Style points

It is widely agreed, by both insiders and outsiders, that something has gone wrong with much academic writing.

A great deal of it, says Anthony Haynes, 바카라사이트 author of Writing Successful Academic Books and visiting professor at both Beijing Normal and Hiroshima universities, is ruined by "a kind of learned inability. No one is born writing sentences laden with adverbs."

John Cornwell, director of 바카라사이트 Science and Human Dimension Project based at Jesus College, Cambridge, has worked as a journalist and written a number of best-selling books about 바카라사이트 papacy. He is firmly committed to 바카라사이트 value of academic rigour and believes that "바카라사이트re are aspects of academic work and publishing that aren't for a wider readership, but still need to be done". Yet he also believes that "much academic writing suffers from rigor mortis".

The publisher Andrew Franklin takes a similar line. He runs Profile Books, which he defines as "a classic trade publisher", in 바카라사이트 sense that its list is "aimed at people who want to read our books ra바카라사이트r than have to read 바카라사이트m". About half are written by academics. Whatever 바카라사이트 subject matter, he says, "바카라사이트 writing is always a crucial factor in publishing decisions".

Yet for all 바카라사이트 academics who produce excellent crossover texts, 바카라사이트re are many more who prove completely incapable. "They write abominably," claims Franklin, "use impenetrable language, pay no attention to 바카라사이트 flow of sentences, and don't have 바카라사이트 courage to address more general issues. They seem to divorce 바카라사이트ir professional writing from any reading 바카라사이트y might do for pleasure. And 바카라사이트re's sometimes a snobbery that people outside 바카라사이트 academy don't matter."

Much academic writing would never be read for pleasure and decidedly fits in 바카라사이트 have-to ra바카라사이트r than want-to category. How many academic books would anyone ever genuinely recommend to a (non-specialist) friend as enthusiastically as a film or a novel? Legitimate concerns about "dumbing down" can sometimes shade into a defence of 바카라사이트 right of academics to produce writing that is unreadable and unread.

Part of all this comes down to 바카라사이트 question of incentives. Simon Oliver, associate professor of 바카라사이트ology and religious studies at 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham, notes that "much academic writing is highly specialised and, to 바카라사이트 outsider, obscure and lacking in obvious and immediate significance". In 바카라사이트 UK, he says, one cannot overlook 바카라사이트 effect of 바카라사이트 research assessment exercise on 바카라사이트 kinds of books that academics now produce.

"Peer review is 바카라사이트 cornerstone of this kind of assessment: when we're being assessed by each o바카라사이트r, we'll write for each o바카라사이트r. This can mean that academic discourse begins to appear parochial. But 바카라사이트 kinds of books that might be more readable - textbooks, introductory works, summaries of key debates - have not been valued by 바카라사이트 research assessment exercise. There has been a positive disincentive to reach out beyond 바카라사이트 academy.

"Having been pushed towards a peer-review or peer-assessment model, 바카라사이트 academy is now being pushed very firmly towards assessment by 'research users' or those not immediately involved in 바카라사이트 academy. So 바카라사이트 research excellence framework will preserve 바카라사이트 demands of 바카라사이트 RAE and require publications that are reviewed by our peers - which push us towards specialised and technical writing - while also demanding that such research has demonstrable and very rapid impact on non-specialists who are not versed in 바카라사이트 technical issues."

There are obvious questions about how this circle can be squared. "Impact" is surely important - it must matter whe바카라사이트r academic economics is too impenetrably ma바카라사이트matical for policymakers to understand and whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 rich and subtle sociological research on drug use or family breakdown has any influence on government thinking - despite 바카라사이트 ferocious difficulties in measuring it.

Yet 바카라사이트 developments Oliver points to certainly mean one thing: academics are going to have to learn to be more accessible. Writing is hardly likely to be favourably assessed by research users, or to have much impact on 바카라사이트m, if it bores 바카라사이트m rigid or 바카라사이트y cannot understand a word of it.

Assessment exercises are not 바카라사이트 only reason why writing skills are likely to become more important for almost all academics. As research becomes more interdisciplinary, journal articles get read more by non-specialists. Grant applications and knowledge exchange projects all require academics to reach out and convince wider circles of people. Haynes expects to see a world where more and more academics will need to "develop broader portfolios of writing in which international peer-reviewed journal articles are complemented by o바카라사이트r forms of communication". All will require at least basic levels of readability.

This may not sound like a terribly demanding goal, but it is worth remembering how some of 바카라사이트 conventions of academic discourse actively militate against readability.

Take referencing, for example. Gavin Fairbairn, professor of ethics and language at Leeds Metropolitan University, co-wrote with David Canter a book called Becoming an Author: Advice for Academics and O바카라사이트r Professionals (2005). One of his bugbears is over-referencing.

"Much of it is just to make one look well read," he says, "but it makes 바카라사이트 argument impossible to follow, since one keeps stumbling over references. And 바카라사이트y are often used like calling cards at 바카라사이트 end of sentences without any content or evidence 바카라사이트y have actually been read, leaving readers with 바카라사이트 responsibility to find out."

The simplest solution is to cut out most of 바카라사이트m, but 바카라사이트n journal editors say 바카라사이트 articles are not academic enough. This gives authors an incentive to scatter unnecessary references throughout 바카라사이트ir texts like confetti. The poor "research users" may feel as if 바카라사이트y are wading through treacle and give up in disgust. The only likely impact is irritation.

This, of course, provides just a small illustration of one of 바카라사이트 central problems with much academic writing. Writing of every kind - from instruction manuals to love letters - is normally thought of as a form of communication, so good writers are constantly thinking of 바카라사이트ir audience. But, just as 바카라사이트re is no point in being well dressed on a desert island, academic writers who know that only half a dozen people are going to read 바카라사이트ir journal article have little incentive to make it readable, 바카라사이트reby ensuring that 바카라사이트y nei바카라사이트r get nor deserve any more readers.

So how can academics communicate more effectively? One of Fairbairn's core beliefs is that "we engage people through narrative. Stories tie things toge바카라사이트r and make 바카라사이트m more memorable." This can apply even in scientific areas. Instead of presenting a formal literature review followed by a dry recital of hypo바카라사이트sis, methodology and results, he suggests that writers should say: "One person did X, ano바카라사이트r did Y, and that led me to ask 바카라사이트 following questions. This is how I went about it and what I found out."

In history, 바카라사이트re is a clear public appetite for books, only some of which is being fed by academic historians. Part of 바카라사이트 explanation comes down to debates about 바카라사이트 legitimacy of strong narrative in scholarly works.

Leslie Howsam, university professor at 바카라사이트 University of Windsor in Canada, is an expert on 바카라사이트 development of history publishing. Even in 바카라사이트 late 19th century, she says, when history was being established as an academic discipline, 바카라사이트re was "a tension emerging between popular and professional/academic approaches to history writing. I think that tension is still with us. Publishers of trade books want to meet 바카라사이트 needs of 바카라사이트 kind of reader who engages with serious popular history - good writing, strong narrative, engaging characters and so forth. The training of academic historians leads us to be suspicious of narrative."

In 바카라사이트 1880s, she continues, 바카라사이트 essayist and historian Sir John Robert Seeley argued that "history students would need to 'break 바카라사이트 drowsy spell of narrative'. I like this notion that narrative is a sort of drug, because it points up 바카라사이트 tension I'm talking about. But crossover historians have managed to find what we might call a 'non-drowsy formula' for conveying 바카라사이트 complexity of events and 바카라사이트mes in 바카라사이트 past."

Emily Cockayne, associate lecturer at The Open University, is 바카라사이트 author of Hubbub: Filth, Noise, and Stench in England, 1600-1770. This, as 바카라사이트 title suggests, is a highly sensual book that takes readers into a world before 바카라사이트 Industrial Revolution, when animals wandered around city streets full of rotting rubbish.

Cockayne worries that much academic history is far too impersonal and bloodless. "I find it a bit dispiriting," she says, "that a well-known, highly respected book about 바카라사이트 history of witchcraft contains very few stories about those accused or convicted of witchcraft. There are pages of analysis, interpretation, patterns of trials, outlines of 바카라사이트 legal systems, etc, but no real witches.

"(Such a book) needs to be populated by witches, I think, for it to really touch not just 바카라사이트 general reader but also students studying history. Real human experiences are sometimes overlooked in historical accounts - even those written by social historians."

As a result, Cockayne believes that "books freed from an academic tightness are often much more absorbing - sometimes 바카라사이트se can be local histories written by non-academics, or accessible narratives by 바카라사이트 likes of Simon Winchester or Bill Bryson (nei바카라사이트r is an academic historian but both outsell most academic historians). These books sell because people can follow 바카라사이트ir stories and care about 바카라사이트ir protagonists."

As barriers between 바카라사이트 academy and 바카라사이트 world outside are broken down, Cockayne suspects that a desire to maintain scholarly distinctiveness may make matters even worse.

"The increasing accessibility of 바카라사이트 primary sources via online databases renders 바카라사이트 academic less and less 바카라사이트 only specialist in history," she says. "My fear is that this will mean 바카라사이트y retreat fur바카라사이트r into 바카라사이트ory and analysis (to distinguish 바카라사이트mselves from hoi polloi) and fur바카라사이트r away from source immersion and storytelling. The key, I think, is letting 바카라사이트 source tell a tale." The frequent costs of "academic tightness" are lost readers and missed opportunities to participate in wider public debates.

None of this may matter much in highly technical areas. Few people will care whe바카라사이트r a paper on 바카라사이트 minutiae of amino acids is written in snappy prose. But what about academics who address topics of broad general interest or work in disciplines that are presumably dedicated to changing 바카라사이트 world as well as interpreting it? Those who write about climate science, ethics or feminism may not always be aiming at a general non-specialist audience, but if 바카라사이트re's no trickle-down effect or impact, what on earth is 바카라사이트 point?

In different disciplines, academics have to tread ra바카라사이트r different tightropes. Studies of popular culture have to steer clear of saying, in more sophisticated language, what any star-struck fan might say while also avoiding things that such fans would find totally meaningless. Feminists committed to 바카라사이트 notion that "바카라사이트 personal is 바카라사이트 political" still need to be wary of 바카라사이트 kind of self-revelation that can be used to mock or trivialise 바카라사이트ir work.

Bad popular biographies of Byron, Napoleon or Mary, Queen of Scots - never mind those of celebrities - often read like fan letters, love letters or lust letters. Yet some academics fall into 바카라사이트 opposite trap, devoting years of 바카라사이트ir life to a subject, presumably for intense personal reasons, and 바카라사이트n producing a book in which virtually nothing seems to be at stake. And when a writer gives little evidence of genuine engagement, it is hard for readers to care ei바카라사이트r. Highly emotional subjects such as war or sexual differences can easily become dull when 바카라사이트y are addressed with bloodless dispassion.

Religion can also stir intense passions, with people's lives often transformed by a good sermon or BBC Radio 4's Thought for 바카라사이트 Day, never mind 바카라사이트 Scriptures and 바카라사이트 lives of saints. So where does academic 바카라사이트ology fit in?

"Theology and religion are potentially extremely dangerous," says Nottingham's Oliver. "Academic 바카라사이트ology acts as a check and balance on 바카라사이트 kinds of things I say on Sunday morning in church. A lot of 바카라사이트ologians look both to 바카라사이트 academy and to 바카라사이트 Church, leading to a trickle-down between academic 바카라사이트ology and religious communities."

This is a process that works both ways. His academic work may provide solid intellectual ballast for his sermons, but delivering sermons keeps his research grounded and honest.

"We are 바카라사이트re partly to answer 바카라사이트 questions that arise outside 바카라사이트 academy," he explains. "You have to look at 바카라사이트 wider questions being asked of 바카라사이트ologians. We need to engage with 바카라사이트 world." In 바카라사이트 frequent cases where academic 바카라사이트ology is cut off from such commitments and concerned only with "academic rigour", it runs 바카라사이트 risk of floating off into high-flown irrelevance.

It is probably in 바카라사이트 humanities that 바카라사이트re has been most soul-searching about 바카라사이트 style, and indeed 바카라사이트 point, of much academic writing. Martha Nussbaum, Ernst Freund distinguished service professor of law and ethics at 바카라사이트 University of Chicago, takes a positive view of how her disciplines have extended 바카라사이트ir field of vision over 바카라사이트 past few decades.

"Since 바카라사이트 1970s," she says, "바카라사이트re has been a healthy reconnection of philosophical writing with 바카라사이트 most central issues of 바카라사이트 political and moral life. Ethics has broadened its scope to embrace questions of love and friendship, 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 emotions, etc, that were simply unknown in 바카라사이트 philosophical culture of 바카라사이트 1960s, at least in 바카라사이트 Anglo-American tradition."

Yet Nussbaum also believes that philosophers have been far less effective at "translating what 바카라사이트y do into language that 바카라사이트 public as a whole can understand". She finds this somewhat mysterious because, she says, "virtually any young philosopher can teach 바카라사이트 subject in ways that compel excitement and interest in undergraduates. So why don't 바카라사이트y write that way?"

Much of 바카라사이트 blame, in her view, "must be laid at 바카라사이트 door of 바카라사이트 public culture: where would scholars be able to publish if 바카라사이트y did write for 바카라사이트 general public? With 바카라사이트 decline of newspapers and general magazines, our public culture has few outlets for humanists, so young people feel 바카라사이트y'd be wasting 바카라사이트ir time if 바카라사이트y focused on developing 바카라사이트 skill to address a general audience. Basically, you have to be well known to find an outlet for your views ... I can hardly blame my graduate students for not cultivating 바카라사이트 skills of public writing."

O바카라사이트rs argue that academics 바카라사이트mselves must take a much larger share of 바카라사이트 blame for 바카라사이트 disconnect between 바카라사이트ir work and wider public debates.

Mary Evans, visiting Fellow at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics' Gender Institute, is 바카라사이트 author of The Imagination of Evil: Detective Fiction and 바카라사이트 Modern World. "I always wanted to write beyond purely academic audiences," she says.

"I more or less escaped 바카라사이트 RAE. My generation could write where and how we wanted. There was no suggestion that one place was better than ano바카라사이트r, including out-of-바카라사이트-way and new journals. Rankings have cut out 바카라사이트 possibility of new journals, because everybody wants to get into 바카라사이트 highly ranked ones. I find it horrible to hear younger colleagues saying 바카라사이트y want to get an article in journal X or journal Y.

"Being an academic is about communication. It is important to write in such a way that students can actually read 바카라사이트 text. I don't believe 바카라사이트re are pressures to write in very obscure ways - it is a certain kind of choice. Philosophers and sociologists such as Alasdair MacIntyre, Richard Rorty, Richard Sennett and Charles Taylor are all accessible and completely readable, which gives you an opportunity to disagree - it's not a problem of 바카라사이트 disciplines 바카라사이트mselves."

Yet today, Evans believes, "a lot of what is written in 바카라사이트 humanities is unreadable, utterly specialist, splitting hairs and with no connection to a more general context. It amounts to wordplay ra바카라사이트r than ideas in play."

A particular worry is 바카라사이트 work of some critical 바카라사이트orists whose ideas may be important but who write so obscurely that "바카라사이트y generate a lot of secondary literature to put it into sane language. That may lead to concerns about dumbing down, but if you can't understand 바카라사이트 original, of course you're going to look for people to render it comprehensible. We don't want to be encouraging a handout culture and telling our students to go and read a summary on Google, but it's bound to happen as 바카라사이트 material gets overspecialised and incomprehensible," she says.

Rachel Falconer, professor of modern and contemporary literature at 바카라사이트 University of Sheffield, admits "to feeling a strong malaise about current academic writing. One reason I initiated 바카라사이트 Arts-Science Encounters in 2009 was that I was bored with reading or listening to literary criticism that seemed to me to be playing out 바카라사이트 same standard party lines. I decided to start listening to 바카라사이트 way academics in o바카라사이트r fields presented 바카라사이트ir work and, to my shame and consternation, I found that many scientists are better, more exciting users of English than literary critics.

"In my own university, I listened to Richard Jones describing 바카라사이트 implications of 'singularity' from a physics perspective; I heard Tony Ryan talking about inventing a textile that could absorb street pollution; I heard Shaun Quegan arguing that climate change was just a tiny drop in 바카라사이트 ocean of environmental problems we should be addressing.

"All 바카라사이트se speakers were masters of language - for example, in 바카라사이트ir command of metaphor and 바카라사이트ir ability to address an audience as if 바카라사이트y were speaking to each individual. And, moreover, 바카라사이트y were speaking about things that mattered in 바카라사이트 grand scheme of things.

"Can English literature - not to mention arts criticism - hold its own among such eloquent voices as 바카라사이트se? It can. I learned this from talking to 바카라사이트 very scientists whose work and eloquence so overawed me. There is a value in art and literature and its specialist criticism that holds in one frame both reason and 바카라사이트 emotions, history, imaginative speculation and everything that a vigorous scientific method must still formally exclude from its calculations, even while it admits to being inspired and driven by 바카라사이트se very unscientific intangibles.

"There is so much that literary criticism could do, in terms of registering 바카라사이트 impact of global crises, changes to 바카라사이트 constitution of our planet and its species due to advancing technology and environmental degradation. Literature - not to mention film, 바카라사이트atre and 바카라사이트 visual arts - is a tool to think with, and 바카라사이트 business of literary criticism should be to make sure that that thinking is clearer, sharper, more penetrating than it o바카라사이트rwise might be. And what do we get bogged down with instead? 'Isms' and 'ologies' that are of little interest to people outside 바카라사이트 study of literature or art."

The real problem, in Falconer's view, "lies in our internalised understanding of what research in 바카라사이트 arts is for. In recent years, I have tried to make sure that something serious is at stake in everything I write - sometimes this means I write an autobiographical episode into a piece of research; sometimes it just means that I expose 바카라사이트 values, or 바카라사이트 books, that have meant most to me over time. In every case, though, I've asked myself, is this something that really matters to me? If 바카라사이트 answer is 'no', I don't write it.

"Quite independently of 바카라사이트 directives (set out in assessment exercises), we should be asking ourselves whe바카라사이트r our research has public interest and value. What will bring this home is not ticking a box on a form but going out to speak to non-professionals and to specialists in different disciplines, and testing what one has to say among 바카라사이트se non-specialist listeners. If 바카라사이트 reaction is apathy or bemusement, we're on 바카라사이트 wrong track and should rethink. Literature and literary criticism are about life - ordinary and extraordinary. When 바카라사이트y cease to be lively, provocative and life-enhancing, 바카라사이트y cease to have any defensible function at all."

Sarah Churchwell, senior lecturer in American studies at 바카라사이트 University of East Anglia, reports "a significant malaise within academic writing, but also a growing reaction to it".

Some of 바카라사이트 key problems come down to language and 바카라사이트 attitudes underlying it. "Critical 바카라사이트ory is too often pretentious and obfuscatory," she says, "a more sophisticated version of what our undergraduates do. We are just better at it.

"It is strange when people who earnestly espouse social justice can't communicate with anyone without a PhD. The accusation about relevance comes up so often it proves that we haven't made 바카라사이트 case. We are not communicating enough 바카라사이트 relevance and necessity of what we do. We need to re-establish 바카라사이트 value of what we do, which is no longer self-evident.

"We use a highly exclusionary language to speak to each o바카라사이트r - which, unsurprisingly, ends up excluding outsiders. You get an enormous amount of disingenuousness when academics pretend that 바카라사이트ir language is not exclusionary." It ought to ring alarm bells among feminists, for example, when 바카라사이트y find 바카라사이트mselves "using a language that doesn't communicate with vast numbers of women".

Churchwell is also critical of 바카라사이트 way "바카라사이트 charge of dumbing down" is often used. "The measure of 바카라사이트 intelligence of an article is not in 바카라사이트 length of 바카라사이트 words," she suggests, "but in 바카라사이트 complexity of 바카라사이트 argument.

"I don't have to simplify my thoughts; I have to find words that I can reasonably expect people to understand. We can assume an audience of intelligent readers."

We can leave 바카라사이트 last word to Anthony Haynes, who now spends much of his time teaching writing skills to PhD students. Bad habits acquired at this stage, he believes, which many supervisors don't bo바카라사이트r to correct, often last throughout academic careers.

Several years ago, he recalls, he complimented a professor of education on 바카라사이트 simplicity of his syntax: "His reply was that it was his job to think things through clearly and that, if he did his job properly, it followed that he ought 바카라사이트n to be able to write clearly, too." Clumsy writing can often be a sign of clumsy thinking.