What do you think?
Rate this book
Writing to Learn: How to Write--And Think--Clearly about Any Subject at All
This is an essential book for everyone who wants to write clearly about any subject and use writing as a means of learning.
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
About the author
William Zinsser
49 books467 followersWilliam Knowlton Zinsser is an American writer, editor, literary critic, and teacher. He began his career as a journalist for the New York Herald Tribune, where he worked as a feature writer, drama editor, film critic, and editorial writer. He has been a longtime contributor to leading magazines.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 200 reviews
October 10, 2016
Humor is the most perilous of writing forms, full of risk; to make a vocation of brightening the reader’s day is an act of continuing gallantry.
Specialization inspires in me a certain existential dread. This is of two sorts. The first is the despairing thought that, by specializing, I will come to know only a certain, restricted corner of the vast universe. The second, more puerile fear is that, by becoming a specialist, I will commit myself on a path I won’t like very much.
Generalization is often, I suspect, motivated as much by fear of commitment as by humanistic curiosity. In Spanish there’s a word for a man who likes to sleep around—a picaflor—which conjures up the suggestive image of a bee going from flower to flower. Well, picaflores and Don Juans and Lotharios are generalists. Devoted husbands are specialists.
Promiscuity aside, we continue to do homage to generalists with our notion of the “Renaissance Man,” and the quintessential Renaissance Man was of course Leonardo da Vinci. His notebooks are filled not only with “art,” but studies of anatomy, light, physics, engineering, music, and so much else.
Last year I read a selection of Leonardo's notebooks, hoping to find out how one man could tackle so many disparate subjects. My conclusion was that his versatility was due to the application of his medium: drawing. By making careful, detailed sketches of things—bees, bodies, bridges—he came to understand them. His pencil thus acted as antennae, with which he probed and investigated his world.
I thought: Could I do something similar? Certainly I have little talent as regards visual art. But I do have a verbal addiction. Perhaps I could use writing in a way similar to how Leonardo used sketching? Such an idea was hardly original. Soon I found out that Zinsser, the writing guru, already had a book about it.
The idea of reading another Zinsser book was not especially appealing. I had already read his popular book On Writing Well, and came away with a sour taste in my mouth. But if I was going to be the next Leonardo, I had to swallow some pickles. Dutifully I bought this book; and, after equally dutiful procrastination, I am here to tell you about it.
My first reaction was, again, distaste. This is not entirely rational. Every good writer has what I call a “literary personality”—related to, but not identical with, their real personality—and I simply do not like Zinsser’s. I do not wish to spend time with him or to invite him to supper. I cannot really articulate why I dislike him, in the same way I can’t say exactly why I don’t like the sound of people eating apples. He’s a strong writer and I agree with much of what he says. He is thoughtful, curious, broadly educated, sensitive to art, music, and literature, and generally benign in his means and ends. When I think about it, I really ought to like him quite a bit. Yet I don’t.
Maybe this is because I object to the way he romanticizes his craft. Zinsser would have you believe that clear writing is one of the most difficult, dangerous, and distasteful activities in the world. It is so hard and so strenuous that it requires continual, backbreaking effort. Good writers are saints, many of them martyrs, including Zinsser himself: “I don’t like to write, but I take great pleasure in having written.” Zinsser makes very clear that his vocation is a heroic one, especially considering that he not only writes himself, but teaches it too:
Why, then, would anyone in his right mind want to be a writing teacher? The answer is that writing teachers aren’t altogether in their right mind. They are in one of the caring professions, no more sane in the allotment of their time and energy than the social worker or the day care worker or the nurse.
It takes serious audacity (to use a polite word) for a writing teacher to compare himself to a nurse. I also gag at this self-pity about the how hard it is to write well. Yes, it can be hard. Lots of things are hard. The only thing that sets writers apart is that they tend to whine the most eloquently.
Even when I put my personal dislike aside, however, I still must conclude that this book is disappointing. It begins with an unnecessary autobiographical section on Zinsser’s childhood education. (Considering how much Zinsser likes to talk about omitting unnecessary material, I found this especially ironic.) The rest of the book consists of long excerpts of what Zinsser considers to be successful examples of writing in different subjects, from anthropology to chemistry, from geology to mathematics. The book could easily have been an anthology, and probably should have been.
Most of what I wanted from this book is lacking. Yes, any subject can be written about engagingly—Zinsser didn’t need to prove this to me—but how do you go about doing that? Zinsser avoids the problem of methodology by insisting that good writing is learned by imitation. This is no doubt largely true; still I found it to be an abdication of this book’s promise: to give the would-be autodidact a strategy, or at least a few tips, for writing to learn.
Another serious omission is that Zinsser does not provide any concrete advice for teachers looking to apply this philosophy to their classes. There are a few reported examples of teachers who have done so, and a lot of hortatory passages about the benefits of “writing across the curriculum,” but very little in the way of concrete strategies for implementing this idea. As both a student and a teacher, I found this irksome.
Still, I suppose this book does have its value as a piece of propaganda. Zinsser is enthusiastic about writing, and his enthusiasm is contagious. For anyone skeptical that any subject—even chemistry, physics, or math—can be written well, or if you’re unsure whether writing can help you think and learn, you’ll find these doubts addressed here. For all its faults, this book does provide a glimpse of a compelling educational ideal: one that allows all of us to be picaflores in good conscience.
August 8, 2013
If you’ve read On Writing Well, you should read this book too. If you haven’t, you should read them both. Writing to Learn does a great job of summarizing the idea of “Writing Across the Curriculum.” It gives examples, justifications, and inspiration. I would sum up the book like this:
1. Writing helps us think.
2. Clear writing is clear thinking.
3. You can (and should to truly learn) about any subject.
4. Everyone (not just “writers”) writes.
5. We learn by imitation.
6. Every subject is accessible through clear writing.
7. Every field, subject, domain... has a literature.
8. There are two kinds of writing: explanatory and exploratory.
9. We can learn from anywhere, anyone.
10. We should look at the best examples in any field to learn.
Zinsser gives examples from the worlds of science, math, art, music, physics, chemistry, psychology. As a teacher, this book inspires me to find good examples from the worlds of technology, comedy, video games, cooking, sports, movies, and other fields that my students are really into.
Quote:
“Therefore, for the purposes of this book, I’ll generalize outrageously that there are two kinds of writing. One is explanatory writing: writing that transmits existing information or ideas. The other is exploratory writing: writing that enables us to discover what we want to say. Call it Type B. They are equally valid and useful.” (Loc 832 via Kindle)
Often exploratory writing is neglected in schools because it seems to “not have a point” or “not be graded” in the same way as final writing assignments might be. The irony, of course, is that the final writing assignment won’t be any good if the writer hasn’t explored the topic beforehand. This book helps explain how to to do that.
Other quotes too good not to share:
“...writing is a form of thinking, whatever the subject.” (Loc 36)
“But every discipline has a literature - a body of good writing that students and teachers can use as a model; writing is learned mainly by imitation.” (Loc 36)
“Clear writing is the logical arrangement of thought; a scientist who thinks clearly can write as well as the best writer.” (Loc 46)
“I thought of how often the act of writing even the simplest document - a letter, for instance - had clarified my half-formed ideas. Writing and thinking and learning were the same process.” (Loc 55)
“Learning, he seemed to be saying, takes a multitude of forms; expect to find them in places where you least expect them to be.” (Loc 180)
“Contrary to general belief, writing isn’t something that only “writers” do; writing is a basic skill for getting through life.” (Loc 188)
“Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly should be able to write clearly - about any subject at all.” (Loc 188)
“Students should be learning a strong and unpretentious prose that will carry their thoughts about the world they live in.” (Loc 228)
“...there’s no subject that can’t be made accessible in good English with careful writing and editing.” (Loc 429)
“...a piece of writing is a piece of thinking.” (Loc 761)
“If clear writing is one of the foundations of a democratic society, don’t count on getting it from men and women with a college degree.” (Loc 1033)
“Writers and learners will write better and learn more if they understand the “why” of what they are studying.” (Loc 1267)
“Nonfiction writing should always have a point: It should leave the reader with a set of facts, or an idea, or a point of view, that he didn’t have before he started reading.” (Loc 1959)
“Writer’s who think they are being criticized when only their writing is being criticized are beyond a teacher’s reach.” (Loc 3035)
“If writing is learned by imitation, I want every learner to imitate the best.” (Loc 3156)
“Moral: think flexibly about the field you’re writing about. Its frontiers may no longer be where they were the last time you looked.” (Loc 3243)
1. Writing helps us think.
2. Clear writing is clear thinking.
3. You can (and should to truly learn) about any subject.
4. Everyone (not just “writers”) writes.
5. We learn by imitation.
6. Every subject is accessible through clear writing.
7. Every field, subject, domain... has a literature.
8. There are two kinds of writing: explanatory and exploratory.
9. We can learn from anywhere, anyone.
10. We should look at the best examples in any field to learn.
Zinsser gives examples from the worlds of science, math, art, music, physics, chemistry, psychology. As a teacher, this book inspires me to find good examples from the worlds of technology, comedy, video games, cooking, sports, movies, and other fields that my students are really into.
Quote:
“Therefore, for the purposes of this book, I’ll generalize outrageously that there are two kinds of writing. One is explanatory writing: writing that transmits existing information or ideas. The other is exploratory writing: writing that enables us to discover what we want to say. Call it Type B. They are equally valid and useful.” (Loc 832 via Kindle)
Often exploratory writing is neglected in schools because it seems to “not have a point” or “not be graded” in the same way as final writing assignments might be. The irony, of course, is that the final writing assignment won’t be any good if the writer hasn’t explored the topic beforehand. This book helps explain how to to do that.
Other quotes too good not to share:
“...writing is a form of thinking, whatever the subject.” (Loc 36)
“But every discipline has a literature - a body of good writing that students and teachers can use as a model; writing is learned mainly by imitation.” (Loc 36)
“Clear writing is the logical arrangement of thought; a scientist who thinks clearly can write as well as the best writer.” (Loc 46)
“I thought of how often the act of writing even the simplest document - a letter, for instance - had clarified my half-formed ideas. Writing and thinking and learning were the same process.” (Loc 55)
“Learning, he seemed to be saying, takes a multitude of forms; expect to find them in places where you least expect them to be.” (Loc 180)
“Contrary to general belief, writing isn’t something that only “writers” do; writing is a basic skill for getting through life.” (Loc 188)
“Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly should be able to write clearly - about any subject at all.” (Loc 188)
“Students should be learning a strong and unpretentious prose that will carry their thoughts about the world they live in.” (Loc 228)
“...there’s no subject that can’t be made accessible in good English with careful writing and editing.” (Loc 429)
“...a piece of writing is a piece of thinking.” (Loc 761)
“If clear writing is one of the foundations of a democratic society, don’t count on getting it from men and women with a college degree.” (Loc 1033)
“Writers and learners will write better and learn more if they understand the “why” of what they are studying.” (Loc 1267)
“Nonfiction writing should always have a point: It should leave the reader with a set of facts, or an idea, or a point of view, that he didn’t have before he started reading.” (Loc 1959)
“Writer’s who think they are being criticized when only their writing is being criticized are beyond a teacher’s reach.” (Loc 3035)
“If writing is learned by imitation, I want every learner to imitate the best.” (Loc 3156)
“Moral: think flexibly about the field you’re writing about. Its frontiers may no longer be where they were the last time you looked.” (Loc 3243)
October 2, 2016
For anyone interested in the definition and use of "living books" in education, this is full of good examples and ponderings. It might be useful to accompany the topical chapters (such as "how to read social science") in Adler's How to Read a Book.
March 16, 2022
Excellent examples of creative and gripping non-fiction writing, but didn't cover the process of writing - specifically drafting and editing and thinking through writing- as much as I hoped.
May 26, 2022
Really 3.5 stars. The first part of the book is interesting. The second half, while a pleasure to read, was like looking at the author’s scrap book of other author’s writing excerpts. I’m grateful to have finally discovered Primo Levi, but I struggled to glean much from some of his “examples”. I found it difficult to discern who was “learning”, or was supposed to be learning, by the writing examples he offered. They were very good examples, but I found their value more in the substantive information an example so cleanly and elegantly (sometimes passionately) presented, than any “tips” on how “writing to learn” is realized except by hard work (editing, rewriting and more rewriting) and a hunger for the subject about which you’re writing. And I think much of his approach is dated: Requiring students to write about what they are studying (science, math, music, or any subject really) appears to inspire many students to take a “deeper dive” (I hate that expression) into their subject(s), but I don’t believe it’s a method that “works” for many students or teachers, given the degree of functional illiteracy evident in our public schools.
I’m grateful for being introduced to Jeremy Campbell’s *Grammatical Man*, Primo Levi’s *The Periodic Table*, and Charles Darwin’s *The Voyage of the Beagle*. Bought all three of them.
Addendum: Reading “Grammatical Man” now (5/26). Wowser! Thank you, Dr. Zinsser. It’s even better than you praised it.
I’m grateful for being introduced to Jeremy Campbell’s *Grammatical Man*, Primo Levi’s *The Periodic Table*, and Charles Darwin’s *The Voyage of the Beagle*. Bought all three of them.
Addendum: Reading “Grammatical Man” now (5/26). Wowser! Thank you, Dr. Zinsser. It’s even better than you praised it.
February 9, 2020
I’ve read On Writing Well several times (and am having my writing students read it this semester), but I hadn’t read anything else by William Zinsser. I picked up Writing to Learn, planning to read a chapter or two a day—but I just couldn’t put it down. I find Zinsser to be one of the most addictive writers, so easy to read. Even when I don’t quite agree with him, he’s a lot of fun.
Some of this book overlaps with On Writing Well (and they complement each other perfectly), but Zinsser’s main point here is to affirm the value of “writing across the curriculum,” arguing that even the subjects you might not think would benefit from writing (math and chemistry, for example) are still greatly enhanced by interacting through writing. He draws examples from two extremes: on the one hand, students just learning the subjects, and on the other hand, some of the most refined writers and renowned thinkers in history. For me, this was enjoyable to read, though perhaps not proving his point very effectively. I agree that it’s wonderful to read examples of some of the most engaging nonfiction prose; but that doesn’t mean that I’m likely to become a Charles Darwin or a John Muir. Clear writing was part of their intellectual persona and development, sure, but there were so many other factors involved, too.
My other criticism of Zinsser, here as in On Writing Well, is that even across a wide range of disciplines and topics, he still prefers a very particular kind of writing. He likes a conversational, informal, friendly tone that draws the reader in. That’s fine, and of course I love that style of voice too, but I don’t know if it’s appropriate for every context, or that every piece of writing would benefit from that style. My area is academic writing (which Zinsser doesn’t touch at all, really), and the witty, engaging style that Zinsser likes just won’t fly in everyone’s PhD dissertation, or in all ethnographies. I wish Zinsser could have give some perspective on this side of writing, too. When is it okay not to be so clever and informal in your prose?
However, these are relatively minor criticisms of a book and author that I generally love, understanding what to expect from him. It’s never bad to read a panorama of really good nonfiction prose. The example that I remember most from Writing to Learn is Lewis Thomas’s New York Public Library lecture (pp. 168–173; later published as “A Long Line of Cells” (1986)), in which Zinnser had asked Thomas to talk about memoir and autobiography, and Thomas proceeded to give a history of himself from the beginning of human evolution through the development of his own first cell in the womb.
In addition to all the examples Zinsser presents, he also has a number of very memorable passages of his own about the craft of writing. Here are some that I shared with my students:
He also writes some very funny lines, of course, and here’s my favorite—remembering his struggles in an elementary school math class with his teacher, Mr. Spicer:
Some of this book overlaps with On Writing Well (and they complement each other perfectly), but Zinsser’s main point here is to affirm the value of “writing across the curriculum,” arguing that even the subjects you might not think would benefit from writing (math and chemistry, for example) are still greatly enhanced by interacting through writing. He draws examples from two extremes: on the one hand, students just learning the subjects, and on the other hand, some of the most refined writers and renowned thinkers in history. For me, this was enjoyable to read, though perhaps not proving his point very effectively. I agree that it’s wonderful to read examples of some of the most engaging nonfiction prose; but that doesn’t mean that I’m likely to become a Charles Darwin or a John Muir. Clear writing was part of their intellectual persona and development, sure, but there were so many other factors involved, too.
My other criticism of Zinsser, here as in On Writing Well, is that even across a wide range of disciplines and topics, he still prefers a very particular kind of writing. He likes a conversational, informal, friendly tone that draws the reader in. That’s fine, and of course I love that style of voice too, but I don’t know if it’s appropriate for every context, or that every piece of writing would benefit from that style. My area is academic writing (which Zinsser doesn’t touch at all, really), and the witty, engaging style that Zinsser likes just won’t fly in everyone’s PhD dissertation, or in all ethnographies. I wish Zinsser could have give some perspective on this side of writing, too. When is it okay not to be so clever and informal in your prose?
However, these are relatively minor criticisms of a book and author that I generally love, understanding what to expect from him. It’s never bad to read a panorama of really good nonfiction prose. The example that I remember most from Writing to Learn is Lewis Thomas’s New York Public Library lecture (pp. 168–173; later published as “A Long Line of Cells” (1986)), in which Zinnser had asked Thomas to talk about memoir and autobiography, and Thomas proceeded to give a history of himself from the beginning of human evolution through the development of his own first cell in the womb.
In addition to all the examples Zinsser presents, he also has a number of very memorable passages of his own about the craft of writing. Here are some that I shared with my students:
I never stopped to ask, “Who is the typical Yale alumnus? Who am I editing for?” One of my principles is that there is no typical anybody; every reader is different. I edit for myself and I write for myself. I assume that if I consider something interesting or funny, a certain number of other people will too. . . . Meanwhile I draw on two sources of energy that I commend to anyone trying to survive in this vulnerable craft: confidence and ego. If you don’t have confidence in what you’re doing you might as well not do it. (25)Little bits of wisdom like this, based on Zinsser’s many years of experience as a writer, editor, and teacher (and spending time with other people who have all kinds of interesting experience), are helpful bursts of motivation for any writer.Whenever I embark on a story so overloaded with good material I despair of ever getting to the end—of covering the ground I know I’ll need to cover to tell the story right. In my gloom it helps me to remember two things. One is that writing is linear and sequential. If sentence B logically follows sentence A, and if sentence C logically follows sentence B, I’ll eventually get to sentence Z. I also try to remember that the reader should be given only as much information as he needs and not one word more. Anything else is a self-indulgence. (33–34)
Achieving a decent piece of writing is such a difficult task that it often strikes the reader as having been just that: a task. It accomplishes its purpose, and perhaps we shouldn’t ask for anything more. But we do. We wish the writer had had a better time—or at least had given us that impression. . . . Writing is a craft, and a writer is someone who goes to work every day with his tools, like the carpenter or the television repairman, no matter how he feels, and if one of the things he wants to produce by 6 p.m. is a sense of enjoyment in his writing, he must generate it by an act of will. Nobody else is going to do it for him. (73, 75)
He also writes some very funny lines, of course, and here’s my favorite—remembering his struggles in an elementary school math class with his teacher, Mr. Spicer:
Such self-pity would have been despised by Mr. Spicer; emotions have no place in mathematics. He was one of those people who have “a head for figures,” instantly certain that twelve times nine is—well, whatever it is. Confronted with a student who was unable to produce the right answer, he would begin to turn red, a man betrayed by his vascular system, until his round face and bald head were crimson with disbelief that such dim-wittedness was at large in the next generation. (150)On Writing Well remains the number-one Zinsser for every writer to read; but Writing to Learn is also excellent to read at some point afterward, when you need a quick shot of encouragement to keep writing. As with On Writing Well, this is a book that pushes me toward other good books, and that's a wonderful thing.
November 9, 2009
About six years ago I spent such a happy afternoon in the Melbourne library, reading Zinsser's On Writing Well (similar in style and content to Strunk and White's Elements of Style), I was happy to pick up another of his books when it came my way. The opening chapters were exciting: Zinsser wrote well about the pains and rewards of writing, and made an eloquent case that society (especially the educated, business class) has gone to the dogs by way of 'office-speak' and 'bureaucratese.' He even convinced me that writing should be taught 'across the curriculum;' in other words, math students should write about math. Economics students should write about economics. Not only does our culture need good, clear writing about all subjects, but people learn best from their subject if they write about it. Writing, he pleaded, is organized thought. Of course, he was preaching to the choir.
But, the book fell flat. The remaining chapters were devoted to samples of other people's writing, organized by category (the arts, sciences, etc.). Thing is, except for only an exception or two (you know Rachel Carson, the envronmentalist? The woman can write!), none of his examples wrote as well as Zinsser himself does. Toward the end, I found myself skipping the samples in favor of Zinsser's clever, albeit brief, commentaries.
Here is one passage in which I took great heart:
"Only when the job was over did I enjoy it. I don't like to write, but I take great pleasure in having written-- in having finally made an arrangement that has a certain inevitability, like the solution to a mathematical problem. Perhaps in no other line of work is delayed gratification so delayed."
But, the book fell flat. The remaining chapters were devoted to samples of other people's writing, organized by category (the arts, sciences, etc.). Thing is, except for only an exception or two (you know Rachel Carson, the envronmentalist? The woman can write!), none of his examples wrote as well as Zinsser himself does. Toward the end, I found myself skipping the samples in favor of Zinsser's clever, albeit brief, commentaries.
Here is one passage in which I took great heart:
"Only when the job was over did I enjoy it. I don't like to write, but I take great pleasure in having written-- in having finally made an arrangement that has a certain inevitability, like the solution to a mathematical problem. Perhaps in no other line of work is delayed gratification so delayed."
March 16, 2014
I expected instruction on how to enjoy what we learned by writing reflectively about it. What I got was a warm and engaging memoir that also conveyed the former. This author provides a kindred spirit to those who are curious about more than their essential daily function, and he will encourage this, and he will encourage it in any reader in whom curiosity has become just a flicker. He makes every field he touches accessible, and he encourages us to share his zest for life.
October 15, 2008
In one of my recent reads, Writing to Learn, William Zinsser makes the challenge to write about something that is intangible rather than concrete. For example, a music lesson. It is one thing to write descriptively about a work of art or a photograph~~~the reader can LOOK at what is being discussed. But to describe a musical technique requires the ability to conjure up sensory information of a different sort. In the author's own words:
"Writing about music also made me a better musician. The need to write clearly about an art form that the reader can never see or hear; one that evaporates with the playing of each note, forced me to think harder about the structure of music--about what I was trying to learn."
Zinsser's approach here is related, I think, to the concept of narration. Homeschoolers, especially of the Charlotte Mason variety, are well familiar with this technique of "telling back" what has been learned. In a homeschool setting, this most often involves telling back an episode in a book. But I'm finding that this deceivingly simple exercise is valuable in other settings, too.
The music lesson is just one "non book" example. How about narrating the way in which a math problem is solved? Or describing how to do a flip on the trampoline? Have you ever tried to describe in detail an elegant meal that you enjoyed?
Oral "tellings" are perfect for young children, but writing the narrations adds a new level of learning. Even adults find it challenging! I know this because I've tried tackling some of the writing assignments I've given to my children.
Zinsser tells us that writing forces the brain to reason in a linear, sequential way and thus is ideally suited to help us tackle subjects that we might view as difficult. When we write, we must break it down into bite-sized morsels and that is far less intimidating than sorting through a huge mass of information.
I have two very excellent writers in the family. But I have noticed that when I choose the "Achilles Heel" subject as a writing assignment, the result is less-than-excellent. So I am taking Zinsser's advice which includes:
*Providing excellent models of good writing across the curriculum
*Taking the time to write across-the-board, even where symbols are commonly preferred (math, music, physics, etc.)
J. Henri Fabre, the famous French writer and entomologist, honed his incredible writing ability over a period of 20+ years by writing textbooks. His care in writing enabled him to later pen books that have been described as the "Insects' Homer". His words sing, even after being translated into different languages.
The lesson I learn from Fabre is that writing is a lifetime pursuit! I'm excited that my own learning continues to unfold as I oversee the education of my children.
Life is rich!
"Writing about music also made me a better musician. The need to write clearly about an art form that the reader can never see or hear; one that evaporates with the playing of each note, forced me to think harder about the structure of music--about what I was trying to learn."
Zinsser's approach here is related, I think, to the concept of narration. Homeschoolers, especially of the Charlotte Mason variety, are well familiar with this technique of "telling back" what has been learned. In a homeschool setting, this most often involves telling back an episode in a book. But I'm finding that this deceivingly simple exercise is valuable in other settings, too.
The music lesson is just one "non book" example. How about narrating the way in which a math problem is solved? Or describing how to do a flip on the trampoline? Have you ever tried to describe in detail an elegant meal that you enjoyed?
Oral "tellings" are perfect for young children, but writing the narrations adds a new level of learning. Even adults find it challenging! I know this because I've tried tackling some of the writing assignments I've given to my children.
Zinsser tells us that writing forces the brain to reason in a linear, sequential way and thus is ideally suited to help us tackle subjects that we might view as difficult. When we write, we must break it down into bite-sized morsels and that is far less intimidating than sorting through a huge mass of information.
I have two very excellent writers in the family. But I have noticed that when I choose the "Achilles Heel" subject as a writing assignment, the result is less-than-excellent. So I am taking Zinsser's advice which includes:
*Providing excellent models of good writing across the curriculum
*Taking the time to write across-the-board, even where symbols are commonly preferred (math, music, physics, etc.)
J. Henri Fabre, the famous French writer and entomologist, honed his incredible writing ability over a period of 20+ years by writing textbooks. His care in writing enabled him to later pen books that have been described as the "Insects' Homer". His words sing, even after being translated into different languages.
The lesson I learn from Fabre is that writing is a lifetime pursuit! I'm excited that my own learning continues to unfold as I oversee the education of my children.
Life is rich!
Read
August 11, 2022This was another book I finished this month after having it on my reading stack for 3-4 months. It was a good one to take in chunks, because less a how-to manual and more a book of examples. I can see why AO assigns it in high school and I will recommend it to my teens, although I don’t think it is sufficient for helping a teen learn the art of writing. However, solid, clear nonfiction prose that is more than merely descriptive is a hard skill to learn, so the book of examples from a variety of fields and numerous people - each with their own clear style - then commented upon (but not picked apart or really analyzed) by Zinsser is a good place to start so students get a sense for what’s being asked of them in a paper.
I’d highly recommend it to anyone who wants to write to be understood and to synthesize their own knowledge, not because it will teach you how but because it will demonstrate that it’s possible and desirable.
I’d highly recommend it to anyone who wants to write to be understood and to synthesize their own knowledge, not because it will teach you how but because it will demonstrate that it’s possible and desirable.
August 21, 2021
The book name is misleading - a small quote from the book to prove my point - "Only two chapters—9 and 11—specifically demonstrate writing as a method of learning."
the writing is sometimes really misleading and confusing. A big part of the book is praises on the power of writing or just the author petting his own ego.
It does contain some helpful tips but are rare and sparsely scattered in the book. It does contain a lot of examples of good writing that can be helpful if you plan to write about the subject the examples are about.
This book might help people planing to write a book about the subjects discussed in the book or for teachers trying to add some sort of writing assignments to their courses.
the writing is sometimes really misleading and confusing. A big part of the book is praises on the power of writing or just the author petting his own ego.
It does contain some helpful tips but are rare and sparsely scattered in the book. It does contain a lot of examples of good writing that can be helpful if you plan to write about the subject the examples are about.
This book might help people planing to write a book about the subjects discussed in the book or for teachers trying to add some sort of writing assignments to their courses.
March 21, 2023
William Zinsser demonstrates convincingly how writing about any subject should be clear, understandable, succinct and interesting. He believes good writing is a product of clear thinking. He also argues that the former can lead to the latter. In this book, he gives various examples of good writing from a range of disciplines: biology, chemistry, music, anthropology and more.
July 18, 2019
This book is a treat for 'generalists' that are curious about all subject matters and want to write about them, be it Mathematics, Sciences or Humanities! And you CAN successfully write about mathematics, chemistry and music in clear and plain English because Zissner will show you that you can. Chock full of examples exploring how the knowledgeable Greats of their subjects/fields have managed to do this with aplomb. This book is a handbook for people of any academic background who have ever felt that writing seemed to have belonged to the Humanities but that harboured a love for prose and wanted to incorporate it into their learning without the worry of being treated as non-serious. Prose writing about mathematics has integrity! Read this to find out the how's and whys. The book is full of highly quotable ideas that are a useful learning tool for all of us who don't want to fall into any one particular subject category and want to write across the curriculum. And demonstrates that 'the same principles of good writing would apply to them all'.
Some highlights
Preface:
'it's not necessary to be a "writer" to write well. Clear writing is the logical arrangement of thought'
'writing and thinking and learning were the same process'
P. 10
'I've become a clarity nut. I've also become a logic nut. I'm far less preoccupied than I once was with individual words and their picturesque roots and origins'
P. 11
'writing is thinking on paper'
P. 14
'writing is primarily an exercise in logic and that words are just tools designed to do a specific job'
P. 21
'Generalists, as interested in astronomy and mathematics and evolution as they are in physics and the genetic code and the processes of life'
P. 23
'we must say to students in every area of knowledge: "This is how other people have written about this subject. Read it, study it, think about it."'
Some highlights
Preface:
'it's not necessary to be a "writer" to write well. Clear writing is the logical arrangement of thought'
'writing and thinking and learning were the same process'
P. 10
'I've become a clarity nut. I've also become a logic nut. I'm far less preoccupied than I once was with individual words and their picturesque roots and origins'
P. 11
'writing is thinking on paper'
P. 14
'writing is primarily an exercise in logic and that words are just tools designed to do a specific job'
P. 21
'Generalists, as interested in astronomy and mathematics and evolution as they are in physics and the genetic code and the processes of life'
P. 23
'we must say to students in every area of knowledge: "This is how other people have written about this subject. Read it, study it, think about it."'
December 27, 2020
This book was not bad, exactly, just not what I was hoping for. Most of it is a repeat of On Writing Well. It was page after page of polished writing samples and analysis of why this sentence grabs you, or how this passage makes a technical subject accessible. It's more about learning to write than writing to learn. I'm disappointed because it falls short of what it claimed to be.
Not to completely disparage this book, the first two chapters do explain the benefit of using writing in subjects that are not typically writing-centric. The chapter on mathematics was also closer to what I was looking for, where a grade-school teacher uses writing to teach mathematics. The samples were rough, but they showed how students used writing to grasp mathematical concepts.
This book overemphasized the necessity of entertainment value and accessibility of writing. When you are student, it's important to write clearly, sure, but writing to learn shouldn't mean you have to write fantastic, engaging content like Rachel Carson. It is more about testing your thoughts in clear terms. The polishing should be secondary.
Not to completely disparage this book, the first two chapters do explain the benefit of using writing in subjects that are not typically writing-centric. The chapter on mathematics was also closer to what I was looking for, where a grade-school teacher uses writing to teach mathematics. The samples were rough, but they showed how students used writing to grasp mathematical concepts.
This book overemphasized the necessity of entertainment value and accessibility of writing. When you are student, it's important to write clearly, sure, but writing to learn shouldn't mean you have to write fantastic, engaging content like Rachel Carson. It is more about testing your thoughts in clear terms. The polishing should be secondary.
September 7, 2015
Zinsser's book is both an anthology and a narrative about his experience with the concept of "writing across the curriculum." He recounts how good writing in other fields helped break down his misconception that certain subjects were, at best boring, or at worst, unlearnable. He posits that writing is the best way for students to engage with material--any material.
Through carefully selected reading examples and personal examples, William Zinsser engages with the natural world, art, physics, music, chemistry, mathematics, anthropology, etc...the world of learning becomes limitless and accessible. Zinsser defines three "R"s for writing: No matter the subject, good writing will have Resonance, Relevancy and Responsibility (Accountability).
Through carefully selected reading examples and personal examples, William Zinsser engages with the natural world, art, physics, music, chemistry, mathematics, anthropology, etc...the world of learning becomes limitless and accessible. Zinsser defines three "R"s for writing: No matter the subject, good writing will have Resonance, Relevancy and Responsibility (Accountability).
December 19, 2017
I read this and _On Writing Well_ back when the books were only a few years old and I was teaching my first ever classes -- freshman composition. Zinsser is such an easy (apparently) writer and thinker that I don't know why I haven't come back to these again and again.
Easily remedied.
Easily remedied.
March 2, 2018
Beyond being instructional on what makes for good writing, this book introduced me to some books that I have added to my ever-growing "want to read" list.
January 2, 2024
Excellent advice excellently formulated. Zinsser rightly highlights the interplay between the members of the holy trinity of mental fitness: reading, writing and thinking.
"Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly should be able to write clearly—about any subject at all."
"Writing organizes and clarifies our thoughts. Writing is how we think our way into a subject and make it our own. Writing enables us to find out what we know—and what we don’t know—about whatever we’re trying to learn."
"Writing is a tool that enables people in every discipline to wrestle with facts and ideas. It’s a physical activity, unlike reading. Writing requires us to operate some kind of mechanism—pencil, pen, typewriter, word processor—for getting our thoughts on paper. It compels us by the repeated effort of language to go after those thoughts and to organize them and present them clearly. It forces us to keep asking, “Am I saying what I want to say?” Very often the answer is “No.” It’s a useful piece of information."
"The artist Paul Klee once told his students that “art is exactitude winged by intuition.” I like that equally as a definition of good writing."
"Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly should be able to write clearly—about any subject at all."
"Writing organizes and clarifies our thoughts. Writing is how we think our way into a subject and make it our own. Writing enables us to find out what we know—and what we don’t know—about whatever we’re trying to learn."
"Writing is a tool that enables people in every discipline to wrestle with facts and ideas. It’s a physical activity, unlike reading. Writing requires us to operate some kind of mechanism—pencil, pen, typewriter, word processor—for getting our thoughts on paper. It compels us by the repeated effort of language to go after those thoughts and to organize them and present them clearly. It forces us to keep asking, “Am I saying what I want to say?” Very often the answer is “No.” It’s a useful piece of information."
"The artist Paul Klee once told his students that “art is exactitude winged by intuition.” I like that equally as a definition of good writing."
April 13, 2024
Eh - I liked the first part of his book (particularly when he noted ethics and critical thought were taken out of science education after Sputnik, and that has led to alarming results for American culture- so sorry, my guy, it gets worse!!) and (similar to other readers) was somewhat let down to go without a clearer plan for translating writing to learning. I suppose he doesn't have to, but I wish he did. He said it would have been patronizing, but I really don't think it would have been.
There are subtle changes writing style. What's considered good in one decade may become gratuitous in another. Which is to say, I found a few of Zinsser's "exemplar" pieces verbose and dry. I did not share is wonder. Then again, I don't think I'd share in the author's all-too-common derision of "lazy" writing.
I'd skip. The highlights will be enough.
There are subtle changes writing style. What's considered good in one decade may become gratuitous in another. Which is to say, I found a few of Zinsser's "exemplar" pieces verbose and dry. I did not share is wonder. Then again, I don't think I'd share in the author's all-too-common derision of "lazy" writing.
I'd skip. The highlights will be enough.
May 9, 2022
Absolutely brilliant. It was a bit slow going at the start but after that I just couldn't put it down. It makes you look at the world with fresh eyes. Some of the example paragraphs are simply luminous.
Amongst the examples of great writing are Einstein and Freud and many others. The section about art was my favourite but they are all great. As a result of reading this my bookshelves gained a few more older books (I just couldn't resist after reading some of the extracts, I particularly cannot wait to read the Grammatical Man) and I bought a few more of Zinssers books as well. I am his starry-eyed fan.
Amongst the examples of great writing are Einstein and Freud and many others. The section about art was my favourite but they are all great. As a result of reading this my bookshelves gained a few more older books (I just couldn't resist after reading some of the extracts, I particularly cannot wait to read the Grammatical Man) and I bought a few more of Zinssers books as well. I am his starry-eyed fan.
December 10, 2019
As the title states, William dives deep into all subjects you can imagine and shows they can be written in a manner that appeals to everyone. I would read any book from William Zinsser simply because of his command over the language.
March 20, 2024
Part1: 5/5
Part2: 2/5
Part2: 2/5
August 25, 2024
DNF
If you ever ask me what I thought about this book, I will tell you my entire life story in great detail, and maybe some thoughts about why books are important because of the stories they tell, and never answer your question at all.
If you ever ask me what I thought about this book, I will tell you my entire life story in great detail, and maybe some thoughts about why books are important because of the stories they tell, and never answer your question at all.
April 14, 2022
I very much enjoyed this book and felt enriched by it. As a ESOL person, having someone comment on what great writing looks like (and how it help us learn more) was a nice treat.
June 18, 2024
Stunning approach for developing better writers in many disciplines, including art, music, mathematics, and science. Also picks apart what makes non-fiction more readable, especially to people who know nothing about the content.
March 31, 2024
The book is about passion. The author’s passion and his passion for other author’s passions, and their ability to convey clearly their passion.
Ok, the book is about non-fiction writing. It is about the author’s position that writing through the curriculum - writing across ever subject of knowledge - is important for learning. Though what stands out every step of the way throughout the book is the author’s passion.
The book consists of two parts. Part 1 is 72 pages conveying what makes good writing good and bad writing bad. The instruction is light and it’s wrapped up in a sort of Zinsser memoir spanning his school years, military, college, time at the New York Herald Tribune and later at Yale. Part 2 is 154 pages of biography and examples of writing from scientists, historians, musicians, teachers, doctors, convincingly conveying their passion for their subject. Part 1 includes explicit instruction on writing non-fiction. Part 2 is much more implicit. Zinsser says as much. In my assessment, the writing instruction throughout the book is predominantly implicit. The book is more of an inspiring memoir and passion project than instruction manual.
For explicit instruction, in Part 1, Zinsser’s cites two types of writing. Type A writing: explanatory writing, which is about clear thinking and clear writing. Notably, he says “…the hard part is the thinking.” Type B writing: exploratory writing, which is about discovery. Then he goes on to explain what differentiates good writing from bad writing.
Right from the get-go, Zinsser hits us with his passion. The way the author talks about his interviews and the stories he edited at the Yale Alumni Magazine is absolutely energizing. His enjoyment expands with the breadth of the subject matter. When talking about these subjects, “all of them delighted me with their unexpectedness and their information.” Then, a key point that was ahead of it’s time, “They also taught me a lesson about the integration of knowledge: Separate disciplines are seldom separate.” Today all sorts of experts talk about the importance of being more than a narrow expert. It’s important to have breadth of context. Stories today abound regarding innovations which have resulted from putting together experts of different domains. When David Epstein’s book came out — Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World — it was 2019 and I thought this was a brilliant and modern topic. Yet here I read Zinsser making the same observation more than 30 years earlier.
Zinsser says that good writing is clear and concise. “I also try to remember that the reader should be given only as much information as he needs and not one word more. Anything else is self-indulgent.” This one hit me like a ton of bricks. Why? Because I write for myself, so many of us write for ourselves. When the self is the audience there is a tendency to self-indulgence. More so, this holds true for speech and presentation — how much superfluous, self-indulgent information is either due to a lack of skill or a lack of discipline? Guilty as charged.
Midway through Part 1, Zinsser takes a turn to values. The writing teacher is tasked with instructing more than proper words on a page, but instructing the person. The ultimate charge of the writing teacher, says Zinsser, is to produce broadly educated men and women “with a sense of stewardship for the world they live in.” Applying this idea to the scientist, he references the eras in 60s and 70s when science training was focused on technical knowledge only. Lacking context of history and ethics, science got itself in trouble. “If such values aren’t imparted in the classroom they will probably never get imparted; college students who are praised and coddled for acquiring technical knowledge aren’t likely to have an onset of ethics when they get out into the world of profit and loss. Yet moral dilemmas have never been woven so bewilderingly through American life.” “Everyday we are assaulted with scientific or biomedical questions… Many of them are the legacy of scientists who now admit that they didn’t understand how their decisions would affect the quality of life, or life itself.” These are insights from more than 30 years ago, apparently history does indeed repeat itself — We are having this conversation today about Generative Artificial Intelligence. So what is the recommendation here? First, educate our future scientists to be more attuned to the impact of innovation, and second, teach scientific literacy for non-scientists. That was 1987 — how have we been doing?
In the section “Information and Noise”, Zinsser talks about the need to protect the message in our writing. “I found it consoling after all these years to learn that writers are up against nothing less than the fundamental anarchy of the universe: entropy, prince of disorder, is sprinkling noise on everything we write. Ambiguity is noise. Redundancy is noise. Misuse of words is noise. Vagueness is noice. Pomposity os noise. Jargon is noise. Clutter is noise: all those unnecessary adjectives (“ongoing progress”), all those unnecessary adverbs (“successfully avoided”), all those unnecessary prepositions draped onto verbs (“order up”), all those unnecessary phrases (“in a very real sense”). Information is your sacred product, and noise is its pollutant. Guard the message with your life.”
The section “Lifesaving Verbs” is about the basic, and essential, reminder of the importance of active verbs. A noun or pronoun coupled with an active verb propels motion. Meaning, it’s clear and compelling. One of the best pieces of writing (in this reviewer’s opinion) cited by Zinsser in the book is from Norman Mailer. Mailer witnessed the death of a boxer and wrote about it. The paragraph Zinsser includes in the book delivers punch thanks to active verbs.
Turning to Part 2, the passion in story comes through in example after example. Zinsser describes the enjoyment and joy of the writer conveyed through their writing.
”What what we want to do we will do well.” A principle Zinsser learned from his father. He segues to the single minded passion of Professor Archie Carr: the Sea Turtle. Professor Carr is enthusiastic enough about sea turtles to commit his entire career to studying them. “Enthusiasm… is crucial to writing well”, says Zinsser. The enthusiasm for the turtle is apparent in Carr’s quality writing.
Another student of the natural world, Charles Darwin, is cited in the book. This time to make the point that it is important to make a point. “That’s the writing of a scientist totally committed to his subject. But Darwin never forgets that the purpose of his writing is to transmit information. The Voyage of the Beagle is above all supremely useful — which is it’s supreme strength. Nonfiction writing should always have a point: It should leave the reader with a set of facts, or an idea, or a point of view, that he didn’t have before he started reading. Writers may write for any number of good personal reasons — ego, therapy, recollection, validation of their lives. But what they produce will have a validity of it’s own to the extent that it’s useful to somebody else.”
Reading the section about Dr. Lewis Thomas, I found myself immersed in the writer’s world. This is remarkable because the section consists of only a few pages. Dr. Lewis Thomas, Lives of A Cell, is a personal memoir of himself… before birth. He humanizes the life of the cell, pre-conception and beyond. These examples of writing, and Zinsser’s writing about the writing, does exactly what he says it does: clear and concise writing about a topic one is passionate about can be compelling regardless of the reader’s interest in said topic. I care little for biology. Though it only took a few sentences before I was captured by the uniqueness and enthusiasm of the writing.
In the final example of a writing of passion, Zinsser cites the composer Roger Sessions writing about the act of composing. Zinsser ends the book with a piece on musical composition because of it’s symmetry with the act of writing. The act of creating the work is “incalculably more intense than any later experience he can have from it; because the finished product is the goal of that experience and not in any sense of repetition of it.”
Zinnser says several times that, for him, writing was a difficult, solitary, painful act. Though, I wonder if Zinsser would agree that the act of writing well is an act of passion.
Ok, the book is about non-fiction writing. It is about the author’s position that writing through the curriculum - writing across ever subject of knowledge - is important for learning. Though what stands out every step of the way throughout the book is the author’s passion.
The book consists of two parts. Part 1 is 72 pages conveying what makes good writing good and bad writing bad. The instruction is light and it’s wrapped up in a sort of Zinsser memoir spanning his school years, military, college, time at the New York Herald Tribune and later at Yale. Part 2 is 154 pages of biography and examples of writing from scientists, historians, musicians, teachers, doctors, convincingly conveying their passion for their subject. Part 1 includes explicit instruction on writing non-fiction. Part 2 is much more implicit. Zinsser says as much. In my assessment, the writing instruction throughout the book is predominantly implicit. The book is more of an inspiring memoir and passion project than instruction manual.
For explicit instruction, in Part 1, Zinsser’s cites two types of writing. Type A writing: explanatory writing, which is about clear thinking and clear writing. Notably, he says “…the hard part is the thinking.” Type B writing: exploratory writing, which is about discovery. Then he goes on to explain what differentiates good writing from bad writing.
Right from the get-go, Zinsser hits us with his passion. The way the author talks about his interviews and the stories he edited at the Yale Alumni Magazine is absolutely energizing. His enjoyment expands with the breadth of the subject matter. When talking about these subjects, “all of them delighted me with their unexpectedness and their information.” Then, a key point that was ahead of it’s time, “They also taught me a lesson about the integration of knowledge: Separate disciplines are seldom separate.” Today all sorts of experts talk about the importance of being more than a narrow expert. It’s important to have breadth of context. Stories today abound regarding innovations which have resulted from putting together experts of different domains. When David Epstein’s book came out — Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World — it was 2019 and I thought this was a brilliant and modern topic. Yet here I read Zinsser making the same observation more than 30 years earlier.
Zinsser says that good writing is clear and concise. “I also try to remember that the reader should be given only as much information as he needs and not one word more. Anything else is self-indulgent.” This one hit me like a ton of bricks. Why? Because I write for myself, so many of us write for ourselves. When the self is the audience there is a tendency to self-indulgence. More so, this holds true for speech and presentation — how much superfluous, self-indulgent information is either due to a lack of skill or a lack of discipline? Guilty as charged.
Midway through Part 1, Zinsser takes a turn to values. The writing teacher is tasked with instructing more than proper words on a page, but instructing the person. The ultimate charge of the writing teacher, says Zinsser, is to produce broadly educated men and women “with a sense of stewardship for the world they live in.” Applying this idea to the scientist, he references the eras in 60s and 70s when science training was focused on technical knowledge only. Lacking context of history and ethics, science got itself in trouble. “If such values aren’t imparted in the classroom they will probably never get imparted; college students who are praised and coddled for acquiring technical knowledge aren’t likely to have an onset of ethics when they get out into the world of profit and loss. Yet moral dilemmas have never been woven so bewilderingly through American life.” “Everyday we are assaulted with scientific or biomedical questions… Many of them are the legacy of scientists who now admit that they didn’t understand how their decisions would affect the quality of life, or life itself.” These are insights from more than 30 years ago, apparently history does indeed repeat itself — We are having this conversation today about Generative Artificial Intelligence. So what is the recommendation here? First, educate our future scientists to be more attuned to the impact of innovation, and second, teach scientific literacy for non-scientists. That was 1987 — how have we been doing?
In the section “Information and Noise”, Zinsser talks about the need to protect the message in our writing. “I found it consoling after all these years to learn that writers are up against nothing less than the fundamental anarchy of the universe: entropy, prince of disorder, is sprinkling noise on everything we write. Ambiguity is noise. Redundancy is noise. Misuse of words is noise. Vagueness is noice. Pomposity os noise. Jargon is noise. Clutter is noise: all those unnecessary adjectives (“ongoing progress”), all those unnecessary adverbs (“successfully avoided”), all those unnecessary prepositions draped onto verbs (“order up”), all those unnecessary phrases (“in a very real sense”). Information is your sacred product, and noise is its pollutant. Guard the message with your life.”
The section “Lifesaving Verbs” is about the basic, and essential, reminder of the importance of active verbs. A noun or pronoun coupled with an active verb propels motion. Meaning, it’s clear and compelling. One of the best pieces of writing (in this reviewer’s opinion) cited by Zinsser in the book is from Norman Mailer. Mailer witnessed the death of a boxer and wrote about it. The paragraph Zinsser includes in the book delivers punch thanks to active verbs.
Turning to Part 2, the passion in story comes through in example after example. Zinsser describes the enjoyment and joy of the writer conveyed through their writing.
”What what we want to do we will do well.” A principle Zinsser learned from his father. He segues to the single minded passion of Professor Archie Carr: the Sea Turtle. Professor Carr is enthusiastic enough about sea turtles to commit his entire career to studying them. “Enthusiasm… is crucial to writing well”, says Zinsser. The enthusiasm for the turtle is apparent in Carr’s quality writing.
Another student of the natural world, Charles Darwin, is cited in the book. This time to make the point that it is important to make a point. “That’s the writing of a scientist totally committed to his subject. But Darwin never forgets that the purpose of his writing is to transmit information. The Voyage of the Beagle is above all supremely useful — which is it’s supreme strength. Nonfiction writing should always have a point: It should leave the reader with a set of facts, or an idea, or a point of view, that he didn’t have before he started reading. Writers may write for any number of good personal reasons — ego, therapy, recollection, validation of their lives. But what they produce will have a validity of it’s own to the extent that it’s useful to somebody else.”
Reading the section about Dr. Lewis Thomas, I found myself immersed in the writer’s world. This is remarkable because the section consists of only a few pages. Dr. Lewis Thomas, Lives of A Cell, is a personal memoir of himself… before birth. He humanizes the life of the cell, pre-conception and beyond. These examples of writing, and Zinsser’s writing about the writing, does exactly what he says it does: clear and concise writing about a topic one is passionate about can be compelling regardless of the reader’s interest in said topic. I care little for biology. Though it only took a few sentences before I was captured by the uniqueness and enthusiasm of the writing.
In the final example of a writing of passion, Zinsser cites the composer Roger Sessions writing about the act of composing. Zinsser ends the book with a piece on musical composition because of it’s symmetry with the act of writing. The act of creating the work is “incalculably more intense than any later experience he can have from it; because the finished product is the goal of that experience and not in any sense of repetition of it.”
Zinnser says several times that, for him, writing was a difficult, solitary, painful act. Though, I wonder if Zinsser would agree that the act of writing well is an act of passion.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
July 15, 2024**Method**: Kindle
### Summary
Delightful book. Highly recommend.
### Key Takeaways
- Location 45 (Highlight (Yellow)): Clear writing is the logical arrangement of thought; a scientist who thinks clearly can write as well as the best writer.
- Location 67 (Highlight (Yellow)): Once I met them, however, there was no mistaking the men and women I wanted to have along on the ride. They all had the rare gift of enthusiasm. Again and again I was struck by the exuberance that these writers brought to what they were writing about. Whoever the writer and whatever the subject—the biologist Rachel Carson writing about life on the ocean floor, the anthropologist Clifford Geertz writing about a cockfight in Bali, the art historian A. Hyatt Mayor writing about the lithographs of Toulouse-Lautrec, the zoologist Archie Carr writing about the giant sea turtle, the psychiatrist Robert Coles writing about the gallantry of children under stress, the naturalist John Muir writing about an earthquake in Yosemite Valley, the composer Roger Sessions writing about Beethoven and the mystery of composition—the common thread is a sense of high enjoyment, zest and wonder. Perhaps, both in learning to write and in writing to learn, they are the only ingredients that really matter.
- Location 187 (Highlight (Yellow)): Contrary to general belief, writing isn’t something that only “writers” do; writing is a basic skill for getting through life. Yet most American adults are terrified of the prospect—ask a middle-aged engineer to write a report and you’ll see something close to panic. Writing, however, isn’t a special language that belongs to English teachers and a few other sensitive souls who have a “gift for words.” Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly should be able to write clearly—about any subject at all.
- Location 241 (Highlight (Yellow)): Writing is learned by imitation. I learned to write mainly by reading writers who were doing the kind of writing I wanted to do and by trying to figure out how they did it.
- Location 383 (Highlight (Yellow)): What quicker way to get to know a great university? Editors are licensed to be curious. Besides, I enjoyed editing more than writing. I liked thinking of story ideas; I liked working with writers and helping them to present their writing at its strongest, and I especially liked the element of surprise: Every day an editor learns something new. I signed up for the job and did it for seven years.
- Location 450 (Highlight (Yellow)): But the people who gave the seminar its rigor were from disciplines that had nothing to do with performance. The metallurgist Cyril Smith talked about symmetry and dissymmetry in molecular structure. The geologist John Rodgers talked about the strict numerical repetition in the formation of crystals. The zoologist G. Evelyn Hutchinson talked about the rhythmic movement of lake waters; the art historian Malcolm Cormack talked about rhythm in painting, and Dr. Glaser talked about the role of the brain in the physiology and control of rhythm. For three days the rhythmologists turned each other on, and Ruff has used the format ever since to teach an interdisciplinary seminar on rhythm. *(Notes: This would be a fun format for conferences; it would prevent it from growing stale.)*
- Location 741 (Highlight (Yellow)): Writing is a tool that enables people in every discipline to wrestle with facts and ideas. It’s a physical activity, unlike reading. Writing requires us to operate some kind of mechanism—pencil, pen, typewriter, word processor—for getting our thoughts on paper. It compels us by the repeated effort of language to go after those thoughts and to organize them and present them clearly. It forces us to keep asking, “Am I saying what I want to say?” Very often the answer is “No.” It’s a useful piece of information.
- Location 831 (Highlight (Yellow)): Therefore, for the purposes of this book, I’ll generalize outrageously and state that there are two kinds of writing. One is explanatory writing: writing that transmits existing information or ideas. Call it Type A writing. The other is exploratory writing: writing that enables us to discover what we want to say. Call it Type B. They are equally valid and useful.
- Location 845 (Highlight (Yellow)): Keep thinking and writing and rewriting. If you force yourself to think clearly you will write clearly. It’s as simple as that. The hard part isn’t the writing; the hard part is the thinking.
- Location 910 (Highlight (Yellow)): Information is your sacred product, and noise is its pollutant. Guard the message with your life.
- Location 937 (Highlight (Yellow)): people who write obscurely are either unskilled in writing or up to mischief.
- Location 2148 (Highlight (Yellow)): “For many years,” she said, “I’ve been asking my students to write about mathematics as they learned it, with predictably wonderful results. Writing seems to free them of the idea that math is a collection of right answers owned by the teacher—a body of knowledge that she will dispense in chunks and that they have to swallow and digest. That’s how most non-mathematicians perceive it. But what makes mathematics really interesting is not the right answer but where it came from and where it leads.”
- Location 2231 (Highlight (Yellow)): “Writing is a way to explore a question and gain control over it,” Mrs. Countryman said. “But it also engages the imagination, the intellect and the emotions, and these are powerful aids to learning.”
- Location 2252 (Highlight (Yellow)): Another format is for students to keep a journal with a running account of their work. “In a journal,” Mrs. Countryman said, “I want them to suspend judgment—to feel free to ask questions, to experiment, to make statements about what they do and don’t understand. At first they need help to learn to write without censoring their thoughts—to feel confident that nobody will criticize what they’ve written.”
- Location 2284 (Highlight (Yellow)): Listening to these examples, I saw that many of my beliefs about writing and learning also apply to mathematics: that we write to discover what we know and don’t know; that we write more comfortably if we go exploring, free of the fear of not being on the “right” road to the right destination, and that we learn more if we feel that the work has a purpose.
- Location 2875 (Highlight (Yellow)): No book has so put me inside the head and heart of a chemist as The Periodic Table, by Primo Levi, an Italian chemist who survived Auschwitz and wrote three powerful books about that experience. The Periodic Table, which was published in this country several years ago to great acclaim (in a superb translation by Raymond Rosenthal), takes its title from the structure of its chapters, each of which is named for a chemical element that played a memorable role at some moment in Levi’s life.
- Location 3167 (Highlight (Yellow)): I like the point that instructiveness in writing is a drag. If you want to preach, disguise it as entertainment.
### Summary
Delightful book. Highly recommend.
### Key Takeaways
- Location 45 (Highlight (Yellow)): Clear writing is the logical arrangement of thought; a scientist who thinks clearly can write as well as the best writer.
- Location 67 (Highlight (Yellow)): Once I met them, however, there was no mistaking the men and women I wanted to have along on the ride. They all had the rare gift of enthusiasm. Again and again I was struck by the exuberance that these writers brought to what they were writing about. Whoever the writer and whatever the subject—the biologist Rachel Carson writing about life on the ocean floor, the anthropologist Clifford Geertz writing about a cockfight in Bali, the art historian A. Hyatt Mayor writing about the lithographs of Toulouse-Lautrec, the zoologist Archie Carr writing about the giant sea turtle, the psychiatrist Robert Coles writing about the gallantry of children under stress, the naturalist John Muir writing about an earthquake in Yosemite Valley, the composer Roger Sessions writing about Beethoven and the mystery of composition—the common thread is a sense of high enjoyment, zest and wonder. Perhaps, both in learning to write and in writing to learn, they are the only ingredients that really matter.
- Location 187 (Highlight (Yellow)): Contrary to general belief, writing isn’t something that only “writers” do; writing is a basic skill for getting through life. Yet most American adults are terrified of the prospect—ask a middle-aged engineer to write a report and you’ll see something close to panic. Writing, however, isn’t a special language that belongs to English teachers and a few other sensitive souls who have a “gift for words.” Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly should be able to write clearly—about any subject at all.
- Location 241 (Highlight (Yellow)): Writing is learned by imitation. I learned to write mainly by reading writers who were doing the kind of writing I wanted to do and by trying to figure out how they did it.
- Location 383 (Highlight (Yellow)): What quicker way to get to know a great university? Editors are licensed to be curious. Besides, I enjoyed editing more than writing. I liked thinking of story ideas; I liked working with writers and helping them to present their writing at its strongest, and I especially liked the element of surprise: Every day an editor learns something new. I signed up for the job and did it for seven years.
- Location 450 (Highlight (Yellow)): But the people who gave the seminar its rigor were from disciplines that had nothing to do with performance. The metallurgist Cyril Smith talked about symmetry and dissymmetry in molecular structure. The geologist John Rodgers talked about the strict numerical repetition in the formation of crystals. The zoologist G. Evelyn Hutchinson talked about the rhythmic movement of lake waters; the art historian Malcolm Cormack talked about rhythm in painting, and Dr. Glaser talked about the role of the brain in the physiology and control of rhythm. For three days the rhythmologists turned each other on, and Ruff has used the format ever since to teach an interdisciplinary seminar on rhythm. *(Notes: This would be a fun format for conferences; it would prevent it from growing stale.)*
- Location 741 (Highlight (Yellow)): Writing is a tool that enables people in every discipline to wrestle with facts and ideas. It’s a physical activity, unlike reading. Writing requires us to operate some kind of mechanism—pencil, pen, typewriter, word processor—for getting our thoughts on paper. It compels us by the repeated effort of language to go after those thoughts and to organize them and present them clearly. It forces us to keep asking, “Am I saying what I want to say?” Very often the answer is “No.” It’s a useful piece of information.
- Location 831 (Highlight (Yellow)): Therefore, for the purposes of this book, I’ll generalize outrageously and state that there are two kinds of writing. One is explanatory writing: writing that transmits existing information or ideas. Call it Type A writing. The other is exploratory writing: writing that enables us to discover what we want to say. Call it Type B. They are equally valid and useful.
- Location 845 (Highlight (Yellow)): Keep thinking and writing and rewriting. If you force yourself to think clearly you will write clearly. It’s as simple as that. The hard part isn’t the writing; the hard part is the thinking.
- Location 910 (Highlight (Yellow)): Information is your sacred product, and noise is its pollutant. Guard the message with your life.
- Location 937 (Highlight (Yellow)): people who write obscurely are either unskilled in writing or up to mischief.
- Location 2148 (Highlight (Yellow)): “For many years,” she said, “I’ve been asking my students to write about mathematics as they learned it, with predictably wonderful results. Writing seems to free them of the idea that math is a collection of right answers owned by the teacher—a body of knowledge that she will dispense in chunks and that they have to swallow and digest. That’s how most non-mathematicians perceive it. But what makes mathematics really interesting is not the right answer but where it came from and where it leads.”
- Location 2231 (Highlight (Yellow)): “Writing is a way to explore a question and gain control over it,” Mrs. Countryman said. “But it also engages the imagination, the intellect and the emotions, and these are powerful aids to learning.”
- Location 2252 (Highlight (Yellow)): Another format is for students to keep a journal with a running account of their work. “In a journal,” Mrs. Countryman said, “I want them to suspend judgment—to feel free to ask questions, to experiment, to make statements about what they do and don’t understand. At first they need help to learn to write without censoring their thoughts—to feel confident that nobody will criticize what they’ve written.”
- Location 2284 (Highlight (Yellow)): Listening to these examples, I saw that many of my beliefs about writing and learning also apply to mathematics: that we write to discover what we know and don’t know; that we write more comfortably if we go exploring, free of the fear of not being on the “right” road to the right destination, and that we learn more if we feel that the work has a purpose.
- Location 2875 (Highlight (Yellow)): No book has so put me inside the head and heart of a chemist as The Periodic Table, by Primo Levi, an Italian chemist who survived Auschwitz and wrote three powerful books about that experience. The Periodic Table, which was published in this country several years ago to great acclaim (in a superb translation by Raymond Rosenthal), takes its title from the structure of its chapters, each of which is named for a chemical element that played a memorable role at some moment in Levi’s life.
- Location 3167 (Highlight (Yellow)): I like the point that instructiveness in writing is a drag. If you want to preach, disguise it as entertainment.
July 29, 2014
This book was an interesting read, especially if you deal with writers in a professional sense as an editor or as a writer. That said, it is not a how-to guide. What it does is get the reader thinking about how writing can complement and supplement a person's understanding of any subject. As a writer, I'm not sure this book did much for me. As an editor, I found it enlightening, interesting, and enjoyable. It's easy to suggest to someone that thoughts need to be put down in an orderly fashion and convey personality, humanity, and enthusiasm for the subject--and in an editing capacity, the editor can objectively help the writer gain her footing when the foundation shifts; as a writer, though, well . . . doing what Zinsser suggests is the difficult part. This book doesn't tell the reader how to do anything, but it does give examples of others who have done it brilliantly in case examples are needed.
June 17, 2020
Quite a disappointment to be honest - Zinsser's other book on my list (On Writing Well) is worlds apart from this one. Yes, writing is about putting your thoughts in order but I feel like this book lacks actual depth on what it claims on its title. Every single quoted passage is about how the author feels when he reads it, how interesting it is, but there's a lack of analysis of what is being quoted, what makes it work, or any criticism or feedback on what could have been done differently.
Chapter 11, Writing Physics and Chemistry, is the only one I truly enjoyed. The passages are quite interesting but what's more important, Zinsser's actually provides feedback on key words and techniques that help the authors engage their readers. Up to 3 stars because of this saving chapter.
I would like to know if anyone has measured the amount of content that's quoted vs actual words by the author, it felt like 80:20.
Chapter 11, Writing Physics and Chemistry, is the only one I truly enjoyed. The passages are quite interesting but what's more important, Zinsser's actually provides feedback on key words and techniques that help the authors engage their readers. Up to 3 stars because of this saving chapter.
I would like to know if anyone has measured the amount of content that's quoted vs actual words by the author, it felt like 80:20.
September 28, 2022
Pertama kali saya membaca buku karya William Zinsser, adalah buku klasiknya tentang penulisan nonfiksi, On Writing Well (pertama terbit tahun 1976, masih dicetak ulang sampai tahun 2016). Saya suka sekali dengan gaya penulisannya, dan terutama prinsipnya tentang menulis (nonfiksi) yang baik. Katanya, "The secret of good writing is to strip every sentence to its cleanest components". Membaca ini saya langsung teringat kalimat-kalimat berbelit-belit dengan istilah-istilah mentereng nggak jelas dari para pejabat instansi pemerintah.
William Zinsser adalah penulis yang berpengalaman puluhan tahun sebagai jurnalis suratkabar besar di New York dan kemudian mengajar kepenulisan nonfiksi di Yale dan Columbia University.
Dalam buku Writing to Learn ini, selain tetap membahas "bagaimana menulis yang baik", Zinsser juga berusaha menekankan pentingnya menulis sebagai alat untuk belajar dan memahami apa yang kita pelajari, topik apapun itu.
Buku ini terbagi ke dalam dua bagian. Yang pertama menceritakan tentang usaha memasukkan kegiatan menulis ke dalam kurikulum berbagai bidang studi perkuliahan di luar jurusan bahasa, termasuk di jurusan-jurusan sains seperti kimia dan geologi.
Ternyata kegiatan menulis ini berhasil membantu para mahasiswa (dan juga para dosen) lebih memahami apa yang dipelajari dalam kuliahnya, membantu dosen memahami jalan pikiran para mahasiswa, dan selanjutnya juga 'memperbaiki' logical reasoning penulisnya. Karena "An act of writing is an act of thinking", katanya. Menulis membantu kita berpikir secara teratur.
Bagian kedua berisi contoh-contoh tulisan dengan topik-topik berbeda, yang menurut Zinsser adalah contoh tulisan yang baik. Bagian ini dibagi-bagi lagi menurut topiknya:
- Earth, Sea and Sky, memberi contoh tulisan-tulisan ilmiah populer di bidang geologi, kelautan, dan astronomi.
- Art and Artists, tentang seni lukis, fotografi, desain grafis, dan sejarah seni.
- The Natural World, tentang biologi. Di antaranya menampilkan tulisan Charles Darwin.
- Writing Mathematics
- Man, Woman and Child, tentang antropologi. Termasuk di dalamnya tulisan Clifford Geertz tentang Bali. Di bab ini juga diceritakan pengalaman Zinsser terpesona musik Bali yang membuatnya mengunjungi Indonesia.
- Writing Physics and Chemistry, menampilkan tulisan Albert Einstein tentang relativitas, dan buku "The Periodic Table" dari Primo Levi.
- Worlds of Music
Dalam bab Writing Mathematics diceritakan dengan cukup detail bagaimana cara seorang guru matematika SMA di Philadelphia menerapkan menulis sebagai alat untuk mempelajari matematika di kelasnya. Dengan menuliskan proses berpikir mereka dalam mengerjakan suatu soal, murid-murid terbantu mengeksplorasi soal tersebut secara kreatif dan menemukan jalannya sendiri. Dan dalam prosesnya, mereka juga belajar berpikir secara logis.
***
Saya suka sekali tulisan William Zinsser dan prinsip-prinsip penulisannya. Secara umum saya sependapat dengannya, bahwa sebuah karya tulis perlu disampaikan secara jelas, tidak berbelit-belit, tidak menggunakan istilah-istilah rumit yang tidak perlu, dengan logika bahasa yang terang. Tetapi saya tidak sependapat soal gaya penyampaian yang harus tertentu.
Di salah satu bab Zinsser menceritakan pengalamannya membaca buku "Surely You're Joking, Mr.Feynman". Dia sangat tidak suka dengan gaya penulisan buku itu, dan tidak mau membacanya lebih jauh.
Saya menduga, karena Zinsser berasal dari generasi sebelum adanya internet, blog, atau youtube, ia tidak bisa menerima tulisan nonfiksi dengan gaya percakapan santai. Akibatnya, ia menganggap buku Richard Feynman sebagai karya tulis yang buruk.
"Sayang sekali, padahal saya percaya Feynman adalah orang pintar, tapi bukunya bukan karya tulis yang baik. Saya yakin buku-buku seperti Lives of a Cell dari Lewis Thomas dan Godel Escher Bach dari Douglas Hoftstadter akan terus dicetak ulang jauh setelah buku Feynman menghilang."
Ternyata Zinsser salah besar. Buku-buku Feynman masih dicetak ulang sampai sekarang, bahkan eksis lebih lama dan lebih mendunia.
Mengapa? Menurut saya, pertama, karena jaman sudah berubah. Bahasa percakapan yang santai sudah umum diterima melalui media-media informal seperti blog. Kedua, karena keakraban dalam sebuah tulisan ilmiah populer itu perlu, jika ilmuwan ingin merangkul awam agar mau mengetahui tentang ilmunya lebih jauh. Fakta bahwa buku-buku Feynman laris sampai sekarang adalah bukti bahwa awam menemukan akses itu lewat buku-buku Feynman.
Kedua buku lain yang disebut Zinsser memang gaya penulisannya lebih bagus (buku-buku Lewis Thomas bahkan juga puitis), tapi saya pikir hanya pembaca serius (maksud saya, orang yang benar-benar suka membaca literatur) yang akan membacanya. Buku Feynman lebih mudah dibaca awam.
Feynman sendiri, seperti seringkali disebutkan dalam buku-bukunya, tidak pernah merasa harus dianggap pintar, meskipun dia fisikawan peraih Nobel. Justru dia berprinsip bahwa dia harus bisa menjelaskan ilmunya dengan bahasa sesederhana mungkin sehingga awam pun mengerti. Cara Feynman, lewat bahasa percakapan yang akrab. Terbukti caranya lebih ampuh merangkul awam dibanding buku-buku lain yang disebut Zinsser.
Jadi menurut saya, sebuah tulisan ilmiah juga tergantung niat ilmuwan yang bersangkutan.
Apa tujuannya menulis?
Siapa targetnya?
Jika targetnya sesama akademisi, atau kalangan dengan tingkat pendidikan tinggi, tentu tidak (terlalu) masalah menggunakan istilah-istilah yang lebih rumit dan struktur tulisan yang lebih formal. Tetapi jika targetnya adalah publik yang awam, atau anak sekolah, yang paling penting adalah isi ilmunya bisa dipahami, gaya penulisan nomor dua.
Saat ini usaha merangkul publik agar mau mengonsumsi topik ilmiah adalah suatu hal yang mendesak, tidak ada salahnya memanfaatkan berbagai cara dan media untuk penyampaian ilmu.
Catatan: buku On Writing Well dan Writing to Learn ini layak dikoleksi, kalau memungkinkan.
-dydy-
William Zinsser adalah penulis yang berpengalaman puluhan tahun sebagai jurnalis suratkabar besar di New York dan kemudian mengajar kepenulisan nonfiksi di Yale dan Columbia University.
Dalam buku Writing to Learn ini, selain tetap membahas "bagaimana menulis yang baik", Zinsser juga berusaha menekankan pentingnya menulis sebagai alat untuk belajar dan memahami apa yang kita pelajari, topik apapun itu.
Buku ini terbagi ke dalam dua bagian. Yang pertama menceritakan tentang usaha memasukkan kegiatan menulis ke dalam kurikulum berbagai bidang studi perkuliahan di luar jurusan bahasa, termasuk di jurusan-jurusan sains seperti kimia dan geologi.
Ternyata kegiatan menulis ini berhasil membantu para mahasiswa (dan juga para dosen) lebih memahami apa yang dipelajari dalam kuliahnya, membantu dosen memahami jalan pikiran para mahasiswa, dan selanjutnya juga 'memperbaiki' logical reasoning penulisnya. Karena "An act of writing is an act of thinking", katanya. Menulis membantu kita berpikir secara teratur.
Bagian kedua berisi contoh-contoh tulisan dengan topik-topik berbeda, yang menurut Zinsser adalah contoh tulisan yang baik. Bagian ini dibagi-bagi lagi menurut topiknya:
- Earth, Sea and Sky, memberi contoh tulisan-tulisan ilmiah populer di bidang geologi, kelautan, dan astronomi.
- Art and Artists, tentang seni lukis, fotografi, desain grafis, dan sejarah seni.
- The Natural World, tentang biologi. Di antaranya menampilkan tulisan Charles Darwin.
- Writing Mathematics
- Man, Woman and Child, tentang antropologi. Termasuk di dalamnya tulisan Clifford Geertz tentang Bali. Di bab ini juga diceritakan pengalaman Zinsser terpesona musik Bali yang membuatnya mengunjungi Indonesia.
- Writing Physics and Chemistry, menampilkan tulisan Albert Einstein tentang relativitas, dan buku "The Periodic Table" dari Primo Levi.
- Worlds of Music
Dalam bab Writing Mathematics diceritakan dengan cukup detail bagaimana cara seorang guru matematika SMA di Philadelphia menerapkan menulis sebagai alat untuk mempelajari matematika di kelasnya. Dengan menuliskan proses berpikir mereka dalam mengerjakan suatu soal, murid-murid terbantu mengeksplorasi soal tersebut secara kreatif dan menemukan jalannya sendiri. Dan dalam prosesnya, mereka juga belajar berpikir secara logis.
***
Saya suka sekali tulisan William Zinsser dan prinsip-prinsip penulisannya. Secara umum saya sependapat dengannya, bahwa sebuah karya tulis perlu disampaikan secara jelas, tidak berbelit-belit, tidak menggunakan istilah-istilah rumit yang tidak perlu, dengan logika bahasa yang terang. Tetapi saya tidak sependapat soal gaya penyampaian yang harus tertentu.
Di salah satu bab Zinsser menceritakan pengalamannya membaca buku "Surely You're Joking, Mr.Feynman". Dia sangat tidak suka dengan gaya penulisan buku itu, dan tidak mau membacanya lebih jauh.
Saya menduga, karena Zinsser berasal dari generasi sebelum adanya internet, blog, atau youtube, ia tidak bisa menerima tulisan nonfiksi dengan gaya percakapan santai. Akibatnya, ia menganggap buku Richard Feynman sebagai karya tulis yang buruk.
"Sayang sekali, padahal saya percaya Feynman adalah orang pintar, tapi bukunya bukan karya tulis yang baik. Saya yakin buku-buku seperti Lives of a Cell dari Lewis Thomas dan Godel Escher Bach dari Douglas Hoftstadter akan terus dicetak ulang jauh setelah buku Feynman menghilang."
Ternyata Zinsser salah besar. Buku-buku Feynman masih dicetak ulang sampai sekarang, bahkan eksis lebih lama dan lebih mendunia.
Mengapa? Menurut saya, pertama, karena jaman sudah berubah. Bahasa percakapan yang santai sudah umum diterima melalui media-media informal seperti blog. Kedua, karena keakraban dalam sebuah tulisan ilmiah populer itu perlu, jika ilmuwan ingin merangkul awam agar mau mengetahui tentang ilmunya lebih jauh. Fakta bahwa buku-buku Feynman laris sampai sekarang adalah bukti bahwa awam menemukan akses itu lewat buku-buku Feynman.
Kedua buku lain yang disebut Zinsser memang gaya penulisannya lebih bagus (buku-buku Lewis Thomas bahkan juga puitis), tapi saya pikir hanya pembaca serius (maksud saya, orang yang benar-benar suka membaca literatur) yang akan membacanya. Buku Feynman lebih mudah dibaca awam.
Feynman sendiri, seperti seringkali disebutkan dalam buku-bukunya, tidak pernah merasa harus dianggap pintar, meskipun dia fisikawan peraih Nobel. Justru dia berprinsip bahwa dia harus bisa menjelaskan ilmunya dengan bahasa sesederhana mungkin sehingga awam pun mengerti. Cara Feynman, lewat bahasa percakapan yang akrab. Terbukti caranya lebih ampuh merangkul awam dibanding buku-buku lain yang disebut Zinsser.
Jadi menurut saya, sebuah tulisan ilmiah juga tergantung niat ilmuwan yang bersangkutan.
Apa tujuannya menulis?
Siapa targetnya?
Jika targetnya sesama akademisi, atau kalangan dengan tingkat pendidikan tinggi, tentu tidak (terlalu) masalah menggunakan istilah-istilah yang lebih rumit dan struktur tulisan yang lebih formal. Tetapi jika targetnya adalah publik yang awam, atau anak sekolah, yang paling penting adalah isi ilmunya bisa dipahami, gaya penulisan nomor dua.
Saat ini usaha merangkul publik agar mau mengonsumsi topik ilmiah adalah suatu hal yang mendesak, tidak ada salahnya memanfaatkan berbagai cara dan media untuk penyampaian ilmu.
Catatan: buku On Writing Well dan Writing to Learn ini layak dikoleksi, kalau memungkinkan.
-dydy-
Displaying 1 - 30 of 200 reviews