Clarity…
CLARITY AS THE FOREMOST GOAL OF ACADEMIC WRITING
__________________
Clarity as the foremost goal of academic writing
The ultimate goal of any type of communication is to convey ideas to an intended audience. Grammar has clearly defined rules. Language has clearly defined conventions. Academic writing is a specific type of communication with an intended audience. The thesis of this essay is that the foremost goal of good academic writing is clarity. Without clarity, the work that goes into academic research serves no purpose.
What is “Clarity”?
There are any number of reasons why someone writes. Perhaps they want to take a few notes for a class and are not concerned with a formal style. They may jot down a grocery list and are not concerned with spelling. They may write a letter to a close friend and are not concerned with technical language. These are instances of informal writing. Informal writing has a relaxed feel and is not concerned necessarily with the rules of grammar. No one is going to footnote an email or have a title page for a personal letter. Academic writing has its own set of expectations. Technical language that is specific to a particular discipline is often present. References are expected. Spelling is important. What do different styles of writing have in common? Is there an element present in all writing that is of paramount importance to communicating ideas? The answer is yes and the element is clarity.
Clarity is the goal of academic writing. There can be no communication without a clear presentation of ideas. Consider the following quote from Joseph M. Williams speaking of clarity:
Of course, writing fails for reasons more serious than unclear sentences. We bewilder readers when we can’t organize complex ideas coherently. And they won’t read what we’ve written unless we motivate them to. But once we’ve formulated our claims, organized supporting reasons, grounded them on sound evidence, and motivated readers to read attentively, we must still express it clearly, a difficult task for most writers and a daunting one for many.[1]
The breakdown in communication occurs when the writer tries to communicate to the audience and fails. The shopper that writes the grocery list for himself has only himself for an audience. The shopper can use any language he wishes as long as he can understand what he needs from the store, but when he writes the list for another, he must be sure the list is clear. The same holds true for academic writing. All the sources, all the arguments, and all the conclusions serve no purpose if not presented in a clear manner that a reader can understand.
Clarity is a good thing, isn’t it? There is some disagreement between well-respected style manuals about the importance of clarity. Strunk and White posit that clarity is not an end in itself and, though clarity is a virtue, it is not required. These also encourage writers to write clearly even when using “obscurity” as a literary tool.[2]
What is “Obscurity”?
Strunk and White state that there are “occasions when obscurity serves a literary yearning, if not a literary purpose, and there are writers whose mien is more overcast than clear.”[3] Is there an allowance for writers whose “mien” is overcast? Why would they not want to write with clarity? Are they unable or perhaps unwilling? In addressing the problem, which he coins “The Irresistible Lure of Obscurity,” Williams says:
Generations of students have struggled with dense writing, many thinking they weren’t smart enough to grasp a writer’s deep ideas. Some have been right about that, but more could have blamed the writer’s inability (or refusal) to write clearly. Many students, sad to say, give up; sadder still, others learn not only to read that style but write it, inflicting it in turn on their readers, thereby sustaining a 450-year-old tradition of unreadable writing.[4]
Most writers learn by reading. If they are continuously reading overly dense writing then overly dense writing will become their goal. Overly dense writing is harder to read and the reader may miss main ideas as they attempt to wade through the mire of extended sentences and complex structures.
Is there a time when obscurity is beneficial in academic writing? The answer to this question resides in another question. Is there a time when a writer seeks to obscure intentionally the ideas he is trying to convey? No one writes purely for the sake of writing. Strunk and White give an admonition to those who would write with obscurity when they say:
But since writing is communication, clarity can only be a virtue. And although there is no substitute for merit in writing, clarity comes closest to being one. Even to a writer who is being intentionally obscure or wild of tongue we can say, “Be obscure clearly! Be wild of tongue in a way we can understand!” Even to writers of market letters, telling us (but not telling us) which securities are promising, we can say, “Be cagey plainly! Be elliptical in a straightforward fashion!”[5]
Writing conveys ideas. Since obscurity hinders clear communication, avoid it if possible.
“Roadblocks” to Writing with Clarity
There will be times when academic writing will require technical precision. This technical precision however does not necessarily require the writer to sacrifice clarity. Writing with clarity and depth will require the writer to remove “roadblocks” to effective written communication. Some of these “roadblocks” include abuses of grammar, form, style.
Firstly, abusing grammar is a “roadblock” to writing with clarity. There are certain liberties a writer can take and others that are forbidden. Williams lists three different types of grammar rules: real rules, standard rules, and invented rules. Real rules “define what makes English English.”[6] These rules deal with structure. Standard rules deal with usage and “distinguish the standard dialect from nonstandard ones.”[7] Slang usage and colloquialisms are examples of grammar that violates the standard rules. The third type of rule is the most linguistically fluid. Invented rules are those rules that many writers do not observe and many readers do not notice.[8] They are only important if imposed upon the writer by an outside source such as the preferences of a professor or the contents of a style manual.[9] When a writer violates the rules of grammar, the reader is distracted from the content of the writing and clarity is affected.
The second “roadblock” to writing with clarity is the abuse of form. Form covers areas such as exclamations, margins, headings, hyphens, numerals, parentheses, quotations, and references.[10] Form is important because it brings academic writing into an established expectation. Those who read academic writing have a certain form to which they expect the writer to conform. When the writer violates the form, he sacrifices clarity because the reader becomes distracted and potentially indignant.
The third and final “roadblock” to writing with clarity is the abuse of style. Style is the overall way that a writer composes his work. According to Williams, style reflects the ethos of a writer:
Over time, the ethos we project in individual pieces of writing hardens into our reputation. So it’s not just altruistically generous to go an extra step to help readers. It’s pragmatically smart, because we tend to trust most a writer with a reputation for being thoughtful, reliable, and considerate of her reader’s needs.[11]
Some of the abuses of style that affect the ethos of the reader are unintended obscurity, intended misdirection, and subversive clarity.[12] Strunk and White list twenty-one different elements of style.[13] Each of these elements has the potential to add to or detract from the clarity of writing.
By avoiding the “roadblocks” to writing with clarity, it is possible to write in a way that is technical and understandable. The writer can take comfort knowing that he did everything he could to remove the barriers that might confuse communication. By doing this, he gives the reader a fair chance to understand the material presented.
Conclusion
Writing manuals are full of tips, tricks, rules, and regulations with one goal in mind; making the writer better so that he can communicate clearly. All the rules of grammar, form, and style, when observed, make writing clearer. The goal of every good academic writer should be to convey accurately the ideas revealed through research, synthesis, and argumentation. If the writer fails to convey these ideas then the writing lacks purpose. Clarity is, and must be, the foremost goal of good academic writing.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Strunk, William, Jr., and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed. New York: Longman, 2000.
Williams, Joseph M. Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009.
[1]Joseph M. Williams, Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace (New York: Pearson Longman, 2009), 1.
[2]William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style, 4th ed. (New York: Longman, 2000), 79.
[3]Ibid., 79.
[4]Williams, Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace, 4.
[5]Strunk and White, The Elements of Style, 79.
[6]Williams, Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace, 9.
[7]Ibid., 10.
[8]Ibid., 12.
[9]After reading both books, I found it interesting that this idea of an “invented” rule holds true even for writers of style manuals. I saw several instances where both Williams and Strunk and White violated the rules listed without sacrificing clarity of thought.
[10]Strunk and White, The Elements of Style, 34-38.
[11]Williams, Style: The Basics of Clarity and Grace, 134.
[12]Ibid., 134-40.
[13]Strunk and White, The Elements of Style, 70-81.
