I tagged Geoffrey Pullum’s rant against The Elements of Style for del.icio.us a few days back, because it struck me as interesting, but I didn’t have time to say more. In the subsequent days, I’ve seen a bunch of “Preach it, Brother Pullum!” responses, most recently from revere. I’ve also received the copyedited manuscript of the book-in-production, so I’ve been thinking a bit about grammar and style in my own writing.
Most of the pro-Pullum responses I’ve seen seem to me to be missing the point. Or, rather, they’re criticizing the book because it’s not very good as an absolute and prescriptive guide to what constitutes good writing, when that isn’t what the book is.
Many of the practices and constructions that Strunk and White rail against are perfectly good, and occasionally essential. Good writers can, do, and even should use many of these elements in their writing, and indeed, Strunk and White use some of these elements in their own book. The thing is, Strunk and White isn’t intended as a prescriptive guide for people who are already good writers– it’s more of an aspirational guide for people who aren’t good writers yet.
While a slavish adherence to the rules presented in The Elements of Style would have unfortunate results for people who already write well, it would be a clear improvement for most college students. Just an attempt to follow the guidelines in Strunk and White would make most of the lab reports I have to grade dramatically better.
Strunk and White isn’t going to teach you the grammar you need to know to become “head of linguistics and English language at the University of Edinburgh” like Geoffrey Pullum, in the same way that Halliday and Resnick isn’t going to teach you the physics you need to know to become a college professor. There will come a time when you need to move beyond the most basic textbooks. But when you’re just starting out, they’ll give you the basic ideas that you need to get your feet under you, and prepare yourself for the next steps.