I recently purchased a “thesaurus” after having seen someone referring to this particular book while perusing through some blogs and thinking it seemed interesting. (I put thesaurus in quotes because though the book is labeled as such, it’s the equivalent of calling a beginners guide to html a dictionary.)
I am now going to complain about this book. After 30 minutes of reading I’m in such dismay that I don’t know whether to finish it or put it down. In the words of Dorothy Parker. “It’s not a [book] to be tossed aside lightly…. It should be thrown with great force.”
I get the feeling this article with continually grow as I make my way through more and more. But for now it is as it is.
The point of this book is to teach the reader to be more well spoken without sounding like you’re trying too hard. This far it has failed miserably. It makes wildly dramatic claims without the slightest empirical data to back them.
In giving lessons from THE BEST authors and orators, wordsmiths if you will, of all time (as defined by him) he uses authors such as Eliot, Hemingway, Steinbeck, E.B. White, etc, etc, then comes Barack Obama. And I’m not going to start a political debate nor deny that he has a particular speech-craft however I strongly disagree with putting him in league with the aforementioned. Regardless of that, though, he explains hows he can improve upon all of these and make their words better. Oooookay Pal. Someone’s had a few too many.
In the subsection labeled “The Seven Rhetorical Sins” number 4 is listed as Pretension. First off, to interrupt here, my working definition of pretension would be claiming to be The Authority on all things well spoken and to discredit every person you’ve ever disagreed with in one fell swoop of your hand over a keyboard. However, his example is from a study by Elias Canetti written in Germany in 1960, which he chastises for using the word “man” as opposed to “humankind” asking “why you would choose to rhetorically dismiss half the population of the planet?” Stating “What’s wrong with humankind or even the occasional she or her?” Concluding that this Is the twenty-first century. Actually that wasn’t written in the 21st champ. So you’re a dumbass. Also “Man”, as far as I’m concerned, is generally still accepted as short for mankind. While anyone using the term humankind is considered highly pretentious. Further, in every language I’ve studied, the masculine form is what is properly used for a group of people. <I’d also like to add that Canetti won a Nobel prize for literature… How about Mr. Word-Doctor?>
Further in that category you should never use any of the following in writing. Period.
1. Melodrama. … Ok, I’m sorry but I disagree. I (clearly) love melodrama and love authors who use it. However, to make matters worse his definition of melodrama seems to be imagery and metaphors.
2. Needlessness. Judging from what I can gather from his explanation and examples. Using 2 adjectives or modifiers is needless and makes you a bad writer.
3. Cliches. Don’t use cliches. Ever. Even if they are the most basic way to connect to the audience on a generally universal scale. Or even if you’re making a point. Just don’t use them. ..(Thus saith the lord.)
4. Pretension… .. yea..
5. Craftiness. Oooooh you’ll not be crafty. Especially not when you’re trying to be persuasive. Don’t you DARE try to trick anyone with your words to further your opinion. That will never work. (Yet somehow he still list Obama as one of the greats. Politicians are In No Way Crafty. Nope. None What-so-ever. Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. – Douglas Adams)
6. Perkiness. Do not dare act passionate about what you’re saying. It’s “Insufferable.” Instead write a book called The Beginners Guide to Watching Paint Dry. It’ll be a masterpiece.
7. Wordiness. Wordiness if just ALL. WRONG. You should, in your book on watching paint dry write the following. “Stare.” Of course this is a final draft. Originally You would have written. “Stare blankly at it.” Only to realize that was just all wrong. Perhaps you could even further empathize with the audience by simply writing “Look” as stare may be to strong of a word.
The Watching Paint Dry part is clearly my assertations but you get the idea here..
Continuing on with it’s audacity toward claiming mastery of language the book (I say the book when really I mean the author but I’m currently tired of cursing that…. person… to save more descriptive words.) then goes on to give it’s Thesaurus of a “say this instead of that”. As if it’s simply a measure of counting calories and fat content. Half of his suggestions simply don’t make sense. Half sound far less intelligent that the “don’t say” option and many just don’t fit into anything that isn’t a Yoda impersonation. Maybe he was never taught this, but English sentence structure isn’t a free for all battle royal You don’t just pick which parts to use and what order you decide to put them in. It reminds me of the Even Stevens episode where the “Look Smart, Be Smart” instructions say that if you use words like cornucopia often you’ll look smart. I suppose that if you follow this book you will look intelligent.. to anyone who isn’t very intelligent. To anyone who knows what the hell is going on they will simply wonder why you’re trying to speak in minimalism while successfully decimating grammar.
He, however, believes his .. or wait.. She, however, believes her (even though the author is male this is the 21st century after all) book however is the Rosetta Stone from common speak to über intelligence. Giving an example which he wrote. Then spicing up said example with knowledge from his book. After his alterations the paragraph makes no sense what-so-ever. It’s worse than if someone were to look through a thesaurus and change 1 word in every sentence, completely unaware that the words they chose were based off different definitions of the previous word. Then, gleaming like a child who thinks they’ve discovered something for the first time on Earth, he boast, “No conventional thesaurus can do that. No vocabulary builder. No style guide.” .. I have done it. I have found the cure to poor Speech I ALONE. I AM THE WAY. NO MA… NO HUMANKINDIAN SHALL COMETH TO THE FANCY SPEAK EXCEPT BY ME. Thus saith the lord of words. Rambling on in his audacious self admiration he then reveals his hope that this book is not only used as a guide for writing but that the reader memorizes it and uses it as aid for their everyday speaking.
The one sensible remark I’ve found thus far states: “..always be mindful of your audience. Try not to serve vichyssoise to a coal miner, and do not give Cheerios to the queen of England. Neither will be amused.” And in this regard I feel as though the book should be more aptly titled, How to Speak More Gooder: A guide for the misinformed, unintelligible human with no prior knowledge of language whom seeks to better them self but only through ‘Get rich quick’ schemes
Anyway. I’m done crying for now. This book sucks. Major waste of $12.99 plus tax. Plus the 30 minutes drive from BFE to the Nearest Barnes & Noble. Although, I guess I’m being a bit harsh on it, as it has fueled my rage for a while and gave me something to rant about on an otherwise uneventful and painfully dreary day. Curse you Rain! Where is my Snow?!