TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Strunk and White From:Roy Jacobsen <rjacobse -at- GREATPLAINS -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 3 Aug 1999 14:43:05 -0500
Personally, I don't have a problem with Strunk and White, other than the
fact that it deals almost entirely on _surface_ issues of writing, and it
takes a "micro" view, at that, dealing primarily with "do I choose this word
or that?" sort of things. It's good for clearing up confusion over things
like "which v. that."
When the view widens to issues like organization, you get platitudes like
#12. "Choose a suitable design and hold to it." They offer absolutely no
insight into what a suitable design might be for any specific purposes; not
so much as a general principle.
If you're after something with a bit more breadth, Joseph Williams' _Style_
might fill the bill. A more philosopical look at "style" is _Clear and
Simple as the Truth_ by Francis-Noel Thomas and Mark Turner. Both are
available at Amazon and Barnes and Noble, so I reckon you can also order
them through your friendly local book seller.
Roy M. Jacobsen
Documentation Supervisor
Great Plains
1701 38th Street Southwest
Fargo, ND 58103
USA
-----Original Message-----
From: Bev Lockhart [mailto:bl -at- SEATTLELAB -dot- COM]
>If Strunk and White is considered out of date, how come it still appears on
>most required reading lists for (college) English 101 and upwards?
