style. On the other hand, if one omits these syntax and punctuation rules is it poor writing or ones’ own style. When speaking of rules 3,4,5, and 6, Strunk and White believe, as I do, that, “They should be so thoroughly mastered that their application becomes second nature” (p.7). Style should never be an excuse for poor punctuation but punctuation should not limit style. It depends on the audience. If one were applying to graduate school, he or she would want to exemplify their perfect punctuation and grammar qualities. If one were writing to a friend they would use proper syntax and grammar to relay their message, but they might take a more relaxed style of punctuation. In both, fundamental English skills are used as a means to an end, but the later is in a more comfortable context, which might be the cause for a more lax use of language rules. One should create perfect syntax that illuminates their style. I do not believe that one should let punctuation, syntax, and grammar dictate what it is you want to say; let it help form proper English, while at the same time expressing your style.
Section 1 of Strunk and Whites’, ‘The Elements of Style,’ is a refreshing guide to better writing. This guide will allow all of us to relay our individual messages in a clear and concise tone. Since we do not have all the room in the world to explain every thought in its own sentence—as if that would even be worthwhile—we can abbreviate our thinking by placing one idea with many parts into one or two sentences. In accordance with this concept, I believe this book to be an invaluable and integral instrument to our assignments and participation activities.
It has been a while since I have remembered how to properly exercise all of the correct Rules of Usage. In recent incidents I can recall were I have not implemented—according to Strunk and White—proper grammatical technique. To me, it is somewhat funny—facetiously funny—how we can forget the most basic writing fundamentals in an institution of higher education and still make the grade. I wonder if what professor’s use as a standard for undergraduate writing has significantly changed in the last thirty to forty years. I have a feeling it has changed, but unfortunately only as a lowering of the standard.

To think and write as an individual would be to stay true to ones own ideas and thoughts. One must not only be authentic but also comfortable in their style of writing. I believe that by gaining comfort in one’s style he or she can become a more confident writer. If it means breaking some rules then so be it. Rules were made to be broken.
Being an individual in one’s writing is coming up with original ideas and not borrowing others’. With all the crap out there one must keep true to his or her self, it may be difficult to come up with original views and ideas but differences are what separate one person from the next. Praise and cherish those differences, don’t exploit them, make them work for you.

Afterthought

I may or may not know what being an individual is but I do believe that by incorporating one’s own experiences, beliefs, attitudes, and ideals into their writing one can begin to find their individualistic style of writing. For example, we all have and tell stories but the stories themselves and the way we tell them is individualistic. I believe the key to good writing is relating to those you are writing about or to. When the writer looks at them self as an individual and relates personal human qualities that we all have in common then the writing becomes individualistic for the writer and the reader. The reader can then identify and assimilate with the subject matter and become part of the subject matter.

Before I wrote this in class I sat and thought a second on what my grandfather might have said when introduced to a computer or word processing. In order to complete this in-class assignment in time I took this perspective. The reason I didn’t write about my own feelings on the matter was because I found it very difficult to place myself in the shoes of someone who found ‘computer-aided writing….more overwhelming and constricting than using a pen and paper.’

What are these new fangled computer boxes? What purpose could they serve? Every time I want to writer something I have to turn it on, wait for it to warm up or get ready and about twenty minutes later, if I can still remember what it was I wanted to write down, I can begin slowly punching in corresponding keys. And what is the deal with spellcheck? (spell check) It doesn’t distinguish between words that sound the same but have different meanings. How do I know for certain that the corrections this expensive little box is giving me is correct.(?) I would much rather look the words up in Websters and be sure of their meaning and usage. (Webster’s) How does it know were which comma goes were and when and were something needs to be capitalized? What if I want every sentence to start lowercased, do I have to rewrite the word processing program because everytime I try to do it the box, “corrects” it for me. (every time) What if I use my PC too much, will I forget to write because of this brainwashing technology?

Afterthought

I believe technology or computers mainly, to be both a help and hindrance. It helps us by formatting our term papers and homework without taking hours to align and realign indents and borders, not to mention the amount of time it would take to write and rewrite a five-page paper with a pen and paper. Computers let us surf the information highway. It gives us a plethora of knowledge at our fingertips and in our homes.
The down side to the computer might be the loss of basic writing fundamentals such as the pen and pencil or if the basic skills of handwriting. Insomuch as time, it saves us plenty until the ten-page term paper we have been working all semester disappears from screen in a sudden melt down or power surge.
At this point none of us could live without technology, let alone pass this class. For know it seems we are stuck with it whether we like it or not. To tell the truth as a writer I would rather live with technology and all its inconveniencies than to suffer without it.