The Elephants of Style (text only) 1st (First) edition by B. Walsh

by Bill Walsh

The Elephants of Style : A Trunkload of Tips on the Big Issues and Gray Areas of Contemporary American English [Paperback]Bill Walsh (Author)

Genres: Writing, Nonfiction, Reference, Language, Linguistics, Self Help, Adult

Paperback

First published March 4, 2004

About the author

Librarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name

Bill Walsh was born in Pottsville, Pa., and grew up in Madison Heights, Mich., and Mesa, Ariz. He is a 1984 journalism graduate of the University of Arizona and has worked as a reporter and editor at the Phoenix Gazette and an editor at the Washington Times and the Washington Post. He is now a multiplatform editor at the Post.

Reviews

[Libby Drew · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a required read for my nephew's English class, and I was able to borrow it and breeze through in one night. This book has lots of the same stuff I usually find in these grammar/style guides, but it's presented with some wit and humor. Unfortunately, I think much of the humor went over my nephew's head. ;) Here's an example: Unless you're writing an ultraformal adademic paper or want to communicate the idea that you're very, very constipated, don't strain to avoid contractions.

I did find the discussion on various stylebooks (AP vs. Chicago Manual) very interesting, as well as the information on how to handle some of the unconventional capitilazation issues found on the Internet these days.

[Barbara]

Strunk and White beware, Walsh has a sense of humor.

[Clare · Rating 4 out of 5]

I admit, I was prepared to be annoyed when I first picked up Bill Walsh’s The Elephants of Style, given that its name is a shout-out to what I’m pretty sure is the least helpful book on English usage in the language. (I know many people have found it helpful, but those people are not word nerds. If you say you found it helpful, I’m glad for you, but I’m also not going to view you as having any credibility if you start to try and talk language or writing stuff.) I was additionally apprehensive when Walsh started off by proclaiming himself a prescriptivist. But he assures us he is a reasonable prescriptivist, and so I gave him a chance. And mostly, he is quite reasonable—he’s in a position of giving advice, so he must by necessity prescribe do’s and don’ts (and yes, that’s the correct use of apostrophes in “do’s and don’ts”; we all hate it, too), but he also really knows his stuff, and is pretty up-front about when his peeves are his own peeves that he has developed through the application of logic, which is a thing with a pretty limited role in language. While he wears the curmudgeonly thing as a persona, the book is situated firmly in the “make them remember it by making it funny” school of teaching, rather than the regular boring elitism that so unfortunately plagues much grammar and usage “advice.”

Walsh is a newspaper copy chief, so while his advice runs to “newspaper style” in some ways that are not always applicable to everything, his main goal seems to be making things as readable as possible, rather than, say, showing off how articulate you are (which is, sadly, the goal of a lot of other self-described prescriptivists). And this book has a lot of really solid advice on how to do that, including areas where he advises throwing out or working around certain aspects of “technical correctness” to get more natural-sounding sentences (what one of my creative writing teachers called “invisible writing”). And it doesn’t spend a lot of time rehashing the basics—it’s pretty much all about the “elephants in the room” of writing; the bits people actually get confused about or about which there’s no consensus. He’s also got some useful, if scathing, advice about the “flair, panache” definition of style, like a list of the most tired tropes to use in an introduction.

Overall, it’s very silly, but solid as an elephant.

[Sarah Sammis · Rating 5 out of 5]

I picked up The Elephants of Style by Bill Walsh because I liked the title, a silly little pun on The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr., E.B. White (1957). The book promises a "trunkload of tips on the big issues and gray areas of contemporary American English."

The book has fourteen elephants covering key points of writing and editing. Walsh starts out with the basic reminder that most modern-day writers probably aren't writing on a typewriter. With word processors it is no longer necessary or desirable to leave two spaces after a period. If you write or blog for the web you'll know that web browsers don't render any extra spaces after the first one unless it's hard coded as a non-breaking space.

From the typewriter advice, Walsh moves onto spelling (and common errors), capitalization, abbreviations, problem pairs (picking the right word), word agreement, plurals and possessives, numbers, punctuation, quibbles about style, plagiarism and finally editing. The Elephants of Style is a good starting point for writing well in American English. It won't make your writing perfect. Walsh also reiterates a number of times that writers should double check his advice against their companies' style guides.

For the most part I enjoyed The Elephants of Style but I think the advice on writing for the web feels dated. I realize that back in the early days of commercialization of the internet, the phrase World Wide Web was coined (that's the www that shows up on most URLs) but the capitalization of "Web" in web site (or more preferable website) or web page (or webpage) stinks of marketing. Techies tend to write the terms as website or webpage and marketing folks tend to go for Web site and Web page.

Now for URLs, if you're writing on the web, don't spell out the URL. Instead, spell out the name of the page and then link to it. Your reader, if interested, will click on it. If you are writing for print, it still looks nicer to have the site's name spelled out (so Yahoo instead of www.yahoo.com). If you want to include the URL, please include it as a footnote or endnote.

[Curttrnka]

Currently reading and rereading this book, desperately trying to suck less at editing. Walsh has a way of driving home a point without the material feeling like a textbook. Great read.

[Leah Agirlandaboy]

I always loved Bill Walsh at The Slot, and it was fun to finally read this one, especially when he makes calls that, twenty years later, feel either cutely old-fashioned (Web site, e-mail) or pleasingly prescient (“[My preference] will have many people reaching for the dunce cap, but…I think the them/they/their/theirs solution will eventually become standard. Because English has no official panel to set the rules, however, right-thinking pioneers will have to endure the scorn of the traditionalists for now”). If you love language, enjoyed Benjamin Dreyer’s more recent treatment of the same subject (a treatment that adheres to the superior style that uses serial commas!), and like “a little writing with [your] writing,” this is fun to dip in and out of (on loop forever).

[Kathleen Fowler · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a fantastic resource for anyone who cares that what they write (even if it’s only book reviews for Goodreads!) be clear, grammatically correct, and esthetically pleasing. It addresses a variety of tricky usage issues that have troubled me for ages. I have several other good reference books, but they do not always address my questions, and they are not nearly as much fun to read.

The author says he is writing for those who love language and words and view writing as an art that goes beyond the mere act of communicating. He does not just present rules, but illustrates why they matter. Not only that, but on occasion he illustrates why they don’t matter anymore, and provides arguments for going with an alternative that sounds better and communicates more efficiently. “Language evolves,” as Walsh points out, “but at each instant in that evolution there will be ways of writing that will strike educated readers as ignorant.”

I love this commonsense approach and Walsh’s ability to demonstrate why some rules that appear fussy and pointless to modern folks are still appropriate under certain circumstances. He advises ignoring them unless such a situation arises; it’s all about clarity. Well, that and not looking stupid.

I was glad to see Walsh stand up for the technically incorrect use of plural pronouns to replace the awkward singular “he or she,” “him or her,” and “his or her” constructions. But follow his advice at your own risk. Walsh freely admits to past mistakes in judgement, such as having declared for “on-line” a few years ago whereas “online” is now clearly the accepted spelling. He is not infallible, but he is erudite, thorough, and very entertaining.

The Elephants of Style is not exhaustive, but it does cover a lot of ground. For further enlightenment and entertainment, I will definitely want to read Walsh’s earlier book, Lapsing Into a Comma (which, inexplicably, defies capitalization rules by capitalizing a preposition shorter than five letters).

[Kay Hudson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Much of this book is about style in the journalistic style book sense, which is interesting if not necessarily applicable to writing fiction. However, it would be a good place to start getting ideas for making your own style sheet, particularly if you are publishing independently and don't have a publishing house guide to follow. Various style books do not always agree--the goal is consistency. (Beware of some of the "rules" on Internet issues, as the book was published in 2004,about a century ago in cyber-years.)

There's also a fair amount of grammar and general usage information, presented with humor and sometimes delving into finer points I'd never thought about. I read it in bits and pieces (and will keep it as reference book); if you are a word nerd and or a grammar stickler, you will find it entertaining.

[Christina · Rating 3 out of 5]

My copy editor gifted me with this book. A must-read for Grammar geeks.

[Bryan Nowak · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am a fiction writer who loves the paranormal thriller genera. While I read widely in my own genera, sometimes I have to step out of my regular fare and read something else. I picked up "The Elephants of Style" because it was recommended in an article I was reading about editing.

Bill Walsh is a masterful, and humorously opinionated, writer/editor. He tells you where he is stating fact, opinion, and also his way of viewing things. It is fascinating how we take certain aspects of the English language for granted and then we come across a situation where suddenly what we thought was true really isn't.

This book is well written and fun. There are a few places where the editor speak is way above my head (that is why I hire an editor), but I plunged through it till the bitter end.

For those interested reading more about the stylistic wold that is the English language, I highly recommend it. It is one of those books you can pick up and put down in between reading projects. I also thing it is one of those things worth tabbing at points and maybe adding a few of your own highlights here and there when you find things interesting.

Again, well worth the read for those who make a living on the written word.

-Bryan the Writer

[Elaina Marie Faust · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm a working editor, so most of this book was stuff I already knew, but it would be suitable for a beginner writer or editor who's confused about stuff like punctuation, grammar, etc. It WOULD be. But sadly this book is pretty dated. 20 years is a long time in this field. Lots of stuff in here is no longer correct by most style guides (at least the ones I know of). Some of it is no longer even considered. If you're still learning and at the level where you need the first half of this book, I don't think you'll be able to tell what's so outdated here that you can disregard it. And if you're in a position to discern what's too dated to use, most of this book will be basic knowledge to you. So I don't think there's many people I could recommend Elephants to.

The writing is amusing, and in the last quarter of the book I found some interesting things to consider that I haven't before, but I disagree with the actual conclusions Walsh makes sometimes, again mostly because he's writing from 2004.

I would seek out something published in the last 10 years instead.

[Linda · Rating 2 out of 5]

Finished this now to get it off my still reading list before the year's ends. Not what I was hoping for, found the author overly fussy or old fashioned at times and reasonable in others. Maybe a George Carlin effect, when the author states a grammar rule I adhere to he is reasonable, when he doesn't he is fussy. I can live with that.

[Irene · Rating 4 out of 5]

Language is always evolving—lots of good usage and grammar tips here, presented with a great sense of humor, although some things covered are quite outdated (e.g., capitalization of Internet and Web). Went online to check out his blog, www.theslot.com, only to discover that he died in 2017. Oh well.

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

An entertaining and extremely helpful way to learn some tips for grammar and style. Some of it is a little outdated and I'd love an updated version.

I have read "The Elements of Style" and was slightly bored. The sarcasm and dramatic reactions to certain trends and common mistakes found in "The Elephants of Style" are sure to stick with me much longer.

See this review and more on my book Substack: https://momsmusings.substack.com/i/14...

[Emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

This style and writing guide is brisk and smart, but because it is non-narrative , non-fiction, it can only be so engaging. The content is aimed for journalists and news-editors. It was fine for what it was.

[Caleb Sommerville · Rating 5 out of 5]

I adore Bill Walsh's snarky sense of humor. Sure, some of his style preferences are outdated (it's email now, HAHA) and it might seem exceedingly dry to those who don't care. But I love it. And this is a fantastic book.

[Jeff McCloud · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received this at a conference that I attended and never got around to reading it. When it got it, it was up to date; now it is pretty outdated in its references to political and cultural topics. And the final section on handling how to add URLs to copy is anachronistic.

[Carol Turner · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of my favorites.

[Cassandra]

Recommended by Caitlin Pyle

[Steven Northover]

This is a fun read. Granted, as an author I need all the help I can get. I read a few pages every day.

[Sharon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love books about writing and all the finicky rules of English grammar and spelling. This book is a modern take on "The Elements of Style," with the elephants representing the major topic areas.

[Kristin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Knowing that I'm doing freelance editing work, a good friend gave me Bill Walsh's The Elephants of Style : A Trunkload of Tips on the Big Issues and Gray Areas of Contemporary American English as a Christmas gift. It's a surprisingly easy read for a book about grammar, and I actually read the whole thing, cover to cover. Essentially, the book is meant to cover the gray areas of grammar, which Walsh calls the “elephants.” His goal is not to settle the ambiguity, but instead to “find a consensus on what doesn’t look stupid—at least for now” (xiv).

Some of his preferences offend my purist nature—for example, using “they” as a gender-neutral, singular pronoun instead of “he”—but I grudgingly take his larger point: written English evolves just as spoken English does. There isn’t an English-language authority as there is in other languages, and after a time it starts to look ridiculous to stick to outdated usages, even in writing. I don’t like it, but I think he’s right (grr).

The book is full of useful grammatical information, such as punctuation distinctions between American and British English and an explanation of when to use “due to” vs. “because of.” Most of Walsh’s recommended grammar “rules” follow practicality rather than long-held convention, but he occasionally goes the other way and rants against loosening standards too far. Rather than making him appear confused, I generally perceived his rants to be well-founded. For example, when he discusses the use of hyphens in compound modifiers (such as “real estate salesmen” vs. “real-estate salesmen,” which is technically correct), he complains that “a casual approach to compound modifiers robs the language of nuance” (133).

One drawback to the book for some readers may be Walsh’s emphasis on newspaper style conventions. He spends a lot of time talking about Associate Press style vs. Washington Post style vs. New York Times style and so on, and many of his text examples involve subjects typically covered in a newspaper. These sorts of things weren’t really useful to me, but they make sense given his history as an editor for the Washing Post. For me, it didn’t detract from the overall usefulness of the book.

I love precision of language. The Elephants of Style provides me with a balanced approach to writing and editing that allows me to seek that precision without appearing stilted and outdated, in a readable and sometimes humorous manner.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

A nice little guide. Nothing fantastic, but probably worth reading if you're me or similar. I read this back when it came out eight or so years ago and some of the rules have stuck with me pretty strongly (e-mail versus email, parallel structure, a few others). Sure, Walsh is curmudgeonly as he'd be the first to admit (in one or two places he's downright and oddly mean), but it's mostly pretty good advice. While he admits that any style guide is merely a snapshot of the current state of affairs, there's already some anachronistic stuff when it comes to the web, or as he'd call it, the Web, which I'm sure even he's not doing anymore. At a certain point I wondered who this book was for, and what was its point—a "real" writer (or I suppose a real editor), I thought, would just pick a styleguide (AP, Chicago, NYT(?)) and get that, use it as a reference—what was the point of these half-way guides? They're not exhaustive enough to serve as a full reference guide, but they're too nitty-gritty nuts-and-bolts to serve as a fun read. But both of these notions are pretty much false. This is a guide for someone who's interested in improving their (as Walsh would say) grammar/etc., not a professional editor. He keeps it entertaining and it's a quick read with a good deal of information in a small space. (You can read the whole thing in a couple sittings.) I flagged a couple spots for going-back-to-later. Anyway, the design is a hot mess, but what can you do there. Worth the time, I'd say.

[Stacey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Everything you ever wanted to know about writing as a professional in the English language. All stuffed into a few hundred pages.
Well, can I say: Remember it has been 10 years since this book has been published. Much of the technology terms are different or even used differently now. Sometimes while reading, I'd get riled up at something only an aspiring writer could and reminded myself. 2004, web pages were just becoming common. There were a few other things that I scratched my head thinking, why should I care? Probably the biggest piece of advice I got from Walsh is know your audience!
But it had a lot of good information. Walsh has a dry wit that in this book he introduced many problems of the English language to the audience. This was an assigned textbook for a college course. I appreciated some of the professional experiences Walsh gave and how he pointed out that some "rules" are just plain silly. But it was the old adage, you have to know the rules to break the rules.
On my shelf...yes, no, maybe? Probably going to sell the textbook back for the few dollars I can.

[Jacob · Rating 3 out of 5]

As you might guess from the terrible pun in the title, this was a fun one to read. The author, Bill Walsh, is copy chief for national news at the Washington Post; in this book, he explores some of the choices that a copy editor must make (including, for instance, whether to call himself a "copy editor" or a "copyeditor" (p. 185). I find it refreshing that someone is paying attention to details and is not afraid to express a strong opinion on small things. I've always believed there's a right way and a wrong way to do practically anything. Maybe this explains why I've chosen to become a lawyer. (That's "lawyer" and not "attorney," as Walsh points out on page 54.)

In the midst of all the small-picture stuff, Walsh offers a bit of general advice about editing that I think applies to the writing process more broadly: "What you write is always clear to you; good writers have the ability to read their words through an outsider's eyes and make sure it will be clear to others" (p. 198).

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bill Walsh is a professional editor at the Washington Post who has a monthly online chat where he regularly refers to his books. Liking the chat, I went and bought his best reviewed book, The Elephants of Style. The allusion to the Strunk and White classic is deliberate and indicative of his irreverent style.

Unfortunately, when all is said and done, it's still a book about nitpicky grammar debates. Walsh leans towards the descriptivist camp rather than prescriptionist (neither word which passes muster with spell-check) which is the way I lean as well. On most topics, he lays out what the dispute is, what the various sides assert and then gives the side he comes down on.His advice is always sound and logical but it's still arbitrary.

At the end of the book he just outright starts padding. There is a certain random cotton candyesqueness to his musings. It's a fun read but not solid enough to serve as a reference book.

[Renee · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm only giving this book three stars because the humor of the author kept me reading. Minus the occasional sacrilegious remark or profane comment, this book was pretty decent with regard to style. Only a few of the author's rules were points I discounted completely, either for personal preference (e.g., nixing the Oxford comma) or disregard for the rules of standard English grammar (e.g., "they/them" in reference to a singular subject). Additionally, the author seems pretty biased toward more liberal ideology. But then again, the author writes for the Washington Post, so I don't know why I expected a volume free of presuppositions. I'm also not a fan of expletives, and I don't like it when the author affects a condescending or arrogant tone, which I picked up multiple times throughout. However, I would recommend this book--to anyone over the age of eighteen who's looking for a humorous manual with a vulgar reference sprinkled here or there to keep you awake.

[Danielle · Rating 3 out of 5]

I added this to my to-read list based on the catchy title, and the promise to clear up some of those pesky grammar problems that always seem to confuse me.
A couple of things: Walsh is wise and experienced. As professional editors know, many "grammar rules" are more guidelines, and a lot of it comes down to style. I tend to agree with Walsh's opinion on many style issues, so I liked him for that reason. He's also fairly readable (given the dry subject matter), but he does come across as a little snobby. OK, a lot snobby, and condescending. So, that was a bit of a turn off.
Secondly, to sit down and read this cover to cover was nigh unto impossible. Without coming across a gray area, and referencing this book to resolve it, it was pretty useless. So, it's maybe one I'd want to own, but not one to read for pleasure. I gave up about halfway through.

[Rosy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I suppose only nerds read this from cover to cover, but doing so was more fun than I had anticipated. I was slightly disappointed in the shallowness or lack of discussion over some of the meatier issues, and I disagree with some of his decisions/opinions. Because I copy edit for a living, I found that I was familiar with almost every topic (not 100 percent, of course), and I suppose that detracted just a little from satisfaction. But I'm adding Lapsing into a Comma to my reading list because this guy is knowledgeable, experienced and funny (and it's been on my shelf for ages).

[Camilla · Rating 2 out of 5]

Kind of a dry read. I expect a bit more wit and a lot more descriptive thinking in an editing book, so I was disappointed that Walsh was so hung up on his own personal brand of descriptivism. His curmudgeon's style book could have been teasing and witty and amusing. Instead it was the most boring section of the book (save the math segment--yuck). I normally really look forward to each entertaining segment of these types of books, but this book is one I could have done without.