I also love Pinker’s prescription about hedging: For example: a plea for writers to draw attention to their subject, not to themselves, and not to spend a lot of time whining about how complicated their topic is (an observation, I’m sure, that comes from reading a lot of academic writing). (I’ll return to that crucial distinction at the end of this post.) They are not necessarily efficient and practical, though, a distinction that Pinker makes clear as he describes the differences between classic and practical style. I like to read books written this way because they are entertaining and interesting. The writer of classic prose must simulate two experiences: showing the reader something in the world, and engaging her in conversation. The purpose of writing is presentation, and its motive is disinterested truth. The writer can see something that the reader has not yet noticed, and he orients the reader’s gaze so that she can see it for herself. The guiding metaphor of classic style is seeing the world. He bases his description on “classic style,” which he loosely defines this way: There is quite a lot to learn from The Sense of Style. His prose is lively, and I felt as if I were learning from a master. Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker is a distinguished writer and chair of the usage panel of the American Heritage Dictionary. It’s a great guide and you should read it, but be aware that business writers need to bring a different and more practical perspective to the advice in this book.

I like Pinker’s take on writing I learned a lot from it. I just finished Steven Pinker’s book on writing style.

The sense of style book