Economical Writing

by Deirdre Nansen McCloskey

A valuable short guide for mastering the craft of academic writing! Students and young professionals who care about direct, clear expression should read this lucid, delightful gem by an author who practices what she advises. McCloskey s systematic treatment provides a range of insights and practical advice for better writing by scholars in every field.

Genres: Writing, Economics, Nonfiction, Self Help, Business, Communication, Personal Development

112 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 1999

About the author

Deirdre Nansen McCloskey has been distinguished professor of economics and history and professor of English and communications at the University of Illinois at Chicago. She is the author of numerous books, including Bourgeois Equality: How Ideas, Not Capital or Institutions, Enriched the World.

Reviews

[Matt C · Rating 3 out of 5]

Two spaces after a comma is barbaric

This deserves four stars, but lost one due to the completely baffling decision to advise readers to include two spaces after a comma.

[Phil · Rating 4 out of 5]

McCloskey gives more advice about writing in the social sciences (in particular economics) in this slim volume than most do, and gives the advice with a nice touch of humor. Each chapter is only about two pages long and focuses on concise points, with titles like "Speak to an Audience of Human Beings" and "Rules can help, but bad rules can hurt." This can easily be read in a single sitting, and serves as a helpful reference guide for many dos and don'ts. Probably should be read (and read again) by any writer, but particularly academic authors. Recommended!

[Patrick · Rating 2 out of 5]

Certainly economical

JDN 2456722 PDT 15:29.

A review of Economical Writing by Deirdre McCloskey

There is a certain paradox inherent in the "style manual": Legislating style is like legislating personality. If we all followed such manuals to the letter, we'd all sound alike, and the world would be a boring place indeed. There are on the other hand certain useful things one can say, just as there are certain personality types we can all agree are unhealthy (e.g. obsessive-compulsive, antisocial). There are certain ways of writing that clearly do not work, and it may be useful to discuss them.
Economical Writing walks this line fairly well on the whole. Some of the advice is general enough to be applicable for almost anyone. Three suggestions that seemed particularly good are "write not so that you can be understood, but so that you cannot be misunderstood", "revise heavily", and "visualize your target audience". Then again, they are nothing new; I had read them many times before and I expect to read them again in the future.
The book is also very short, which for a style manual is especially important; the longer you spend pontificating about how other people should write, the more likely you are to collapse into the role of the curmudgeon, telling those damn kids to keep off his lawn. Languages change! Indeed, one change I'm noticing even in formal writing is that older generations are uncomfortable writing numbers as, well, numbers; they want us to use ludicrous circumlocutions like "twenty-seven point eight percent" instead of the much more readable "27.8%". I've been graded down for this on occasion, and it always annoys me. (For the record, McCloskey also seems to think we should write out our numbers as words, and gives equally little justification.) Perhaps we millennials have become so accustomed to reading numerals in our text—even where it arguably doesn't belong, like "inb4" and "stop h8"—that it seems positively baffling to us to not use a number when a number is obviously what you mean. Obviously if I were to start writing "l8r" and "1337" my writing would seem too informal; but what, exactly, is the problem with "27.8%"?
Speaking of ludicrous circumlocutions, McCloskey is adamantly opposed to all Latinate vocabulary; therefore I should have apparently written this sentence as follows: "Talking about silly ways of talking your words into knots, McCloskey really doesn't like words that come from Latin, so I guess I should have written this sentence this way:" (The above is a translated Quine.) Who sounds informal now? To be fair, there are many abuses of jargon and sesquipedalian vocabulary (should I say "five-dollar words" as McCloskey does? Is that inflation-adjusted by the way?), but those words also exist for a reason. "Five-dollar word" doesn't actually mean quite the same thing as "sesquipedalian", and more importantly "frequency-dependent selection" isn't at all the same thing as "choosing that depends on commonness". Some jargon should probably be deprecated, like "heteroskedasticity" (isn't "non-constant variance" much more straightforward?), but other jargon should not: I wouldn't know how to describe non-constant variance if I couldn't say "constant" or "variance", and "deprecate" means something very specific that "eliminate" or "get rid of" simply doesn't say. Exempli gratia doesn't really add much that "for example" wouldn't, but a priori is pretty hard to get around (the best I've seen is simply to use "prior", which barely cloaks the Latin).
McCloskey also objects to two other constructions I use quite frequently, namely the parenthetical remark (like this—and this dash variant I'm sure you've also seen me use) and the emphatic italic. While I must admit I probably do overuse them, they are nonetheless tremendously useful. There is an HTML tag and corresponding LaTeX command just for the emphatic italic! Surely if it has a LaTeX command it cannot always be inappropriate for scientific papers. Personally I find that if I'm reading a long text and the writer never feels passionate enough to italicize something at least once every page or two, I begin to get the sense that they don't really care about what they are saying, and if they were to lecture on the subject it would be in some kind of robotic monotone. I guess I don't really get that impression from McCloskey, so perhaps there is a way around it... but what was so bad about italics in the first place?
Near the end of the book McCloskey really jumps off the rails, venturing into curmudgeon territory. She takes an eliminativist stance on folk economics, which is every bit as bizarre (and every bit as aggravating) as when cognitive scientists take an eliminativist stance on folk psychology. I shall quote her at length:

Everyone, economist or not, comes equipped with a vocabulary for the economy. It might be called Ersatz Economics. In Ersatz Economics, prices start by "skyrocketing." When "sellers outnumber buyers" prices fall from "exorbitant" or "gouging" levels, down through "fair" and "just." If this "vicious cycle" goes on too long, though, they fall to "unfair" and "cutthroat," the result of "dumping." Likewise, the woman in the street believes she knows that unions and corporations have more "bargaining power" than do their victims, and therefore can "exploit" them. A consumer can "afford" medical care, maybe only "barely afford" it, "needs" housing and views food as a "basic necessity". Business people maintain their "profit margins", probably "obscene" or "unwarranted," by "passing along" a higher wage, which causes workers to demand still higher wages, in a "spiral." The protection of the American worker's "living wage" from "unfair competition" by "cheap foreign labor" should be high on the list of the nation's "priorities," as should be the "rebuilding" of our "collapsing" industrial "base."
To write thoughtfully in economics you must clear your mind of such cant, as to understand astronomy you must stop talking about the sun "rising."

Oh really, Dr. McCloskey? Is there something illegitimate about saying that housing prices "skyrocketed" in 2007, only to "plummet" in 2009? If so, what is it? And God forbid we talk about issues of fairness or justice or exploitation; economics has no place for such petty human concerns I suppose. And who really needs housing, right? Shelter is only one of the fundamental survival needs of the Maslow hierarchy. And speaking of those, what nonsense is this "basic necessity"? I mean, really, what's the difference between taking away $10 worth of food from a child in Burkina Faso and taking $10 in taxes from Goldman Sachs? $10—excuse me, ten dollars—is obviously the proper unit of measure, and not the fact that, say, the child may starve to death and the Goldman executives may not even notice. (Shameless plug for my forthcoming paper "Markets fail to maximize utility in the presence of wealth disparity".)
Business owners themselves talk about "profit margins" (usually mentioned in shareholder reports), and would probably be baffled that you have a problem with the term. The WTO formally characterizes certain low-price trade practices as "dumping". I cannot fathom in the least what your objection to "priorities" would be; economics is in some sense entirely about the prioritization of goals given resources. And did you really mean to say that unions and corporations do not have bargaining power? The entire literature on bilateral monopoly begs to differ.
Yes, the folk knowledge does get some things wrong; the "cheap foreign labor" narrative is overly simplistic, and the "collapsing industrial base" is a wrongheaded way of looking at the transition from scarcity to post-scarcity manufacturing technology. But honestly, the way McCloskey sneers at words like fair and just makes me think that the folk understanding is on a more solid overall footing than hers.
Also, this entire paragraph is full of sneering scare quotes, despite the fact that McCloskey specifically makes a rule against using such scare quotes (and actually in general I agree). If you don't have someone specific to cite for your quotations... maybe you shouldn't be quoting?
In these paragraphs McCloskey exhibits the same error of the cognitive science eliminativists, albeit if anything more egregiously. The fact that many people believe something does not make it false—on the contrary, it is evidence that it is probably true. We evolved with a need to understand the behavior of other humans, and thus we must be able to do so, at least reasonably well; psychology and economics are actually exactly the cases in which you'd expect the folk knowledge to be accurate. Understanding the motions of the planets was not critical for our survival most of the time; understanding the distribution of scarce resources absolutely was. At least cognitive scientists have the excuse that our scientific understanding of the mind is very poor, and we are basically unable to bridge the gulf between low-level neural operations and high-level thoughts and behaviors. Of course, such a link must exist; the fact that you cannot understand it does not prevent it from being true—but it does at least explain why you'd have trouble believing it. Economists have no such excuse, for the level of abstraction required to understand the concept "supply curve" is on essentially the same level as that required to understand the concept "fairness". Fairness is something we understand more intuitively, supply curves are something we understand more mathematically; but they are both about the interactions between human individuals or small groups; there is no deep causal gulf between them the way that there is between action potentials and beliefs.
By the way, NASA issues precise predictions of sunrises not only on Earth but also on Mars; I think they'd be a bit confused by the assertion that real astronomers do not say the sun "rises". What they actually say is more like this: "A sunrise is when the part of the Earth where the observer is turns to face the Sun." This is the proper scientific attitude; we explain human experience; we do not explain it away.

[Kerem · Rating 4 out of 5]

Howard Becker ve Umberto Eco'dan sonra yazmakla ilgili başka bir kitap. Yine başka yüksek kalibreli bir sosyal bilimci: McCloskey'den. Bu tip bilim insaları, yazarların yazma üzerine düşüncelerini okumak çok keyifli. Her yıl listeme iki üç tane bu türden eklemeyi planlıyorum.

Kitabın yazıldığı kitle sosyal bilim öğrencileri ve kariyerinin başındaki akademisyenler. Her bölüm iki üç sayfadan oluşmak üzere, önsöz ve sonuçla beraber kitap otuz küsur bölümden oluşuyor. Kitabın benzerlerine göre oldukça kısa olduğu da söylenebilir (120 sayfa).

Kitabın içeriği yazmanın zanaattaki kilit rolü ve yazma üzerine McCloskey'nin verdiği nasihatlerden oluşuyor. Yazar bu nasihatleri kesinlikle havada bıramıyor ve uygulanabilir önerilerde bulunuyor. Yalnız öneriler denince şaşırtıcı bir şey beklememek lazım. Hepsi akla yatkın hatta bir kısmı okuyucunun da aklına gelmiş, gelebilecek şeyler. Becker ve Eco ile kesiştikleri yani başka kitaplarda da rastlayabileceğimiz pek çok öneri mevcut.

Bazı bölümler oldukça gaz: "Yazmak İktisatçının Mesleğidir", "Yazmak Düşünmektir". Bu başlıklar bile yazma konusunda McCloskey'nin ne düşündüğünü tanıtmaya yeter. Herhalde yolun başındaki birine verilecek en iyi önerilerden bazıları da bunlar.

Sade yazmak konusunda Becker gibi köktenci. Örneğin zarif çeşitlilik dediği aynı şeyi farklı kelimelerle anlatma alışkanlığına toptan karşı duruyor. Ben hala farklı kelimeler kullanmanın okumayı tek düzelikten çıkardığını, yazıyı renklendirdiğini düşünüyorum. Buna ek olarak, McCloskey eğer Veblen falan değilseniz macera aramayın, üslup konusuna mütevazi olun diye öğütlüyor. Buralarda kafam karışık. Bu şekilde üslup nasıl inşa edilebilir bilmiyorum. Üslubu yaratmak için bazı yerlerde okuru isildetmeyi (cringe) göza almak gerek bence. :)

Çeviriyi pek beğenmedim. Vakit ayırırsam bu konuya daha ciddi bir şekilde değineceğim.

[Özgür Balmumcu · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kısa bir kitap, kısa kısa 31 bölüm. Yer yer motive edici ve mesleğin asli unsurunu hatırlatıcı, pratik öneriler de var, lâkin doğal olarak İngilizce merkezli bu önerilerin çoğu. Türkçe yazmak hususunda bazı önerilerin karşılığı yok. Bir de metin bana çok aceleci geldi, koştura koştura gidiyor yazar, mesele üzerine düşünmeye pek fırsat tanımıyor. Kitabın çevirisi vasat, bu da ket vuruyor okura bir miktar. Yine de özellikle lisansüstü öğrencilerinin okuması faydalı olabilir.

[Oliver Kim · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is badly written.

[Sarah Cupitt · Rating 4 out of 5]

How often do you come across a sentence that leaves you puzzled, forcing you to pause and decipher its meaning? Great read. I think at times went a little over my head though.

Main takeaways:
- Ethics has three levels: the good for self, the good for others, and the good for the transcendent purpose of a life
- “The big economic story of our times is not the Great Recession of 2007–2009, unpleasant though it was. Now it’s over. The big story is that the Chinese in 1978 and then the Indians in 1991 began to adopt liberal ideas in their economies, and came to welcome creative destruction.”
- “If we seized all the assets of the eighty-five wealthiest people in the world to make a fund to give annually to the poorest half, it would raise their spending power by less than 10 cents a day.”
- “The bourgeois (which is merely the usual French and for a while the usual English word for the urban men of the middle class) were the innovators willing to subject their ideas to the democratic test of a market, and to supply Paris with grain and iron.”

Fav quotes:
- “The Harvard philosopher John Rawls articulated what he called the Difference Principle: if the entrepreneurship of a rich person made the poorest better off, then the higher income of the rich entrepreneur was justified.7 It makes a good deal of ethical sense. Equality does not.”
- “The cry for more education, by the way, is often a despairing excuse for not liberalizing the economy directly and quickly.”
- “happiness is not a six-pack and a sport utility vehicle but what he calls “flow.” It occurs “when a person’s skills are fully involved in overcoming a challenge that is just about manageable”

Notes:
- Style and content are inseparable. Clear expression forces you to examine your thoughts critically. Writing isn't just a tool for communication, but a process that shapes thought itself. Good writing requires honesty and self-criticism.
- Writing clearly means ensuring that your reader understands your message without having to pause and puzzle over your words. Clarity isn't just about avoiding complex vocabulary.
- To further refine your writing, consider the classical rhetoric guides. Invention, arrangement, and style.
- Writing should be enjoyable, and finding joy in the craft is essential for continued improvement.
- The key to overcoming this common hurdle is to start writing early, even before your research feels complete. Writing is more than just recording thoughts.
-
Economical Writing
Deirdre Nansen McCloskey Economical Writing – 35 Rules for Clear and Persuasive Prose Whether you're a student or a professional, writing has probably become a central part of your work. The ability to communicate ideas clearly and persuasively is essential. Writing well can advance your career, deepen your thinking and enrich your mind. Economical Writing by Deirdre Nansen McCloskey began as focused advice for young professionals.
It's evolved into a set of principles that apply to anyone seeking to improve their writing, no matter the discipline. These insights, refined over years of teaching, cover skills that can elevate your writing from amateur to professional. In this Blink, you'll learn some of the practical rules and techniques for writing with clarity and impact. You'll discover how to avoid pitfalls, refine your ideas and express them in a way that resonates with your audience.
You'll become a better writer, starting from wherever you are now. Are you ready to enhance your writing and elevate your communication skills? Then let's dive in and explore the principles that can transform the way you approach the written word.
Imagine a young child eagerly waiting for their parent to come home after a long day at the office. As the parent walks through the door, exhausted and juggling a stack of papers, the child watches in confusion. Seeing their parents settle down to work late into the night, the child asks, do you still have to do homework even when you're grown up? This simple question reveals a reality many professionals eventually face.
Writing, much like homework, never truly ends. In fields like economics, history, business and government, writing demands constant effort and improvement. Despite its importance, many professionals receive little formal training in effective writing. While some institutions still value well-crafted reports, poor writing practices are common. Academics, pressured to publish, often produce work that's rushed and unclear. Undergraduates receive minimal instruction in writing, typically confined to a single composition course, and graduate students receive even less.
This lack of training leaves many struggling with clear communication. Poor writing can lead to failure, as unclear reports and papers are more likely to be dismissed. Even if some argue that obscurity can occasionally be beneficial, clear writing remains ethically and practically superior. Writing is also a form of thinking. The expression of ideas can significantly alter their meaning and impact. Throughout history, the power of scientific and economic arguments has often depended on language as much as ideas.
Figures like Galileo and Keynes influenced opinions not just with their ideas, but with their skilful writing. Style and content are inseparable. Clear expression forces you to examine your thoughts critically. Writing isn't just a tool for communication, but a process that shapes thought itself. Good writing requires honesty and self-criticism. The act of writing often uncovers flaws in thinking and reveals unexpected insights.
Through this process, the true value of ideas becomes evident. Writing, much like mathematics, is an instrument of thought, refining and shaping ideas through its disciplined structure. Again, much like mathematics, writing is a skill that can be learned and improved with practice. It's not an innate talent that only a few possess. Rather, it's something that anyone can develop through dedication. While not everyone will become a literary genius, anyone can write better than they currently do by following the example of great writers who have shared their insights on the craft.
Anyone can learn to refine their writing by applying a few key principles. This brings us to the next section, essential rules that can help transform your writing into something more effective and clear. RULES FOR CLEAR AND JOYFUL WRITING Have you ever wondered why some writing feels effortless to read while other writing makes you stumble at every sentence?
The answer lies in understanding and applying certain principles that guide clear and effective communication. One of the most important rules in writing is clarity. Writing clearly means ensuring that your reader understands your message without having to pause and puzzle over your words. Clarity isn't just about avoiding complex vocabulary.
It's about structuring your sentences and paragraphs in a way that leads the reader smoothly from one idea to the next. Good writing eliminates unnecessary words, focuses on the subject, and places modifiers close to the words they describe to prevent confusion. Misplaced modifiers or overly complex sentences can lead to misunderstandings, distracting the reader from the main point. Being precise with word choice is also essential. It's best to avoid the temptation to vary words excessively just to avoid repetition. While it may seem sophisticated to use different words for the same concept, this often leads to what writers called elegant variation, which confuses the reader.
Consistency in terminology helps the reader stay focused on the message. To further refine your writing, consider the classical rhetoric guides. Invention, arrangement, and style. These principles, rooted in the art of persuasive speaking, are just as relevant in writing. Invention involves generating and developing your ideas. It's the stage where you explore different angles and find arguments that are worth presenting.
Good writing begins with strong ideas, and invention helps you ensure your content has depth and interest. Arrangement is about organizing your ideas in a logical and coherent manner. This step ensures that your reader can follow your thoughts easily, moving from one point to the next without confusion. Whether you use a traditional structure or something more creative, the key is to guide your reader smoothly through your narrative or argument. Style is the way you express your ideas. It encompasses your choice of words, sentence structure, and overall tone.
Style is what makes your writing uniquely yours and helps engage your reader. But it also requires careful revision to avoid awkward phrases and ensure clarity. Finally, while rules are helpful, they shouldn't stifle your creativity. Writing should be enjoyable, and finding joy in the craft is essential for continued improvement.
As you gain confidence, you'll start to play with language, creating sentences that not only communicate effectively, but also bring pleasure to both you and your readers. Balancing the application of rules with a sense of playfulness can transform the writing process from a chore into a rewarding and creative experience. As you refine your writing skills, remember that the process of writing is as much about purpose as it is about clarity. Let's look at that in the next section.
The Craft of Writing with Purpose Have you ever stared at a blank page, unsure of how to begin? Daunting, isn't it? The key to overcoming this common hurdle is to start writing early, even before your research feels complete. Writing is more than just recording thoughts.
It's an active process of thinking itself. As you write, gaps in your knowledge and flaws in your argument become clear, allowing you to refine both your ideas and your research. This ongoing interplay between writing and research keeps your work dynamic and insightful. Once you begin, keep your spirits high and push forward. Writing doesn't always come easily, and sometimes the next sentence feels impossible to find. When that happens, it's a signal to dive back into reading or conversation, or to reconsider your research approach.
Remember, the writing process often reveals what research was unnecessary, guiding you toward what truly matters in your work.

[Matt Mullis · Rating 4 out of 5]

I should read this once a year. Major takeaway: be clear and concise.

[Ben Labe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Deirdre McCloskey is an adequate writer, which is to say, a better writer than almost all economists. Most writing handbooks are exactly what they most admonish: unreadable. They tend to be dry and uninviting. Understanding that irony well, McCloskey has imbued "Economical Writing" with just enough wit and excursus to make it pleasurable. The book's funniest moments are when she sneaks the mistakes that she is describing into her descriptions of them, as in the chapter titled "The Order Around Switch It Until It Sounds Good". Who knew that I could finish 90 pages of advise about how to write? Evidently Deirdre McCloskey did.

Beyond being merely readable, the book is also useful. McCloskey is wary of rules, so instead she provides a list of heuristics. Some of her guidelines are to "Avoid Boilerplate", "Control Your Tone", and "Make Your Writing Cohere". Even though these are things that everyone should know, they are also easy to forget. As any writer either already knows or has yet to learn, writing is a process of constantly disciplining yourself, and of avoiding the various pitfalls that can trap you when you're engrossed.

The extent to which this handbook concerns the subject of economics as opposed to any other discipline is that most of the examples provided pertain to economics. The rest is good advice for any writer to heed.

[Max Lauber · Rating 5 out of 5]

This slim book probably taught me more about writing in a week than two and a half years of Language Skills and Culture did. Although the book targets economists specifically, I recommend it to anyone who wants to improve their writing.

[Antonia Malvino · Rating 5 out of 5]

Highly enjoyable and on point. This book made me think and laugh and highlight many parts. She had my rapt attention throughout and so I wrote this review before finishing and was condemned to revise it with each new freshet of wit shared. The author has a great sense of humor!

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

McCloskey unpacks the mistakes of many writers and replaces them with prose that is clear and reader-friendly. The short format is quite easy to digest. Although targeted at an economics audience, the rules seem relevant to anyone who uses prose in business.

[Simge · Rating 3 out of 5]

Şu anda en ihtiyaç duyduğum kaynaklardan biri akademik yazım ile ilgili kitaplar. Yavaş yavaş da olsa yoğun bir yazım sürecinin içerisine girmek üzereyim. Kitap, yazım sürecine ilişkin birçok tüyo veriyor fakat ne yazık ki daha çok anadili İngilizce olanlara hitap ediyor. Özellikle verilen bazı bağlaç örneklerinin tam karşılıkları konusunda akılda soru işaretleri oluşabiliyor; İngilizcenin dilbilgisi kurallarına ciddi bir hakimiyet gerekiyor. Bunu böyle düşünmemde etken olan şey, kitabı Türkçe çeviriden okumuş olmam da olabilir, çevirinin rahat okunduğunu söyleyemeyeceğim(kitapta anlatılmak istenenle oldukça tezat bir şekilde:)). Bunun dışında bazı cümle bozuklukları ve yazım hataları da göze çarpıyor. Örnek vermem gerekirse: "Neyden kaçınılacağı üzerindeki kuralların arkasında, neyin amaçlandığına dair kurallar yatar." Buradaki "neyden" ifadesi zaman zaman konuşma dilinde karşılaştığımız bir kelime fakat (konuşma dilinde olduğu kadar) yazı dilinde de kelimeyi bu şekilde kullanmanın yanlış olduğunu düşünüyorum, bunun yerine kaçınılacak şeyin ne olduğu belirtilse daha iyi olabilirdi. Bir başka örnek: "Çerçeveyi, işlediğiniz konuya uyacak biçimde kendiniz oluşturmanız daha iyidir." Belki bu şekilde bir kullanım kabul edilebilir, bununla birlikte cümle başka şekillerde de ifade edilebilirdi: "Çerçeveyi, işlediğiniz konuya uyacak biçimde sizin oluşturmanız daha iyidir." veya "Çerçeveyi, işlediğiniz konuya uyacak biçimde kendinizin oluşturması daha iyidir." gibi. "Kendiniz oluşturmanız" ifadesi, okurken duraksamaya neden oluyor diye düşünüyorum veya ben kendi alıştığım yazım şeklinin dışında olduğu için de böyle düşünmüş olabilirim. Yine de, özellikle konuya meraklı kişilerin mutlaka okuması gereken bir kitap, böylece kendilerine birçok şey katacaklardır.

[Dio Mavroyannis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very short, very elegant, and hits all the right points. I don't really know how to judge books like this because it's practical. I had fun reading it and the lessons seem good and make sense but I'm not suddenly a better writer. It's a few conscience rules to try and apply to your everyday writing. For what it's worth, I often see writing advice and disagree about whether the sentence pointed to is elegant, and this book has none of that, I fully agree with Deirdre. I had an initially negative reaction to the footnotes point, but upon further reflection, I think I've come around.

[Cara · Rating 4 out of 5]

My New Year's resolution is to read nonfiction for 30 minutes each morning. Economical Writing provides a good set of rules for writing with illustrative examples. Though I disagree about the advice for emails, I'm planning to implement other suggestions.

[Diego Elias · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must read to learn to write in a fun and not boring way

[Simonh]

Ging helemaal niet over schrijven over economie?

[Jung · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Economical Writing: Thirty-Five Rules for Clear and Persuasive Prose" by Deirdre Nansen McCloskey is a book designed to help writers improve their communication skills. Whether you're a student, professional, or simply looking to elevate your writing, this book offers valuable insights into the art of clear and persuasive prose. The ability to communicate ideas effectively is essential in almost every field. Good writing not only advances your career but also deepens your thinking and helps you express ideas in a way that resonates with others.

McCloskey's book began as focused advice for young professionals, particularly in the field of economics, but it has since evolved into a comprehensive set of principles that apply to anyone who wants to improve their writing. These principles, refined over years of teaching and writing, cover a range of techniques that can elevate your writing from amateur to professional. You'll learn practical rules for writing with clarity, avoiding common pitfalls, and expressing ideas in a way that captures your audience's attention.

One of the central themes of the book is that writing is an ongoing process, much like homework that never truly ends. In fields like economics, history, business, and government, writing is a constant task that demands attention and improvement. Despite its importance, many professionals receive little formal training in writing. Academic pressure to publish often results in unclear and rushed writing, while undergraduates and graduate students typically receive minimal instruction in writing. As a result, many people struggle with clear communication, and poor writing can lead to misunderstandings or failure.

Writing is not only a tool for communication but also a form of thinking. The act of writing forces you to critically examine your ideas, refine them, and uncover new insights. Great thinkers like Galileo and Keynes not only had revolutionary ideas but also the writing skills to express those ideas persuasively. Clear writing requires honesty, self-criticism, and a willingness to revise and improve. Writing is a skill that can be learned and improved with practice, much like mathematics.

McCloskey provides readers with a set of rules for clear and effective writing, which can help transform your prose into something more readable and enjoyable. One of the most important rules is clarity. Clear writing ensures that your audience understands your message without struggling to decipher your words. Clarity isn't just about avoiding complex vocabulary; it's about structuring your sentences and paragraphs in a way that guides the reader smoothly from one idea to the next.

Good writing eliminates unnecessary words, focuses on the subject, and places modifiers close to the words they describe to avoid confusion. Misplaced modifiers or overly complex sentences can lead to misunderstandings and distract the reader from your main point. McCloskey also emphasizes the importance of precision in word choice. While it might be tempting to use a variety of terms to avoid repetition, this can lead to confusion. Consistency in terminology helps readers stay focused on the message.

The classical principles of rhetoric—invention, arrangement, and style—also play a key role in effective writing. Invention involves generating and developing your ideas, ensuring that your content has depth and interest. Arrangement refers to organizing your ideas in a logical and coherent manner, so your reader can easily follow your thoughts. Style encompasses your choice of words, sentence structure, and tone, making your writing uniquely yours while keeping it clear and engaging.

Writing should be enjoyable, and finding joy in the craft is essential for continued improvement. McCloskey encourages writers to balance the application of rules with a sense of creativity and playfulness. As you gain confidence, you'll start to play with language, creating sentences that are not only clear but also bring pleasure to both you and your readers.

Another key element of good writing is purpose. Writing isn't just about recording thoughts; it's an active process of thinking itself. As you write, you may discover gaps in your knowledge or flaws in your argument, which allows you to refine your ideas and research. McCloskey advises starting to write early, even before your research is complete, as writing often reveals what information is unnecessary and what truly matters.

When writing, it's important to keep your audience in mind. Imagine you're speaking directly to them, and let that guide your tone and style. The most effective writing often sounds like a well-spoken conversation. Revision is also crucial, as it allows you to refine your prose and ensure that it reads smoothly. Good writing builds a connection with your reader, and tone plays a significant role in creating that connection. A balanced, approachable tone can draw readers in, while a tone that's too formal or casual may alienate them.

Cohesion is another important aspect of good writing. Each sentence should logically follow the last, creating a seamless flow of ideas. Repetition can help link thoughts and keep your writing clear, but it should be used thoughtfully. Cohesion also requires careful revision to ensure that every word contributes meaningfully to the overall argument or narrative. Reading your work out loud is a simple but powerful technique that can help you identify awkward or unclear phrasing.

Precision is essential in writing. Effective writing begins with the careful use of strong, active verbs. Passive constructions can obscure the subject and muddle the action, while active verbs bring clarity and energy to your sentences. McCloskey encourages writers to cut down on unnecessary adjectives and adverbs, ensuring that every word adds value to the message. Precision also involves avoiding jargon and overly complex phrases, which can alienate readers who aren't familiar with the terms.

McCloskey also highlights the importance of understanding the nuances of language. Prepositions, idioms, and the origins of words all play a crucial role in creating sentences that flow naturally. By expanding your knowledge of language and carefully considering your word choices, you can avoid clichés and produce writing that is both precise and impactful.

Punctuation and typography are often overlooked but can significantly impact the clarity of your writing. McCloskey discusses the importance of punctuation marks such as commas, periods, semicolons, and dashes. The Oxford comma, for example, can prevent ambiguity in lists. Misusing punctuation can lead to confusion or make your writing cumbersome. Typography, such as the use of italics or quotation marks, also affects how your writing is perceived. Overuse of emphasis can give the impression that your writing lacks confidence, while an over-reliance on acronyms can make your text feel overly technical and inaccessible.

Here are 35 rules from Deirdre Nansen McCloskey's “Economical Writing”:

01. Write clearly – Avoid jargon and complex language.
02. Be concise – Eliminate unnecessary words.
03. Avoid passive voice – Use active verbs.
04. Be concrete – Use specific examples rather than abstractions.
05. Write in the positive – Frame statements in affirmative terms.
06. Avoid hedging – Don’t use weak qualifiers like "perhaps" or "seems."
07. Write to express, not impress – Don’t write to show off your vocabulary.
08. Use short sentences – Keep your sentences punchy and to the point.
09. Avoid clichés – Stay original and avoid tired expressions.
10. Use simple words – Use everyday language.
11. Be precise – Use the exact word needed, not a close synonym.
12. Avoid repetition – Don’t say the same thing in different ways.
13. Be economical with adjectives and adverbs – Use them sparingly.
14. Favor active verbs – They make your writing more dynamic.
15. Use parallel structure – Keep elements in your sentences balanced.
16. Revise ruthlessly – Edit out unnecessary elements.
17. Use transitions carefully – Make sure your flow makes sense.
18. Eliminate redundancy – Don’t repeat ideas or words.
19. Avoid complicated constructions – Write simply and directly.
20. Use examples judiciously – Illustrate your points with relevant examples.
21. End sentences strongly – Leave a lasting impact with a powerful conclusion.
22. Avoid nominalizations – Don’t turn verbs into nouns unnecessarily.
23. Be direct – Don’t beat around the bush.
24. Avoid ambiguity – Make sure your meaning is clear.
25. Stay on topic – Don’t wander off into unrelated ideas.
26. Use variety in sentence structure – Keep your writing engaging.
27. Write in a conversational tone – Make it easy to read.
28. Don’t overcomplicate ideas – Simplify complex concepts.
29. Use clear transitions between ideas – Connect your points smoothly.
30. Avoid unnecessary introductions – Get to the point quickly.
31. Don’t use big words unnecessarily – Write for clarity, not complexity.
32. Keep paragraphs focused – Each should convey a single idea.
33. Summarize effectively – Avoid restating information unless necessary.
34. Use formatting wisely – Italics, bold, and headings should aid comprehension.
35. Proofread thoroughly – Ensure there are no grammar or style errors.

In conclusion, "Economical Writing" teaches that writing is not just a skill but a craft that can be refined with practice. From mastering clarity and purpose to honing precision and style, each element plays a vital role in communicating ideas effectively. By applying McCloskey's principles and embracing the process of continuous improvement, you'll become a more confident and effective writer.

[Trey Malone · Rating 5 out of 5]

I would never claim that I'm a great writer, but as I finish my PhD in applied economics, I've found that there are three surefire ways to improve your writing. First, you need practice and meaningful feedback. Second, you need to be critically examining other comparable texts constantly so you can see what good writing looks like. And third, you should buy this book and thumb through it often. McCloskey lays out some very insightful guidelines for crafting a strong economic argument, and anyone challenged to write for an academic audience would do well to examine those guidelines.

[Alexia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing book on how to write better

I only found out about this book because it is required reading for one of my postgraduate courses. Kudos to my professor, because this book is incredible.

McCloskey's writing is so succinct, friendly and easy to read, and her advice on writing is already helping me improve my uni assignments. I'd definitely recommend this book to anyone interested in writing or finding writing difficult, even if they are not economists.

[Sema · Rating 5 out of 5]

"İktisadi düşünmenin zahmetli vazifesi ifadelerin doğru anlaşılmasıyken, ço��u okulda yazmaya dair bir şey öğretilmez"


Karl Popper: Yazdığım bir șeyi, yeterince berrak olmadığı suçlamasına karşı asla savunmamayı öğrendim. Eğer dürüst okur bir pasajı anlaşılması zor bulduysa, o pasaj yeniden yazılmalıdır...Adeta biri tetikteymiş ve bana sürekli pasajların anlaşılır olmadığını gösteriyormuş gibi yazarım.

[Nicky · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not the best style guide of ever read. I feel like there’s a lot of better books that help writers figure out how to do their practice. And some of the rules that she included were arbitrary, or at least felt arbitrary, which you can see in other reviews.

[moka · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a good book, I just didn’t like the joke about school teachers. They do a lot of effort and I’m grateful for their job.

[Tim · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's a lot of excellent advice in this book - certainly enough to make it worthwhile to buy it, read it attentively, and go back to it when you're trying to write. I think it will be a fertile source of inspiration read in conjunction with any draft in progress.

As always with this kind of book, it's mixed in with some mere personal likes and dislikes - quite a lot of them in this case - presented (misrepresented) as rules for good writing; and, as almost always, the book is marred by the author's failure - or perhaps cunning choice - not to distinguish explicitly between the two.

Fortunately of course it's generally quite straightforward to distinguish a useful rule from a silly one, in that a good rule can be understood, rather than just memorised; and McCloskey for the most part explains or demonstrates the motivation for the good rules, thereby empowering you to judge for yourself. Where she just says: "don't do this; only bad writers do it", you can just roll your eyes wearily and move on.

It's curious, though, that DNC spends quite a lot of space mocking those who propagate or follow rules of the bad kind, those absorbed at a tender age in the classroom on the basis of mere assumed authority, all the while merrily propagating her own equally arbitrary (and at least equally worthless) rules. Some of them seem almost obsessions, like her dislike of the "not only... but also..." construction.

But it doesn't really matter. You can't expect perfection in a usage guide - we all have prejudices we're attached to. In fact I share quite a few of her preferences and dislikes, but she could have taken the trouble to make cases for them instead of just putting them out there naked; or if that would have made the book too long she could have kept them to herself. You'll need to use your judgement in reading, and, as I'm fairly confident DNC would agree, you should do that whenever you read anything. If you don't (and if you simply take all her advice on faith) you're not likely to be able to write well in any case. To repeat: there's more than enough good stuff in here to make it worth the trouble. It certainly knocks spots off the recent and abysmal "Dreyer's English".

I found DNC's own style a bit strange, and, at first, rather unpleasant. I speculated that she was trying in a very conscious and deliberate way to make every line of the book embody the advice it gives (and not always quite succeeding) - like someone trying to walk around in full observance of the Alexander technique, having just taken a course in it. She seemed to try a little too hard to be clear, concise, striking, functional, etc., all at once. Well, whatever it was, eventually I just got used to it.

Tl;dr: read it if you want help to write better.
(Reassuring disclaimer: this review doesn't attempt to apply DNC's advice, so if you find it horribly written, don't let that put you off.)

[Erwin Lemuel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Deirdre McCloskey’s Economical Writing is a slim but potent guide for anyone who writes, especially those in academia. McCloskey’s advice is clear, concise, and sometimes downright witty, all while pushing for better, more efficient writing. The book aims to strip away the pretentious fluff that often plagues academic prose. It’s refreshingly direct, making it an essential read for students, professors, or anyone looking to write with more clarity.

Here’s a breakdown of the top rules McCloskey emphasizes:

• Write to be understood, not to impress
“If you write to impress, it will fail.”
McCloskey insists that you focus on clarity, not on big words. Simplicity is key in getting your point across.
• Omit needless words
“The best sentence is one that contains no unnecessary words.”
Inspired by Strunk & White, McCloskey constantly reminds us to trim the fat from our sentences. Why use ten words when five will do?
• Be specific and concrete
“Abstract words are an enemy.”
Avoid vague, fuzzy language. McCloskey urges writers to use specific examples that will resonate with readers.
• Prefer active voice
“The passive voice is a sentence killer.”
Make your sentences more dynamic and direct by sticking to active voice. Passive constructions tend to muddy the waters.
• Don’t confuse simplicity with dumbness
“A simple style is not a stupid style.”
McCloskey argues that being clear doesn’t mean dumbing things down. You can be both simple and profound at the same time.
• Keep your reader in mind
“Never forget your reader.”
She emphasizes writing for the reader’s ease, not for your own ego. Think about what they need to know, not what you want to show off.

McCloskey’s tone is approachable and at times humorous, making the book as enjoyable as it is practical. It doesn’t bog you down with jargon or abstract theories; instead, it provides real-world tips that anyone can apply to improve their writing. If you’re tired of wading through academic gobbledygook, this book is like a breath of fresh air.

[Don Lim · Rating 4 out of 5]

McCloskey does not provide any new advice on writing better, but she does collect existing advice from other books and compiles them, focusing more specifically on writing in the subject of economics. Although some of her advice is a bit dated (such as using two spaces after a period, question mark, or exclamation mark), many are useful and would improve writing, if kept in mind. A few examples include: reading out loud, use active verbs, be concise and clear, rewrite and revise, etc. All these are commonsense, yet few writers follow simple advice.

She emphasizes heavily to write in a manner so readers cannot possibly misunderstand. Yet as I have read some of the other reviews, the other reviewers are either dunces or deliberately twisting her words. For instance, when she writes about how astronomers attempting to understand the motion of the sun, they would do well to stop saying the sun is "rising." She is correct. While many laymen and perhaps even astronomers may use sentence, "the sun is rising" casually, to understand the underlying mechanism, astronomers must begin to use terms such as time-space, inertia, and even include mathematical functions in order to more deeply understand astronomy. The same, she argues, applies to economics. Laymen have often used cutthroat, exploitation, skyrocketing, and other such words to hazily explain, or often intentionally obscure, economic concepts.

If you have read other books giving advice on good writing, you may find McCloskey's book does not add much. She does herself recommend rulebooks that she found helpful, a few which were: Strunk & White's The Elements of Style, Graves & Hodge's The Reader Over Your Shoulder, and Williams' Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. Overall Economical Writing was a quick, joyful read (and it is also clear McCloskey had fun writing). For me it has helped keep surface the rules of good writing.

[Fran Frković · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really like Economical Writing even though it makes me realize how difficult it is to write well, and how bad my writing is. Economical Writing contains strong advice and even stronger opinions.

Recommending it isn't difficult, and it's close to a five star review. At times I wanted the book was following a bit more of own advice in keeping it simple. There are some references and callbacks that take me a bit out of the current sentence, which I understand isn't what I as a reader should be experiencing. I also wonder how many references I haven't noticed. I'm not sure if the author wants to reward the careful reader, or to sound smart. Throughout the entire length it argues against attempting to sound smart ("five dollar words"); perhaps it's only my perception that parts of the book could be simplified.

The book often stresses how understanding the roots of English words is necessary for proper use, but the reader being well-learned in Greek, Latin, and Anglo-Saxon is not going to be a common occurrence.

Examples are mostly given for the field of economy and some of the advice won't apply as strongly in other areas.

I'd give this review about 2/5 after reading the book.

[Laurent De Serres Berard · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reminder that 3 stars still meant "liked it" in Goodreads, and so still good. Clarification needed in this world of "5 stars or nothing". In my case, I recommend it as a single read, but will not be a bible in writing that I would recurringly consult.

It is a good writing book, but useful maybe for a limited audience : fresh new undergraduate who contemplate the amoutn of writings in front of them, and those whom english might not be the first language but are fluent in speaking it. There are a few explicit observations on english writing that are useful for them.

The books has the advantages to be very short and funny at times. It offers tips, and not rules, which I would personnally prefered. Despite being about good writing, I do find some sentences a bit strange and not particularly clear. I had expected the book to advise us twoard the end to review it and suggest improvements as practice. It is possible that this is due to the informal tone of the book, to make it lighter to read.

[Quin Zapoli · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quick and actually pretty funny. McCloskey is blunt, she doesn’t spare feelings or elaborate when she doesn’t need to. The way she writes is as much a guide as her actual advice. It’s a good combination of more concrete rules and matters of preference, and I would absolutely say it applies to more than social science writing.

My favorite rule (and the one that’s stuck with me the most): If a reader thinks your writing isn’t clear, then your writing isn’t clear. You as the writer don’t get to disagree with that. If they think it’s unclear, it is. Tough. That rule forces a level of humility that’s hard for myself and I imagine most writers who develop some kind of attachment to things they’ve written. It’s easy to get defensive when a reader thinks something could be written more clearly. But that rule is a great reminder that writing is most often meant to be read, so it’s the reader’s opinion that matters most.

[Wolfie · Rating 3 out of 5]

A solid little guide to clear and concise writing, Economical Writing delivers what it promises: practical advice in short, easy-to-digest chapters. It’s a quick read, perfect for those times when you need to tighten up your writing—or in my case, rewrite a resume without sounding like a corporate buzzword generator.

The 35 rules are straightforward and actionable. It’s not exactly groundbreaking, but it’s like having a no-nonsense friend remind you to keep it simple. The chapters are short and snappy, so you can breeze through them quickly.

If you’re looking for inspiration or something to ignite your inner wordsmith, this… might help. But if you need a down-to-earth, practical checklist for clearer writing, it gets the job done. Think of it as the sensible loafers of the writing world—not flashy, but it’ll get you where you need to go.