Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.14 AVERAGE
4.14 AVERAGE
This book was very good! It was helpful and fun to read.
Unpleasant truth: very few of us write well.
This book is a strong start when you cannot define good writing, but you think you can produce it. I’m sure it will humble you. The author shares the most common writing mistakes — I started seeing them everywhere. He focuses on what to avoid if you want people to read your non-fiction.
For me, the most important message of the book is this: keeping the reader’s attention is the hardest thing to do. University didin’t teach me that; my work has always been read thoroughly and with care. But professors are paid to do it. Real readers are not. I only have few seconds to prove myself before they leave.
Even though the book was valuable to me, I only learnt what doesn’t work. The author didn’t address literary devices (alliteration, litotes, personification, etc.) that can enrich my writing and entertain the reader. Also, he barely discussed grammar, syntax and punctuation. No writing will be worth reading if it’s not grammatically correct (unless you are the next Bukowski).
So, it is a good start so you don’t embarrass yourself, but it won’t teach you the specifics of writing.
“Clutter is the disease of American writing. We are a society strangling in unnecessary words, circular constructions, pompous frills and meaningless jargon.”
This book is a strong start when you cannot define good writing, but you think you can produce it. I’m sure it will humble you. The author shares the most common writing mistakes — I started seeing them everywhere. He focuses on what to avoid if you want people to read your non-fiction.
For me, the most important message of the book is this: keeping the reader’s attention is the hardest thing to do. University didin’t teach me that; my work has always been read thoroughly and with care. But professors are paid to do it. Real readers are not. I only have few seconds to prove myself before they leave.
Even though the book was valuable to me, I only learnt what doesn’t work. The author didn’t address literary devices (alliteration, litotes, personification, etc.) that can enrich my writing and entertain the reader. Also, he barely discussed grammar, syntax and punctuation. No writing will be worth reading if it’s not grammatically correct (unless you are the next Bukowski).
So, it is a good start so you don’t embarrass yourself, but it won’t teach you the specifics of writing.
“Clutter is the disease of American writing. We are a society strangling in unnecessary words, circular constructions, pompous frills and meaningless jargon.”
One of the most important books I read. It starts where Strunk and White ends and takes the dialogue forward. A must read for any writer no matter what you write.
informative
medium-paced
informative
slow-paced
informative
slow-paced
The best book ever written about the craft of writing. It's an annual read for me.
a well written book - as you'd expect - about writing well. It was human and sincere. I'll read more of his books.
4.5 stars!
I enjoyed this book way more than I thought I did! It was recommended to me through a writing program. I expected it to be an informative bore. Instead, it laughed and grinned through the twenty-five chapters. I will definitely be rereading this!!
I enjoyed this book way more than I thought I did! It was recommended to me through a writing program. I expected it to be an informative bore. Instead, it laughed and grinned through the twenty-five chapters. I will definitely be rereading this!!
I am probably unjustifiably happy about this book, given that it took my virginity in reading books on how to write. I'm always too enthusiastic about books in fields I know nothing about.
There are a few essential things that stood out to me, which I need to take pains to remember. First is that what's truly interesting to the reader is not necessarily the subject itself, but who the writer is. To quote Dan John, who quoted another wise figure, "People are interested in stories, especially with people in them." You could say that writing about a subject should always include an underlying story about who the writer is.
To hold the reader's attention, you must have enthusiasm for what you're writing about. Your passion will radiate through your writing—you cannot help it or fake it if you don't: "The reader has to feel that the writer is feeling good."
The most memorable advice from the book, which I've had tremendous difficulty applying, is to cut out all the unnecessary stuff from my writing to sound smart or professional. Zinsser points out how people hide behind convoluted language, leading to a lack of humanity and warmth in writing.
I always chuckle and think of this book when I find myself writing, "I should point out that..." and sense a tiny Zinsser standing on my shoulder, judging me, saying, "If something should be pointed out, just point it out. If it is interesting to note, make it interesting." Zinsser warns against new meaningless fad words like "paradigm, parameter, prioritize, potentialize," and phrases like "in a sense."
Zinsser revealed his editing process and how much he cuts out unnecessary words, which was eye-opening for me. However, I adore the typical British way of writing, where there's a generous amount of chit-chat around the central point, making the writing more humane and relaxing. I think it's a matter of preference whether you like Zinsser's hardcore economy with words and his extreme deliberation over whether a comma should be there or not.
Personally, I am a sucker for fad words, and I think there's something artistic—almost poetic—about using intricate and specific words. While I cannot always defend my choice of words, I can appeal to an aesthetic taste.
That said, I think I am almost deliberately trying to misunderstand Zinsser. The real issue is how people hide behind smoke screens of professionalism, intelligence, and objectivity. We've been taught since school that using the word "me" is bad and that to sound professional, you have to write like an objective monad observing the world. Zinsser, on the other hand, argues that you should write from your personal perspective and share your own opinions.
"But nobody cares about my opinions," people will say. Yet people will care if you tell them something interesting, with words that come naturally to you, with passion for what you write about, and with the ability to explain why it fascinates you.
For some reason, I loved Zinsser's commentary on the use of "OK." It's a great encapsulation of his mission with this book. He suggests that writing "OK," or worse, "O.K.," comes from a place of insecurity—a desperate need to sound robotic, inhumane, and, thus, somehow more intelligent than you really are.
Sometimes, as a newcomer to a field, you need to be told by a master that just being normal and using common sense is okay.
Another point that struck a chord with me was Zinsser's observation that writers can ruin the humor of a joke by reminding the reader it was funny or surprising by adding an exclamation point. Treat the reader as if they can understand the material, and never be condescending. Thus, he discourages the use of "surprisingly," "predictably," and "of course," and says that if a sentence starts with "You see," he stops reading. As he should.
I am a complete sucker for using these types of things. I'll admit I have an "of course" addiction. But at the same time, I'm not convinced to stop using it entirely. "Of course" primes the reader to contextualize what they're about to read or have just read. It's not just a meaningless, patronizing utterance. Filler words and phrases are, in a sense, the valuable pace of processing the material and adding emphasis—like a teacher turning to the chalkboard to write, providing a moment to breathe.
I share Zinsser's view that writing is painful. It's painful for me because when I am forced to put my thoughts onto the page, I realize how much my mind is filled with unquestioned beliefs, clichés, and mental fast food. When my thoughts are exposed in Arial on an A4 document, they stand before me naked, vulnerable, and ashamed.
Finally, one piece of advice that stood out to me is that when writing non-fiction, you should leave the reader with ONE provocative thought. Zinsser failed to follow his own advice, as he left me with many. I'm glad I read it and will probably do so again to nit-pick my own writing in fear Zinsser's ghost will haunt my house for committing the atrocities he described in this book.
There are a few essential things that stood out to me, which I need to take pains to remember. First is that what's truly interesting to the reader is not necessarily the subject itself, but who the writer is. To quote Dan John, who quoted another wise figure, "People are interested in stories, especially with people in them." You could say that writing about a subject should always include an underlying story about who the writer is.
To hold the reader's attention, you must have enthusiasm for what you're writing about. Your passion will radiate through your writing—you cannot help it or fake it if you don't: "The reader has to feel that the writer is feeling good."
The most memorable advice from the book, which I've had tremendous difficulty applying, is to cut out all the unnecessary stuff from my writing to sound smart or professional. Zinsser points out how people hide behind convoluted language, leading to a lack of humanity and warmth in writing.
I always chuckle and think of this book when I find myself writing, "I should point out that..." and sense a tiny Zinsser standing on my shoulder, judging me, saying, "If something should be pointed out, just point it out. If it is interesting to note, make it interesting." Zinsser warns against new meaningless fad words like "paradigm, parameter, prioritize, potentialize," and phrases like "in a sense."
Zinsser revealed his editing process and how much he cuts out unnecessary words, which was eye-opening for me. However, I adore the typical British way of writing, where there's a generous amount of chit-chat around the central point, making the writing more humane and relaxing. I think it's a matter of preference whether you like Zinsser's hardcore economy with words and his extreme deliberation over whether a comma should be there or not.
Personally, I am a sucker for fad words, and I think there's something artistic—almost poetic—about using intricate and specific words. While I cannot always defend my choice of words, I can appeal to an aesthetic taste.
That said, I think I am almost deliberately trying to misunderstand Zinsser. The real issue is how people hide behind smoke screens of professionalism, intelligence, and objectivity. We've been taught since school that using the word "me" is bad and that to sound professional, you have to write like an objective monad observing the world. Zinsser, on the other hand, argues that you should write from your personal perspective and share your own opinions.
"But nobody cares about my opinions," people will say. Yet people will care if you tell them something interesting, with words that come naturally to you, with passion for what you write about, and with the ability to explain why it fascinates you.
For some reason, I loved Zinsser's commentary on the use of "OK." It's a great encapsulation of his mission with this book. He suggests that writing "OK," or worse, "O.K.," comes from a place of insecurity—a desperate need to sound robotic, inhumane, and, thus, somehow more intelligent than you really are.
Sometimes, as a newcomer to a field, you need to be told by a master that just being normal and using common sense is okay.
Another point that struck a chord with me was Zinsser's observation that writers can ruin the humor of a joke by reminding the reader it was funny or surprising by adding an exclamation point. Treat the reader as if they can understand the material, and never be condescending. Thus, he discourages the use of "surprisingly," "predictably," and "of course," and says that if a sentence starts with "You see," he stops reading. As he should.
I am a complete sucker for using these types of things. I'll admit I have an "of course" addiction. But at the same time, I'm not convinced to stop using it entirely. "Of course" primes the reader to contextualize what they're about to read or have just read. It's not just a meaningless, patronizing utterance. Filler words and phrases are, in a sense, the valuable pace of processing the material and adding emphasis—like a teacher turning to the chalkboard to write, providing a moment to breathe.
I share Zinsser's view that writing is painful. It's painful for me because when I am forced to put my thoughts onto the page, I realize how much my mind is filled with unquestioned beliefs, clichés, and mental fast food. When my thoughts are exposed in Arial on an A4 document, they stand before me naked, vulnerable, and ashamed.
Finally, one piece of advice that stood out to me is that when writing non-fiction, you should leave the reader with ONE provocative thought. Zinsser failed to follow his own advice, as he left me with many. I'm glad I read it and will probably do so again to nit-pick my own writing in fear Zinsser's ghost will haunt my house for committing the atrocities he described in this book.