[mabub24]

IMO, this style is most effective on a screen, and on a phone screen at that. This style does not fare well on the page, nor if you're trying to write on a complicated subject. It has the unfortunate feeling of superficiality. Many ideas or points require more than 2 or 3 sentences of explanation. And some ideas require many, many, sentences to present and explain. Worse, too many paragraph breaks can disrupt the flow and rhythm of an argument or article and create the expectation that you are once again introducing a new idea before the last one was allowed to reach a satisfying point. What can seem more direct for the writer, can equally come across as annoying for the reader.

I also think this style is based on the incredible low expectations we now have for the ability of readers to keep their attention, but that's another argument all together. Read some Henry James and you'll see walls of text that achieve a stunning clarity all their own.

Short, standalone paragraphs are very emphatic, though, if used sparingly.

[e12e]

> Read some Henry James and you'll see walls of text that achieve a stunning clarity all their own.

I take it you mean his non-fiction, given the subject? I stumbled on this - I'd be happy to hear some other recommendations - this isn't prose I'd generally look for in a contemporary text that tries to teach a subject - it's too dense for that, I believe:

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/60040/60040-h/60040-h.htm#Pa...

That said, I certainly agree that telegram style can get tiresome, and even hinder communication.

Many poisons are merely too big servings of a remedy.

[mabub24]

I was recommending Henry James in reference to readers attention spans, who often balk at the idea of reading anything quite as dense as from James' writings. But they're missing out. His famous Chp. 42 from Portrait of a Lady is the single best articulation of personal reflection on a failed marriage I have ever read - ever. [0] Losing out on that simply because it's a big imposing paragraph suggests an unwillingness to challenge oneself, which, I think at least, is only to our loss as our attention spans wane.

Specifically for non-fiction, I would recommend R.G. Collingwood, a philosopher of ordinary language who was writing in the late 1930's. His writing, like many philosophers from that time, balances depth with clarity with stunning skill. His introduction to his book "The Principles of Art"[1] is one of my favorite bits of writing ever because of just how clear it is. The paragraphs are often long, but they are meticulously edited to keep forward momentum, and a sense of dawning awareness of a problem which he is solving, present without dragging the reader down. Most of all they are calm. It never seems rushed, or forced, or over-pruned. It's a rhetorical style of instruction that only works when you incorporate length into your writing.

As an aside, the first sentence in the introduction is one of my favorite openings of all time. "The business of this book is to answer the question: What is art?"

---

[0]: http://www.online-literature.com/henry_james/portrait_lady/4...

[1]: https://books.google.ca/books?id=SXpMC9416y4C&printsec=front...

[markcmyers]

You're pulling our leg, right?