The Sense of Style - Book Summary

Discover a whole new approach to honing your writing skills

Ponder over your most adored books — what do they all have in common that makes them so compelling? Is it their wordplay, the impactful initial sentences, the trajectory of the storyline or perhaps how all the components blend seamlessly? In essence, the allure lies in the quintessence of the author's style. So, how can we refine this indispensable literary aptitude?

Oscar Wilde may have once quipped that "nothing that is worth knowing can be taught", but there's no denying that there are definitive steps one can take to enhance their writing. As we navigate a multitude of writing styles from a diverse range of fields, we'll discover how to cultivate a sharper sense of style. Whether you're a budding novelist, a seasoned journalist, a communications head or someone who just wants their emails to be truly captivating — this journey is for you.

Along the way, we'll delve into —

How the dreaded 'curse of knowledge' can render a piece of writing nearly incomprehensible;

The colossal impact of a humble comma; and

The concept of malapropisms and why they're a pitfall to be avoided.

Learn the art of writing through the magic of reading

Style guides are abundant, all aimed at assisting writers to perfect grammar and punctuation. However, you'll often find that accomplished writers credit their skill set not to poring over style manuals, but to scrutinizing works they have relished reading.

Indeed, immersing oneself in well-crafted prose is a fundamental step towards honing impressive writing skills. Consider the captivating opening line of "Unweaving the Rainbow" by the renowned scientist Richard Dawkins: "We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones."

Intriguing prose draws you in from the onset, shunning clichés and banalities. When aiming to instill a grand sentiment, take a leaf from Dawkins's book and infuse a touch of poetry into your prose.

But what if you're grappling with conveying a complex idea? Here, vivid imagery can serve to transform the abstract into the tangible, clearing up the concept while simultaneously engaging the reader's imagination. Dawkins, for instance, refers to the myriad unmaterialized genetic possibilities as "unborn ghosts" — a powerful and stirring depiction.

From the very first paragraph, Dawkins's audacious style leaves an indelible impression on the reader. That, at its core, is what most works of literature aim to achieve, irrespective of their genre.

Interestingly, your source of high-quality writing need not be confined to literary masterpieces alone. Even something as seemingly mundane as the obituary column can provide a wealth of lessons.

The work of Margalit Fox, a New York Times writer acclaimed for her obituary pieces, eloquently proves that one can encapsulate an individual's legacy within 800 words.

Take, for example, her obituary for Maurice Sendak, the beloved author of "Where the Wild Things Are". Fox described his books as being: "Roundly praised, intermittently censored, and occasionally eaten." This playful description brilliantly encapsulates the extensive impact of his books — on critics who sometimes censured his work, and on toddlers who, being too young to read, perceive books as just another object to nibble on.

The classic style — the key to eloquence and clarity in your writing

Amid a plethora of writing styles to gain inspiration from, when it boils down to mastering clarity and brevity, the author and literary scholars alike concur that the classic style reigns supreme.

The core aim of the classic style is to elucidate matters for the reader in a manner that's straightforward and comprehensible, no matter the complexity of the subject matter. To succeed in doing this, the writer must relinquish any tendencies towards being pedantic or excessively analytical, traits that are often ingrained in other writing styles, particularly those utilized in academia or professional fields like business and law.

For instance, renowned physicist Brian Greene harnessed the classic style in his Newsweek articles to masterfully demystify an incredibly intricate concept: the multiverse theory. By employing clear, relatable analogies and examples, he illustrated the idea that our universe could just be one amidst an infinite assortment of coexisting universes.

Greene vividly likened the multiverse to a fully stocked shoe store, guaranteeing that you'll find your perfect fit, as a metaphor for explaining the fortuitous conditions of our specific universe existing within the multiverse. More shoes mean a higher probability of finding the right pair, just as a greater number of universes increases the odds of one having the ideal conditions.

Well-executed classic style has the power to make the reader feel intellectually empowered. Conversely, poor writing can leave the reader feeling foolish.

The classic style considers the writer and reader as equals, with the text serving as a guiding light to help the reader grasp the concept being discussed.

Bad writing, on the other hand, tends to do the exact opposite, often leaving the reader bewildered. It's typically littered with unelucidated references and daunting passages that the average reader struggles to comprehend. Unlike clumsy writers who often clutter their assertions with qualifiers like 'virtually', 'seemingly', 'somewhat' or phrases like 'I would argue', 'to some extent', the classic style articulates its content distinctly and confidently.

Resisting the 'curse of knowledge' to make your writing accessible

Ever abandoned reading a piece because it was flooded with complex terms and jargons? Texts can quickly become bewildering when the writer forgets that not all readers hold expert knowledge on the subject matter.

This issue, known as the 'curse of knowledge,' epitomizes the writer's inability to empathize with the reader, who might merely have a basic grasp of the topic. So how can you steer clear of this pitfall in your writing?

One simple tactic is to refrain from using jargon, acronyms, and specialized vocabulary that would make sense only to those thoroughly familiar with the subject.

When you're deeply immersed in a field — be it science or sports — it's easy to overlook that the industry-specific language might not be common knowledge to everyone. For instance, you can write an intelligible summary of your research on rodent behavior by stating "pertaining to rats and mice" instead of the more scientific term "murine."

Similarly, while acronyms might save you keystrokes, they might rob the reader of comprehension. Avoid making your reader resort to search engines for deciphering acronyms that they aren't expected to recognize.

And in cases when you must use technical terms, take a moment to define them when you introduce them, making the reading process smoother for your audience.

Moreover, many writers succumb to the urge to display their expertise, filling their writings with high-brow vocabulary and convoluted definitions in an effort to demonstrate their erudition.

Don't let this snare ensnare you. If you're crafting arguments, research reveals that readers comprehend your points better when your writing is clear and succinct, rather than obscured by pretentiousness or technical gobbledygook.

A handy way to keep your writing free of jargon is to visualize a potential reader peering over your shoulder as you write, alerting you whenever you employ words that might not be instantly comprehensible.

Mastering syntax and grammar for enhanced clarity in your writing

Imagine if someone told you, "Eating Jerry is sandwich a." You'd likely find yourself puzzled, unable to decipher the intended message. This is due to a jumbled syntax — the word order in the sentence. "Jerry is eating a sandwich," conversely, is far more comprehensible.

Sadly, syntax errors are seldom as conspicuous as the example provided, making them somewhat challenging to identify. Nonetheless, cultivating a profound understanding of syntax can help you detect these slip-ups, consequently enhancing the clarity of your writing.

In a nutshell, English syntax is the code that clarifies who did what to whom. Comprehending how a sentence is framed, and how the words that constitute a sentence are meant to accord with each other, allows writers to more easily spot when the code is being breached.

Consider the sentence, "The impact of the budget cuts have not been felt yet." The use of "have" suggests that the subject is plural. However, "The impact" is evidently singular, implying that "have" ought to be replaced with "has."

An appropriate understanding of syntax can also assist you in evading perplexing or overly complex sentences.

Indeed, numerous style guides suggest that you trim the excess from your writing by eliminating redundant words. This task becomes significantly easier when you possess a firm grasp of syntax and a keen sense for recognizing words that are surplus, repetitive or confusing.

Nevertheless, this advice shouldn't be construed as a mandate to ruthlessly excise all extraneous words. It's perfectly fine to compose lengthy sentences — as long as your syntax is robust.

At times, a sentence may be baffling merely due to poor punctuation. For instance, if you understand syntax, you'd refrain from writing a headline like this: "Joe Shmoe Finds Inspiration in Cooking His Family and His Dog." Insert a comma after "cooking," and suddenly Mr. Shmoe no longer comes across as a psychopath.

Leveraging the passive voice to enhance your writing when appropriate

There are two principal voices in English grammar: the active voice and the passive voice. Let's delve into these.

Active voice comes into play when the subject of the sentence performs an action on someone or something else. For instance, "A dog bit Jack on the leg." Here, the subject, the dog, is acting on the object, Jack, thus demonstrating the active voice.

Conversely, the passive voice is employed when the subject of the sentence is on the receiving end of the action. As an example, consider "Jack was bitten on the leg by a dog." In this scenario, the subject, Jack, is passive, whereas the object, the dog, is active.

As is evident, the passive voice can make a sentence more verbose. It's frequently used in academic and bureaucratic writing, which can often appear drab and challenging to read.

Hence, editors and style guides have traditionally been averse to the passive voice.

In his 1946 essay, "Politics and the English Language," renowned writer George Orwell advised that the active voice should be favored over the passive voice. Over the years, editors have concurred, often reflexively amending sentences composed in the passive voice.

However, the passive voice isn't devoid of its advantages, and a skilled writer (or editor) should recognize when to utilize it.

For instance, there are situations where the active voice may fail to convey information efficiently.

Consider this cumbersome sentence, framed in the active voice: "Another man, he says, whom someone had told to get rid of the puppy, gave the dog to him."

This can be transformed into a smoother sentence using the passive voice: "The puppy, he says, was given to him by another man who had been told to get rid of the dog."

Remember, your aim is to keep your writing lucid and succinct, so any tool that assists you in achieving that is worth considering. The passive voice occasionally allows you to direct your reader's attention in ways the active voice cannot.

For example, it's usually a good idea to commence sentences and paragraphs by concentrating on the main subject. Suppose you're attempting to do this in an essay about red-tailed hawks. Using the active voice could result in: "Birdwatchers observed the red-tailed hawk eating..."

On the other hand, employing the passive voice allows you to place your subject at the forefront: "The red-tailed hawk was observed eating..." After all, your essay isn't about birdwatchers!

Creating cohesive and comprehensive text by establishing a clear theme and linking arguments effectively

Crafting impactful sentences by thoughtfully arranging words is only one side of the coin. The other entails connecting these sentences to form a cohesive, understandable body of text.

A collection of well-composed sentences could still culminate in a disjointed pile of words. To pen a comprehensible text, you first require a lucid central theme, complemented by an outline that charts the progression of your thoughts. Your outline doesn't necessarily have to adhere to traditional conventions involving letters, numbers, and Roman numerals; all you need is a strategy that builds arcs of coherence — clear connections from one sentence or section to the next.

You nurture coherence by fashioning transitions between sentences or paragraphs, clearly demonstrating their interconnectedness. This is referred to as coherence relation.

One approach to clarifying how your sentences or paragraphs are interrelated is by leveraging suitable connecting words. Whether you desire to depict a similarity (using words like "similarly" or "likewise"), a contrast ("in contrast," "on the other hand"), an elaboration ("moreover," "in other words"), or an explanation ("because," "as"), the apt connector can make all the difference.

A coherent text is cleverly structured, employing these connectors to establish an arc of coherence that keeps tabs on ideas and viewpoints.

Most critically, it's essential to ensure that the reader comprehends your main theme right from the outset. You've probably heard of the expression "Don't bury the lead" — a guiding principle for writers due to its wide-ranging applicability across various forms of writing. The last thing you want is for your reader to be left guessing what your piece is about.

The same principle applies to your personal viewpoint. The reader should be aware early on what your perspective is on a topic or what you intend to convey about it.

Grammar traditionalists don't always get it right

Imagine this: you're grocery shopping, and you've only picked out nine items. You maneuver your cart towards the lane that reads "Ten Items or Less."

While you're patiently waiting your turn, someone walks up to you and reproachfully remarks, "Oh, how illiterate! Shouldn't that sign read 'Ten Items or Fewer?' 'Less' is improper!"

Still, no one appears to pay any attention. Everyone grasps the sign's meaning, yet grammar sticklers remain relentless in their argument that the term 'less' shouldn't be used for quantities that can be counted.

In certain circumstances, this holds true: saying 'less bills' does sound peculiar. 'Fewer bills' has a much better ring to it. Conversely, phrases like 'one less car,' 'less than 21 years of age,' and 'one less thing to worry about' all sound perfectly natural. In these and countless other instances, English speakers have comfortably adopted the use of 'less' where, according to the rules, 'fewer' would be more appropriate.

A similar situation exists for the singular 'they.' English language lacks gender-neutral pronouns; however, opting for the singular 'they' instead of writing 'he or she' isn't a recent phenomenon, nor is it grammatically inaccurate. In reality, renowned authors like Jane Austen and Shakespeare utilized the singular 'they' to navigate the gender-neutral pronoun dilemma.

However, the ultimate misguided rule is the prohibition of split infinitives — verbs like 'to love' or 'to go.'

Language traditionalists have long grumbled about the perceived grammatical blunder by Star Trek's Captain Kirk when he pronounced his mission was "to boldly go where no man has gone before." According to them, he should have said 'to go boldly' or 'boldly to go.'

Such misconceived rules are usually the result of wrongly applying Latin grammar rules to English. For instance, in Latin, 'to love' is a single word: 'amare.' Indeed, all Latin infinitives are single words, which makes them impossible to split. But English operates differently, and current grammar guides like the American Heritage Dictionary now declare that the rule barring split infinitives is outdated.

The peril of misused words in undermining the credibility of your writing

Many scribes find themselves pausing over the dilemma of whether to use 'who' or 'whom' — a linguistic fork in the road that stumps even the most seasoned wordsmiths.

However, the line separating 'who' and 'whom' becomes less blurry when you employ a simple trick. Let's consider the example sentence: 'She tricked him.' This sentence can be metamorphosed into two separate queries: 'Who tricked him?' — omitting 'she,' and 'Whom did she trick?' — replacing 'him.'

In your quest to determine whether to use 'who' or 'whom', you must discern if the unknown person is the actor (Who tricked him?) or the object being acted upon (Whom did she trick?).

When 'whom' is judiciously and accurately used, it doesn't disrupt the flow of the narrative. However, even revered writers like William Shakespeare and language aficionado William Safire preferred deploying 'who' universally to maintain a straightforward and conversational tone in their prose.

More conspicuous missteps occur when people opt for words that only sound similar instead of selecting the correct one. This type of error is known as a malaprop, and it's advisable to steer clear of them to dodge potential humiliation.

For instance, if a topic doesn't pique your interest, don't claim that you're 'disinterested' — implying neutrality. Rather, express that you're 'uninterested.'

Similarly, if you're feeling unmoved or indifferent, using 'nonplussed' — which signifies surprise or confusion — in your writing could puzzle your readers.

Moreover, it's beneficial to comprehend the distinction between commonly misused words like 'phenomenon' (a single occurrence) and 'phenomena' (multiple occurrences), 'tortuous' (twisted or winding) and 'torturous' (causing pain), 'proscribe' (to prohibit) and 'prescribe' (to advise), and 'reticent' (shy or reserved) and 'reluctant' (hesitant or unwilling).

When in doubt, don't hesitate to reach out to a dictionary. The brief time it takes to confirm the proper usage far outweighs the potential embarrassment of a malaprop mishap!

Conclusive reflections

The principal takeaway from this book:

The journey to becoming an adept writer may span a lifetime, but there are achievable steps you can embrace today to render your prose more persuasive, clear, and graceful. By cultivating a discerning eye in your writing, you can abandon detrimental writing practices and transform your writing into a delightful reading experience.