Side by Side ,A Multicultural Reader Handbook for Writers 2nd edition

by Frederick Crews

Side by Side ,A Multicultural Reader Handbook for Writers 2nd edition

Genres: Reference, Writing, Nonfiction

Paperback

First published January 1, 1985

About the author

Crews was born in suburban Philadelphia in 1933. In high school, Crews was co-captain of the tennis team; and he continues to be an avid skier, hiker, swimmer, motorcyclist, and runner. Crews lives in Berkeley with his wife of 52 years, Elizabeth Crews, a photographer who was born and raised in Berkeley, CA. They have two daughters and four grandchildren.

Crews completed his undergraduate education at Yale University in 1955. Though his degree was in English, Crews entered the Directed Studies program during his first two years at Yale, which Crews described as his greatest experience because the program was taught by a coordinated faculty and required students to distribute their courses among sciences, social sciences, literature, and philosophy. He received his Ph.D in Literature from Princeton University in 1958.

Crews joined the UC Berkeley English Department in 1958 where he taught for 36 years before retiring as its chair in 1994. Crews was an anti-war activist from 1965 to about 1970 and advocated draft resistance as co-chair of Berkeley’s Faculty Peace Committee. Though he shared the widespread assumption during the mid-1960s that psychoanalytic theory was a valid account of human motivation and was one of the first academics to apply that theory systematically to the study of literature, Crews gradually came to regard psychoanalysis as a pseudoscience. Crews’ change of heart about psychoanalysis convinced him that his loyalty shouldn’t belong to any theory but rather to empirical standards and the skeptical point of view. Throughout his career, Crews has brought his concern for rational discourse to the study of various issues, from the recovered memory craze, Rorschach tests, and belief in alien abductions, to theosophy, creationism, and “intelligent design,” to common standards of clear and effective writing.


Fulbright Lectureship, Turin, Italy, 1961–62
Essay Prize, National Council on the Arts and Humanities, 1968
Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford, 1965–66
Guggenheim Fellowship (Literary criticism), 1970[1]
Distinguished Teaching Award, University of California, Berkeley, 1985
Election to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1991
Faculty Research Lecturer, University of California, Berkeley, 1991–92
Editorial Board, “Rethinking Theory” series, Northwestern University Press, 1992–present
Nomination for National Book Critics Circle Award for Nonfiction (The Critics Bear It Away), 1992
PEN/Diamonstein-Spielvogel Award for the Art of the Essay (The Critics Bear It Away), 1993
Berkeley Citation, 1994
Inclusion in The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2002, ed. Natalie Angier (Houghton Mifflin), 2002
Fellow, Commission for Scientific Medicine and Mental Health, 2003–present
Berkeley Fellow, 2005–present
Inclusion in The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2005, ed. Jonathan Weiner (Houghton Mifflin), 2005
Nominated for National Book Critics Circle Award (Follies of the Wise), 2006

Reviews

[J.D. Steens · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the handbook I’ve been looking for. It’s a commonsense approach to English usage. It’s about rules and conventions that promote clear communication, without the “correctness” that often seem arbitrary or overly fussy.

Occasionally, the book lapses into rules that seem old school. “Et al.” belongs in citations, not in the main text, they say, yet its use in the text is clear and efficient. The authors tell us to use “and so forth,” not “etc.” even when "etc." is clear and it's handy as a shortcut. Plus it is one word and eight characters shorter. It’s not inconsistent with the authors emphasis on clearness and it supports their emphasis on concision. “Do not use D.C. as a place name!” the authors tell us. Why not? How is their preference for “Washington” more concise? Or, how is that Washington not Washington State? “Authorities” they say disagree over "A.M. and P.M." versus "a.m. and p.m." Why does it matter and who are these authorities? It’s the same thing when they say that “opinion” is divided over data versus datum. Though “singular data is now commonly seen,” they also say that “criterion, not criteria, is always singular.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent reference book for writers and proofreaders. It's also settled some correct usage debates.

[Robin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good for when I have some questions. It's hard to read all the way through since its just a handbook, so I mostly skim this as needed rather than straight up read it.

[✨ Anna ✨ | ReadAllNight · Rating 4 out of 5]

I do believe this was a must-buy for school.

Co-author Sandra Schor.

Also says First Edition. Also does not look well used. But has name printed inside front cover.