Style: An Anti-Textbook

Of course Richard Lanham's "Style: an Anti-Textbook is a classic. It tackles a prickly subject: why Strunk & White's "Elements of Style" can actually stifle your writing and limit your ability to to write in a personal and artful way. He makes his case with lively writing, well thought out ideas, and engaging examples. It is a read: you'll have to look a word here and there, but that is part of the fun. When you have finished this book, read "Building Great Sentences" by Brooks Landon. This book is a great tutorial on the world of writing beyond Strunk & White.

Arrived New

I don't think much of the Richard Lanham's writing ability. I first read  Revising Prose (5th Edition)  and found it wanting, and I think this book is merely the proto-version of that book.The problem, however, is that he has correct and useful insights into the problems of writing, and, in this book, the writing about writing. He has good things to say. He has good ideas. He just can't write convincingly. This book is the delight of the person who considers himself the thinking sort--everyone else is wrong and the system is rigged. The textbooks are written by hacks, published by bean counting idiots, and assigned by failed writers to cretins fulfilling general education requirements. The thinking person must endure all of this and copes by putting himself above the fray. If you liked  Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong  or  A People's History of the United States (P.S.) , you'll probably enjoy reading Lanham's evisceration of composition instruction. However, by the time you're in college, you should have already advanced as reader to questioning and evaluating sources, working with primary sources, and synthesizing ideas. The concept of a "textbook" at the college level is fundamentally wrong unless you think college is really just four more years of high school.Lanham is no better than the textbooks he mocks (collectively as "The Books"). I knew this book was going pear-shaped even in its introduction when he asserted, to no good use, that America is the only nation that cares enough to teach its entire citizenry how to write. He has two unsupported and unbelievable suppositions there: that America is the only nation to do so, and that America is actually doing so. I don't think either are true. Even conceding that point, it's entirely irrelevant. There's no reason to assert anything about America. This isn't a book about post-industrial societies.He then starts a story that leads to him writing this book. He writes "I was sitting in my office at UCLA one sunny spring day ...". Why does it matter what the weather was like? It has nothing to do with the story. It's trite. It's Snoopy typing out "It was a dark and stormy night". Furthermore, what does UCLA have to do with it? There's much he doesn't tell and assumes that we've picked up aside from what he tells us. Why shouldn't he start with "I had been teaching Freshman Composition at UCLA for ten years when ...". In  Revising Prose (5th Edition) , he goes on and on about the Lard Factor, the ratio of needless to useful words in a sentence. He's no better than the people he mocks, filling his pages with fluff.After reading this book, I've come to think that Lanham is merely in love with words, which he'll freely admit, but a bit bewildered by sentences, paragraphs, and chapters. He has good insight, but can't express it. The person who most needs his insight is unlikely to tease it out of this book.

If you never believed your college professors that what they were looking for was clear, direct writing, in spite of what they said, then this book is for you. It's also a great writing guide because it exposes all kinds of trenches we can fall into if were aren't looking honestly at our writing styles. I was very entertained and felt like someone had nicely fleshed out an idea I had always had in the back of my head.

That pleasure in words should be the standard for writers was a unique concept to most college students when this book was written. Pleasure in giving the refer the emotional impact has been the standard for great writers since at least Ancient Greek times.

A book that deserves study, not just for reading. some content is for the college professors and students, but any one interested in writing will fine great benefit from this book.

This is the writing book I wanted in High School and College.

I am very disappointed in this book. I can say I derived absolutely nothing from reading it and consider the purchase a waste of money. It consists simply of the author's rants against the current way writing is taught in college. No positive instruction is given, and there is no benefit to be gained by reading it.

El libro está muy bien, porque rompe con todas las reglas de la escritura que habitualmente se enseñan y sirve para tener un concepto un poco más creativo de lo que debe ser escribir.

Whew. Deep breath.First off, I didn't bother to read too far. Second, I checked here and there through the book for some sign of relief.Now I may be all wrong here; but if you are a writer, especially a writer of fiction or poetry, forget this. If you are a reader and want to see a lot of stuff about the development - or lack of development - of written English prose style in America - this is the book for you.Page after page is filled with examples of terrorizing style, which the author has defined as what to avoid. (yes, I do mean 'terrorizing'). Page after page after page of scientific and socialogical obfuscation, mixed with notes here and there pleading with the American educational system to teach English style as a fun thing. Am I clear?Well, that's about it. Page after page of examples of bad style, and not much about good style.As one or another of the previous reviewers has mentioned, there must be humour somewhere here; but I was too impatient to find it.