This book provides important information delievered in an impersonal and lifeless manner. As a writer, I am wary to heed Williams's advice. Do I want to write prose as boring as his? I think not. Frankly, I think that if university students (such as myself) weren't required to read this book for class, Mr. Williams wouldn't make too much money.

I wonder if Mr. Williams thought of taking his own advice when writing this book. To read "Style" I have to sit in absolute silence and puzzle over each sentence I come across. When I see pages full of brackets, I shudder. Should a reading experience be so unpleaseant? Why are you writing a book on writing, Mr. Williams, when you are a poor writer yourself?

If you want to read a book that can actually help you to become a better writer, pick up On Writing Well by William Zinsser. Practical, concise and personable, Mr. Zinsser writes in a way that Mr. Williams should aspire to. I warn you against losing multiple hours of your life that you can never get back by reading this "guide".

While what Williams says is all excellent (nits picked by impatient colicky philistines notwithstanding), what really sets this book apart is the workbook approach: you actually learn how to write more clearly by doing the exercises. Brilliant and useful.

It is difficult to know where to begin. I am writing a brief review of this book to counter the negative reviews I read. I was stunned: I expected to read rave reviews of Professor Williams' book. Without wanting to offend anyone, they are for the most part so far off the mark I would think they were talking about another book.

One author mentioned Strunk and White's book as the ideal. As much as I loved this book when I was young, it seems slightly old-fashioned, even quaint now, and encourages an attention to rules that seems superficial. On the other hand, Williams' book takes advantage of the more systematic, deep approach to language, rhetoric and communication that was developed by the best linguists of the 20th century. There is a good reason that this book has had so many editions for such a long period of time (now in the 8th edition). It is because it is based on an insight that touches a deep truth about communicating in writing: that subjects and verbs, or characters and their actions as Williams helpfully calls them at times, form the basic elements of the English sentence. It is Williams' ability to draw out the implications of this simple truth that gives his book its genius. Emerson once said that rhythm is the deep structure of the universe (he said it better but I can't remember his words); I feel that Emerson would smile in agreement at Williams thesis: that it is an understanding of the significance of the basic character/action relationship between the subject and verb that gives a sentence its strength and, on a "higher" level, the same systole/diastole relationship between theme and discussion that gives a paragraph its strength.

I am by no means doing Professor Williams' book justice, and I would not have written this review if the others had not been so, well, wrong. His writing bad? On the contrary, good writing, as Williams points out in a useful addition to one of the later editions of his book on controlling longer sentences, does not mean Dick and Jane type sentences, and he does not allow himself to fall into Strunk and White's tendency to oversimplify in explaining his ideas. I am now directing an English language program at a major university in Thailand after teaching English at Indiana University for 20 years, and I was recently asked to teach a graduate course on writing. What book did I first reach for in looking for the most substantial, concrete, practical and useful lessons on writing so that my students would not be exposed to the usual platitudes on omitting needless words and relying on your taste to be your guide? Professor Williams' book of course. It is the best of the best and will reward you endlessly as you apply his basic insights in your own writing.