Farnsworth's Classical English Style (Farnsworth's Classical English series, 3)

Those who want a didactic, dry, “never put this before that” sort of grammar manual will be disappointed, as will those who would prefer the opposite: a further watering-down and dilution of our wonderful language and the sidelining of its most renowned masters. It’s interesting to note that some critics of this book expend their entire effort upon the old “it’s all about dead white elites” refrain, while failing to engage in any substantive critique of the book’s actual substance. In a time when college graduates with master’s degrees in business write like grade-school children, and politicians resort to juvenile ad hominem rather than refute their opponents’ positions by skillfully pointing out the ironies or contradictions in their statements, the words of these “dead white elites” are more relevant than ever. In the introduction to the book, on page XIV, the author serves up a telling refutation of such criticism. This is not a book about grammar rules; it’s a book about using the language with style and flair. There are plenty of books about using the language correctly, but using the language correctly and using the language memorably are entirely different things. Mr. Farnsworth’s entertaining approach makes learning this difference not only a pleasure, but just plain fun.

If you write for a living, or if, like me, you edit, or even if you simply like to pop the hood of English to see how the language works, you ought to read Farnsworth’s Classical English Style. It identifies “principles of style that are powerful and enduring,” illustrating them with quotations from masters of English prose such as the King James Bible, Shakespeare, Abraham Lincoln, and Winston Churchill.The book’s central insight is that “rhetorical power can be created by various sorts of oppositions—by the relationship, usually one of friction or contrast, between two things. The two things might be plain and fancy words, long and short sentences, hard and soft syllables, high or rich substance and low or simple style (or vice versa), the concrete and the abstract, the passive and the active, the dignified and the coarse, detachment from the audience and engagement with it.”The book’s first three chapters focus on style questions that arise from the fact that contemporary English grows mostly from Anglo-Saxon and Latinate roots. Consequently, when choosing words, an author can harvest concrete, often one-beat Saxon words, or abstract, often polysyllabic Latinate words: for example, light (Saxon) or illumination (Latinate). One rule of thumb is to prefer the short, concrete Saxon words.Ward Farnsworth argues, however, that the best English prose brings Saxon and Latinate words together fruitfully. (Sometimes, he points out, the issue isn’t etymology so much as it is word length, with Saxon standing in for short words and Latinate for long ones.) You can begin a sentence with Latinate words and end it with Saxon ones: “the Saxon finish.” Or You can do the opposite, “the Latinate finish.” For an example of the Saxon finish, consider this quote from Churchill: “You may take the most gallant sailor, the most intrepid airman, or the most audacious soldier, put them at a table together—what do you get? The sum of their fears.”Successive chapters address metonymy, hyperbole, sentence length and structure, the passive voice, anacoluthon and related devices, and rhetorical announcements and instructions. The final two chapters address cadence, that is, “variation between stressed and unstressed syllables.” We typically think of cadence in terms of poetic meter: iambs, trochees, anapests, dactyls, and so on. Good prose has poetic moments, however, when the cadence of the words makes the sentence sharp and memorable. Consider this anapestic finish—an anapest consists of “three stressed syllables with two unstressed ones between each of them”—from 2 Corinthians 2:15 (KJV): “To the one we are the SAvour of DEATH unto DEATH; and to the OTHer the SAVour of LIFE unto LIFE” (the capitalized letters are stressed syllables).Readers should take note that this is now a how-to book. It identifies stylistic traits and illustrates them copiously. Indeed, the illustrations of good English prose are a selling point for the book. However, Farnsworth does not offer a Step 1, Step 2, Step 3 approach to writing good prose. He simply identifies the principle, illustrates it, and leaves the would-be writer to his or her own devices. And that’s a good thing! Good writing comes from reading good writing and working hard on your own writing to make it good. That kind of writing can’t be prepackaged or bought. It must be earned.Farnsworth’s Classical English Style is the third volume in a trilogy. After reading it, I look forward to savoring its predecessors: Farnsworth’s Classical English Rhetoric and Farnworth’s Classical English Metaphor.

Perhaps, it was Farnsworth’s catchy title “Classical English Style,” or more probably the image on the cover jacket of Grandville’s old falcon -- who did not have much after the revolutions had ruined him, but I felt I should read this book. I am glad that I did.As writers go, I am not much. But as one who appreciates good writing, and wonders ‘how did they do that,’ I am much more. Like a prism to white light, Farnsworth breaks apart the elements of style, with example from famous writers and speakers, chapter by chapter. Even more, the quoted selections are fascinating and worth reading for the pleasure of it.In particular the use of contrasting word types – the type that are multisyllabic with Latinate stems, versus the monosyllabic Anglo-Saxon types – was quite well described. Showing how well-structured sentences may branch from the left or from the right, was illuminating. As for the iamb, trochees, and dactyls that come later in book – I lack the poetic sense to be able to deploy them, nonetheless, I enjoyed the read.His selection includes a great many famous men who wrote notable passages; in no particular order are: Burke, Churchill, Lincoln, Holmes, Shaw, Dickens, Shakespeare, and Webster, etc. Women and people of color are underrepresented. They include: Wollstonecraft, Eliot, Austen Woolf and Douglas. Farnsworth addresses this up front in the introduction. It is so good that he included Douglas.As to how he organized all this material into a book, I envision him deciding on the topics and order of the fourteen chapters first, then describing each rhetorical device and, finally, hunting through Barclay’s for quotations that fit the bill. Equally, for the passages from the Bible, something similar must have been done.All-in-all, it is a very good read and there is plenty to learn from this book. But can you use it? Some of it, you can, and I fear most of it you cannot. Today, it is better (safer?) to write simply, clearly, and efficiently. Maybe Peggy Noonan can risk doing otherwise, but most of the rest of us had better not.

Makes you see with new eyes when you read.

This book arrived yesterday when I had a spare moment so I sat down to read it. Three hours later I was still engrossed. I finished it today. This is an accessible read that takes passages from speeches and written texts as examples of how authors utilise words for effect. There is a lot to learn from here. No need to remember the formal words, grasp the technique. Already I have improved a passage in my book. If only all books were so engrossing.