I’m Just a Little Disgusted

Hi Folks,

This will be a fairly long post. A correspondent recently sent me the following article by Ammon Shea of the New York Times. My comments will appear after the article:

The Keypad Solution

There is a long and noble history of trying to change the English language’s notoriously illogical system of spelling. The fact that through, rough, dough, plough, hiccough and trough all end with -ough, yet none of them sound the same as any of the others, is the sort of thing that has been vexing poets and learners of English for quite some time.

Proponents of “fixing” this wayward orthography have included some of the most prominent names in American history. Benjamin Franklin suggested changing the alphabet, and Andrew Carnegie provided money for people to study the problem. President Theodore Roosevelt issued an edict in 1906 that gave the Government Printing Office a list of 300 words with new spellings: problem cases like artisan, kissed and woe were to be changed to artizan, kist and wo. Roosevelt was largely ignored by the G.P.O., and the matter was soon dropped. Although this issue has been extensively studied and argued over by these and other eminent thinkers, there has been an almost complete lack of success in effecting any substantial progress.

And so it is rather bizarre that the first widespread change in how people spell English words appears to have come from a group of (largely) young people sending text messages to one another with cellular phones and other electronic devices. You may not like seeing the phrase “LOL — U R gr8” on the page, but it is common enough that you are likely to understand it. Why have such inadvertent “reforms” succeeded where generations of dedicated intellectual attempts have not? And will they last?

For most of the history of the language, English speakers took a lackadaisical approach to spelling; the notion that a word should always be spelled the same way is a much more recent invention than the language itself.

The standardization of English spelling began in the 16th century, and although it is unclear at exactly what point our spelling became set, what is certain is that ever since it happened, people have complained that the rules of spelling, such as they are, just don’t make sense.

Perhaps the most successful attempt at spelling reform (at least in America) was wrought by Noah Webster, who managed to forever make Americans view the British honour and theatre as off-kilter.

Some portion of Webster’s determination to change -our to -or and -re to -er was due to nationalist fervor; he wanted his countrymen to break free of the orthographic bonds of their oppressors. He was noticeably less successful in convincing Americans of the utility of many of his other ideas, like spelling oblique as obleek, machine as masheen and prove as proov.

I contacted several of the spelling-reform organizations in operation today to ask them about their feelings on adopting text-messaging shorthands as a kind of spelling reform.

Alan Mole, the president of the American Literacy Council, when asked if his group had ever considered allying itself with the texters, said that it had not, although he added that text messaging “does serve the purpose of raising consciousness” about the fact “that there are different ways of making people spell.”

The council, which has picketed the Scripps National Spelling Bee, prefers its own phonetic method of spelling reform, called SoundSpel. The group offers a downloadable version of SoundSpel (ententetranslator.com/IDL.htm) that can instantly translate an entire novel’s worth of standard English into a more spellable, if less recognizable, form.

The sister organization of the council, the British-based Spelling Society, does not advocate adopting texting conventions, either, but this is less surprising, because it does not advocate adopting any particular approach at all. Jack Bovill, the society’s president, wrote in an e-mail message: “Our present aim is to raise awareness of the problems caused by the irregularity of English spelling. We DO NOT support solutions.”

Whether texting conventions are supported by organized spelling reformists or not, can they possibly solve the difficulty of spelling our troublesome language? David Crystal, the author of “Txtng: The Gr8 Db8,” told me in an e-mail message that “there’s nothing in texting to suggest spelling reform,” noting that texting relies heavily on abbreviations, which he sees as creative stylings, not systematic improvements.

He added that there is very little that is new about most of the abbreviations and lexical shortenings that make texting so maddening to so many. In fact, he said, with the exception of a few recent coinages like LOL, “virtually all the commonly used ones can be found in English a century ago.” For example, bn (been), btwn (between) and wd (would) can all be found in a 1942 dictionary of abbreviations.

Naomi Baron, a professor of linguistics at American University and author of “Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World,” shares Crystal’s view. She predicts that the number of “textisms” will stop growing as people continue to develop more proficiency in using handheld devices and as the devices continue to grow more sophisticated than simple telephone touch pads. She adds that part of the appeal of texting shorthands is their novelty, and that that will fade.

Crystal did say that a certain amount of spelling reform might eventually come from the Internet: “People who try to impose reform ‘top down’ rarely succeed. But a ‘bottom up’ movement might well have some permanent effects.”

Given that the general attitude toward text messaging is that it comes from the linguistic bottom, it may well be that this masheen-sent lingua franca may proov to one day be less obleek than it is now.

Ammon Shea is the author of “Reading the O.E.D.: One Man, One Year, 21,730 Pages.” He is a consulting editor of American dictionaries for Oxford University Press.

 Well, there y’go. This article probably is interesting to writers on several levels, so I offer it up for your consideration. As a freelance editor, I can almost feel the arguments with potential editing clients coming. I actually, physically shudder at the prospect of having to say “No, it is not all right to use alternative spellings (e.g., machine as macheen).” I have more than enough on my plate convincing writers it really is all right to use the word “had,” that it does not “create passive voice” and it’s all right to use a state-of-being verb to describe a state-of-being et cetera, et cetera ad nauseam.  

So right here, Dear Reader, both as a freelance editor and more importantly as a writing instructor, I really have only one thing to say: If anything we do as writers—including spelling words in alternate ways, putting unspoken thought in quotation marks, not putting unspoken thought in italics, not putting quotation marks around spoken dialogue, et cetera—creates confusion in the reader for even a split second, we are undermining our own efforts to communicate the story and create a readership.

That’s it for this time. Happy writing.

Harvey

Be sure to join Arizona Mystery Writers on February 13 in Tucson, Arizona. I’ll present both a shortened version of “Writing Dialect” and “‘Show, Don’t Tell’ & ‘Passive Voice’ Explained.” This event is open to the public. Cost is $22.50 for members $27.50 for non-members and includes lunch. Please RSVP to Carol Dee O’Mahony at cdomahony@aol.com or telephone at 520-760-3630. 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at Hometown Buffet, 5101 N Oracle Road (northwest corner of Oracle Road and River Road).

On the Importance of the Question

Hi Folks,

First, a brief administrative note: Due to a small readership thus far, beginning with this post, this blog will be posted every two weeks. The next post will be on Wednesday, February 3, then Feb 17, then March 3 and so on.

A long while back, I had a Definitions page on my website. The definitions were along the lines of those published by Ambrose Bierce in his Devil’s Dictionary, meaning they were witty, irreverent, extremely opinionated and, most importantly, offered strictly as a kind of entertainment. If you aren’t familiar with Bierce’s work, I strongly recommend it. One of his definitions is November, n. The eleventh twelfth of a weariness.

Johnny Hart, in Wiley’s Dictionary in his B.C. comic strip, wrote this one: Bone, n. One of a set of moving parts that moved too slowly to avoid being buried by a dog. Okay, so I guess I recommend both Bierce’s Devil’s Dictionary and pretty much anything by Johnny Hart.

But back to my own little offering. Because I was less than kind to lawyers in a few of those definitions, an attorney whom I’ve never met in any way other than his written correspondence (on official lawyer letterhead, no less) recommended that I remove the Definitions page from my website in order to avoid a lawsuit proffered by himself and a few of his ilk. So I did. <Sigh…> I know. Bowing to censorship is not a good thing for a writer to do, but I am just a writer, not a journalist, and I’m not wild about the striped sunshine that was likely to ensue had I failed to reveal my “source,” which of course was my own limited-slip traction mind.

ANYway, have you ever written any wrong-headed definitions? It’s a great deal of fun, and it’s a wonderful mental wordplay exercise. I had only three “serious” definitions on the whole page:

fact, n. Because it never represents the whole of a situation or circumstance, a lie. 

opinion, n. Offered as it is from a single, biased point of view and a single set of experiences, a meaningless group of words, except to the speaker.

question, n. Because it stirs thought, the only truly important grouping of words in any language.

Those who attend my Writing the World seminars have heard me say many times they should Question Everything: not only what they hear from other writing instructors, but from me as well. If any writing instructor says something that just doesn’t sound right or that sounds arbitrary, question it, if not aloud, at least in your own mind. And yes, of course that extends to what we hear from the various talking heads on television and radio and the Internet about politics, religion, and any other topic we care about. I mean, y’ain’t gotta be rude about it; just mull over in yer head what folks say ‘afore y’make up yer own mind.

Okay, enough preaching for this time. Here are a few more of those wrong-headed definitions by Harvey:

common sense, n. A misnomor at best. What’s common to some is obviously a luxury to most.

criminal, n. 1.  A person who, despite his actions, is not responsible for those actions; in general, the more heinous his activities, the worse his parents or the society in which he lives. 2. One who perpetuates a crime on a victim; in every case, it is the victim’s fault for being in the way.

democratic republic, n. That form of government in which, every four years, the citizens are kept busy canceling each others’ votes while the electoral college selects a president.

editor, n. A person who is all too often unnecessarily haughty, especially toward writers. This is a trait that is most often undeserved, especially considering that if there were no writers, the editor would not have a job.

enemy, n. One with whom you should always agree so you can revel in the distress the lack of an argument will bring him.

fictionist, n. One who puts the truth, save the boring parts, into the proper perspective for the entertainment of an audience.

friendship, n. A sometimes fleeting condition for which Need is the catalyst and Trust is the currency.

Hell, n. The unimaginative life; waking, working, eating, and sleeping for no other purpose than to procreate and await death. See life.

human, n. The most conceited species on earth, unjustifiably so.

intellectual, n. 1. One who will drive a Hummer six blocks to a Save the Ozone rally or fly a few thousand miles in a private jet to plant a single tree. 2. A closet tuna-eater. 3. One who will gladly sacrifice your life to ensure his right to spout off. 4. One who, when handed a scrap of paper with “see other side” penned on both sides, would not fall for the gag and continue to flip the paper, but would apply for and receive an NEA grant to study the phenomenon.

kindness, n. An imagined effect created by hopeful expectation. Kindness seldom issues forth from one whose lips the word has crossed, except to cement a sense of superiority.

life, n. Per Ambrose Bierce, the time period during which you are evicted from your mother’s womb, crawl across open ground under fire, and collapse into your grave.

Marine, n. That member of the United States military who provides the enemy with the best opportunity he will ever have to die for his country.

moron, n. Any of a subset of humans who exist only because breathing is an automatic reflex; they are  most often seen talking on cell phones while switching lanes without notice, running 4-way stop signs, doing 12 mph in a 40 mph zone, or parking in the passing lane.

political correctness, n. An outright, pre-agreed-upon lie. The speaker agrees not to divulge with any outward physical manifestation that he knows he is lying, and the listener agrees to nod knowingly and ignore the fact that what he’s heard is a complete falsehood. In this way, complete mistrust is quickly and thoroughly developed since neither speaker nor listener knows what the other honestly believes.

religion, n. 1.  The most widely accepted justification for the mass killing of humans by other humans. 2. Any of various ways to worship god, each of which, of course, is the only right way.

salesman, n. One who makes a living by putting the truth in its proper perspective.

victim, n. In our society, the person held responsible for the crime perpetuated against him.

whiskey, n. 1. A substance of which there is decidedly not enough, especially John Jameson & Sons Irish. 2. A numbing, unfortunately temporary balm that calms the racing mind, alleviates the aching heart, and dulls the senses so nothing hurts quite so much and Nothing hurts much less.

writer, n. 1. One who writes, often at the expense of living. 2. One who notices what others do not and is not ashamed to admit it, in writing. 3. A person without whom editors and publishers would not have a job.

Okay, that’s probably more than enough ’til next time.

Happy Writing!

Harvey

Come join me on February 13, when I’ll be making a special presentation to Arizona Mystery Writers. I’ll present both “Writing Dialect” and “‘Show, Don’t Tell’ & ‘Passive Voice’ Explained” at Hometown Buffet, 5101 N Oracle Road from 10 a.m. until 2 p.m. The cost is $22.50 for members or $27.50 for non-members and includes lunch. To RSVP, please contact Carol O’Mahony. Her email is cdomahony@aol.com or you can call her at 520-760-3630. 

Networking site for writers: http://writingtheworld.ning.com

Writing the World seminars now available on DVD! See http://stonethread.com

Punctuation for Writers: http://www.booklocker.com/books/4056.html

Visit Author’s Roost: http://www.authorsroost.com

On Being in the Mood to Write

Hi Folks,

Hmm… is there a particular “mood” for writing? For the record, this is not a rhetorical question, but one to which I hope you will respond in your own mind if not in a public comment to this post.

In an article sent to me recently by a friend, language columnist Mark Peters, in his blog on Wordtastic, asked “A Happy Writer is a Lousy Writer?” In fact, that’s the title of his post. From there, he goes on to discuss some interesting things, chief among which is the theorum that “‘low-intensity’ negative moods are linked to better writing than happy moods.” He goes on to say “As shown in the research of University of New South Wales Psychology Professor Joe Forgas, when we’re not walking on clouds or doing a happy dance, we tend to be more careful and mindful of details.” When we’re not “walking on clouds or doing a happy dance”? I do like the way Mr. Peters turns a phrase.

Turns out I wrote a paper on this very subject when I was in college. Understand, I attended college only after first completing a twenty-one year civilian-appreciation course in the Marine Corps, so I was already an old grouch, and being in classes all day every day with 17 – 20 year olds who were absolutely certain they could easily solve all the world’s problems did nothing to enhance my mood.

Anyway, the paper I wrote dealt with Shakespeare, in particular his Sonnet 144. It’s the one that goes

Two loves I have of comfort and despair,
Which like two spirits do suggest me still:
The better angel is a man right fair,
The worser spirit a woman colour’d ill.
To win me soon to hell, my female evil
Tempteth my better angel from my side,
And would corrupt my saint to be a devil,
Wooing his purity with her foul pride.
And whether that my angel be turn’d fiend
Suspect I may, but not directly tell;
But being both from me, both to each friend,
I guess one angel in another’s hell:
Yet this shall I ne’er know, but live in doubt,
Till my bad angel fire my good one out.

Because I was a grouch when I was in college, and because I enjoyed the A or A+ that appeared on my papers with some regularity, when I set out to write a paper I first looked up what the major critics had written on the topic, then disagreed with them and argued my point, usually vehemently. Regarding this particular sonnet, the literary brains of the day had written that Shakespeare’s Sonnet 144 positively identified him as a homosexual or bisexual man.

What? In the first place, what about the poem even begins to identify the man’s sexual “identity?” And second, what in tarnation does such an opinion have to do with literary matters? 

Anyway, the critics argued that Shakespeare’s “two loves of comfort and despair” are the “better angel,” a man, and that the “worser spirit” is a woman. Well, this was back when “deconstruction” was all the rage and students were pressed to “interpret” literary works—especially poetry—because, I presume, the poet couldn’t possibly have actually meant the actual words he put on the actual page. Ugh.

Fine. I chose to play by their rules. You all know how I am about punctuation and about using it to direct the reading of your work. Wellsir, when I looked up the original poem, one published shortly after it was written, turns out the original first line contained a comma that’s missing from more modern versions of the poem, including the one above. The original first line read “Two loves have I, of comfort and despair.” The critics took the first line, sans the comma, to mean Shakespeare had two love(r)s, one of whom was comforting and one of whom caused him despair. I took the first line in either version to mean Shakespeare had two loves: a love of comfort and a love of despair.  The pause created by the comma in the original version nailed it down. He had two loves, one of comfort and one of despair. He loved comfort, and he loved despair. Ha! Got ‘em! And that was the basis of the paper I turned in and later of an article I wrote that has been published and republished. (If you’d care to see the original article, email me and I’ll try to find it for you.)

I argued (and I still argue) that Shakespeare loved comfort, being happy, enjoying life, as do we all, but comfort isn’t all that conducive to writing. On the other hand, he also loved despair, being miserable or nearly so, because that bit of depression is the well from which has sprung literally thousands of literary works. I’ve long held that literary folks and other “artsy” types aren’t quite able to recognize the same stark boundaries that others recognize, or else we tend to ignore them. Most people probably hate even the thought of being depressed, feeling down, feeling blue. But the creative mind, I believe, almost craves it at times.

Check the second line of his poem. Shakespeare’s two loves are “like two spirits” (emphasis added) and they “do suggest me still.” His two loves, one of comfort and one of despair, “suggest” him, or move him. He loves comfort and the ease of life it brings, but he also loves occasionally crossing over into the darkness of despair where he finds subject matter and is more in the “mood” to write. That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it.

The prof asked me only one question: “Wull, why you s’pose th’ feller made them two spirits a mayun and a woman if’n they was just a good mood an’ a bayud mood, huh?” (Okay, he wasn’t quite that bad, but this was in New Mexico.) I answered with a smile and a shrug. “Heck, I don’t know. Maybe he feels like hangin’ with his buds and havin’ a beer is pure comfort, an’ goin’ home to face his girlfriend afterward brings on a certain amount of trepidation and despair.” He thought a moment and, I swear to God, said, “Yep. Y’might have a point there.” Sigh.

Anyway, that’s it for this time. Oh, wait! Some of you will want to mark your calendars. On February 13 I’m making a special presentation to Arizona Mystery Writers. I’ll present both “Writing Dialect” and “‘Show, Don’t Tell’ & ‘Passive Voice’ Explained” at Hometown Buffet, 5101 N Oracle Road from 10 a.m. until 2 p.m. The cost is $22.50 for members or $27.50 for non-members and includes lunch. To RSVP, please contact Carol O’Mahony. Her email is cdomahony@aol.com or you can call her at 520-760-3630. 

Oh… to see Mark Peters’ post for yourself (I recommend it), visit  http://www.good.is/series/wordliness/.

And to see a recent interview with yours truly and St. Louis Writers’ Guild, visit http://www.stlwritersguild.org/zfiles/spotlight/slwg.php. Okay, now that’s it for this time.

Happy Writing… or sad writing… whatever….

Harvey

Catch All, Part 2

Hi Folks,

I hope you all had a truly enjoyable Christmas and a safe New Year’s Eve celebration and are looking forward to a great new year. Bet I know one thing you didn’t get for Christmas: the perfect writing software.

Several months ago, on a ListServ far, far away, a correspondent wrote that she was searching for the name of a bit of “editing software that would highlight all adverbs if you typed ’search adverbs’ or all verbs if you typed ’search verbs.’” Oh dear… oh deary, dear dear….

That software does exist. It’s called the human mind. I know, I know, but really, I’m not just being a smart-aleck. The truth is, the human mind is the perfect editing software, especially for English or any other living language.

It’s possible—perhaps even probable and preferable—that such software has been developed for some of the so-called “dead” languages, but it is NOT preferable that such a thing be developed for use with English. And even if it came to pass, and even if you were able to find it, I would strongly advise against using it. Why? Well, if you have to use “editing software” to identify (and remove, I presume) an adverb, wouldn’t the next logical step be finding “software software” to teach you how to run the editing software?

Seriously, the problem I have with such software is that English is not a one-rule-fits-all language, despite the legions of people out there who are trying to cram it into that little box.

Samuel Clemens wrote “when you find an adverb you should kill it.” Various writing instructors have advised students to NEVER (strong word, that) use “ing verbs”; NEVER use “the word ‘had’”; NEVER use “contractions” (yes, even in fiction, even in dialogue); NEVER use “curse words” (yes, again, even in fiction, even in dialogue, and the definition of “curse words” varies with the instructor); NEVER use “more than three (or some other arbitrary number of) exclamation points (or em dashes or semicolons or ellipses) per page.” And one woman, a PhD who’d taught at a major university in Florida for over thirty years, published an article in a writing magazine stating that writers should “replace all instances of semicolons with commas.” What? I mean, WHAT?

All of those bits and pieces of wisdom above are pure, unadulterated bull cookies. Again, English is not a one-rule-fits-all language. When you hear ANY instructor say you should “never” do a particular thing in writing, ask the instructor why. If he can’t explain to your satisfaction, ignore his advice.

Here’s why I keep saying English is not a one-rule-fits-all language:

Although it’s true that adverbs CAN clutter up your writing (but not without your help), some adverbs in some situations are necessary. Think about it. If they weren’t necessary, they wouldn’t exist. Same goes for gerunds (“ing verbs”) and “had” and contractions and curse words and all the various marks of punctuation. ”Necessary” is the key word. The secret to good writing is not to get rid of “all” adverbs, state-of-being verbs, adjectives, or anything else, but to get rid of any UNNECESSARY punctuation, adverbs, state-of-being verbs, adjectives, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, narrative, and dialogue. It is the Human Mind (yours) that should determine which punctuation and words and sentences and paragraphs remain, and in what sequence, and which are deleted into the electronic netherworld.

Okay, here are a few guidelines (flexible, not “rules”) you can apply to your own writing:

1. The state-of-being verbs are am, is, are, was, were, be, being and been. When one of these is used in conjunction with a “by phrase” (e.g., The pizza was delivered by Harvey) you’ve written a passive construction. Passive constructions, unless you’re writing a service manual for a vacuum cleaner, are bad. They are bad because they are convoluted, delaying responsibility by putting the subject at the end of the sentence (or, in the case of “The pizza was delivered,” by omitting it altogether).

2. Some state-of-being verbs are necessary, despite the fact that in every case they lie on the page, lifeless, and do nothing to advance the action of your story.  The problem is, when we use a state-of-being verb in a sentence, we often experience an overwhelming urge to dress it up with adverbs. Reading “John was ‘terribly, horribly’ angry” is not the least bit more exciting than reading “John was angry.” But if you recast the sentence to read “John kicked-in the door, stormed up the stairs, slapped Maria and hurled Joaquin to the street below,” you will have engaged the reader’s interest AND let slip that John was perhaps a little upset.  When you encounter a sentence that contains a state-of-being verb, cut it from the herd and attempt to rewrite it. (You can rewrite it by getting rid of the state-of-being verb and putting a subject in front of the word that originally followed the state-of-being verb. If the sentence is “The pizza was delivered by Harvey” or “The package was delivered,” you can revise them by writing “Harvey delivered the pizza” and “UPS delivered the package.”) If the sentence is necessary (there’s that word again) to describe a state of being, you won’t be able to revise it: Tucson is a large city in Arizona. If you can revise such a sentence, do; if you can’t, delete any adverbs that accompany it. (Is “Tucson is a massively large city in Arizona” any better? Nope.)

3. Use Your Mind. Despite what your father (mother, brother, sister, teacher) said, it truly is a wonderful thing. The human mind is the original spell checker, the original grammar checker, and the original verb and adverb finder thingy.

4. As part of using your mind, Read Your Work Aloud. If it sounds good to you, it’s probably right. If it sounds wrong, it probably is wrong. Most importantly, if it sounds good to you, it will sound good in the reader’s mind. If you hit a spot that sounds awkward or rough, fix it.

‘Til next time, Happy Writing!

Harvey

•  
  • Networking site for writers: http://writingtheworld.ning.com
  • Writing the World seminars now available on DVD! See http://stonethread.com
  • Punctuation for Writers: http://www.booklocker.com/books/4056.html

Catch All

Hi Folks,

I recently finished an edit, and the writer for whom I performed the edit had a few questions. After I answered them, I asked her permission to use the email itself as a blog post. She said yes, so this will be kind of a catch-all, covering the use of hyphens, capitalization, the use of numerals and spelled-out numbers, etc. (or et c. or &c. or et cetera).

Oh… the writer also said I should introduce the blog by saying, “Some brilliant but pesky student I like a lot who just happens to have an incredible, blow-your-socks-off novel coming out called One Right Thing (her bold) asked all the following questions and put me out of editing commission for at least twenty minutes while I answered, so now it has to be my weekly blob (oops, blog) so I can get some writing done of my own. Ha.”

So here it is: my weekly blob… er, blog. One caveat—I’ve changed the format a bit to make it more reader friendly, and I might have changed a word or two here or there where I’ve thought of something new to say or a better way to say it.

Comment/Question: We spell out numbers up to but NOT including 100 except in “math” things such as percent and degrees. Right? What about o’clocks? “It was 3 a.m. before we got home.” Not “three a.m.”?

Answer: Just be consistent within the type of numeral you’re using. If you write out a time (six p.m.) write out all times. If you describe a height in numerals (6’2”) describe all heights in numerals.

Comment/Question: Is it ”35 degrees below zero” rather than “35 degrees below 0.”? 

Answer: I recommend always spelling out a lone 0 (zero) because 0 (zero) looks too much like O (oh).  

Comment/Question: “She weighed one-hundred-twenty-five pounds,” not “She weighed 125 pounds”? What about a “man who is six-feet, two-inches tall”? Or should it be “a man who is 6′2″ tall”? Why did you change the number to be “six hundred eighty-seven miles” (the “six hundred” changed NOT to be hyphenated), then no hyphen between “hundred” and “eighty” but “eighty-seven” hyphenated? I’m confused.

Answer: The “eighty-seven” is hyphenated because per convention we hyphenate all spelled-out numbers from twenty-one to ninety-nine and all spelled-out fractions (one-half, seven-eighths). Seven hundred is not hyphenated because it’s simply seven units of one hundred.

Comment/Question: Why is it “six-pound human”?

Answer: Because both “six” and “pound” combine to modify “human.” What if the sentence were “There stood two six pound humans.” Does this mean there were two humans who each weighed six pounds or does it mean there were two or maybe six humans who had recently been living in the pound? “Six-pound” clarifies that, yes?

Comment/Question: The pesky in to and into. How do I know which? 

Answer: In the first case (in to), “in” is a preposition and “to” is part of a verb in the infititive form: He’s going in to do some work. (“To” is part of “to do.”) You can also write “He’s going in to work” (Again, “to” is part of “to work.” This might be clearer if you added “on his files” or something else after “work.”) But if you write “He’s going into work,” “work” is a place, a noun, not a verb.

Comment/Question: Do we call an ing verb a “gerund” every place it falls in a sentence. I know it’s a “gerund” when it starts out a sentence and I know to be careful that the two actions can actually HAPPEN at that point. “Running down the hall Maggie thought of her mother’s words” is okay. “Running down the hall Maggie put a band-aid on her bleeding leg,” would NOT be okay. Thank you for catching “Tamping a slug of tobacco into his pipe he pushed back from the table.” Kind of difficult to keep that tobacco IN that pipe while moving furniture!

Answer: No, there is no specific rule. Yes, an “ing” verb is a gerund by definition, but that’s true no matter where it’s used in a sentence. That’s like asking me whether “the” is an article no matter where it’s used in a sentence. Actually, I changed your original, which read, “He tamped a slug of tobacco into his pipe, pushing back from the table” simply because it sounded like the pipe was pushing back from the table. If you’d written “Pushing back from the table, he tamped a slug of tobacco into his pipe” I’d have left it alone.

Comment/Question: Is an African American a black man or a Black man?

Answer: Capitalized if you’re talking about the race, lower case if you’re specifying a color. “The new hire is a Black.” “He was a black man in a white man’s world.”

Comment/Question: How then do we do Blacks/blacks and Negroes/negroes?

Answer: Here you’re referring to race, so it’s Black and Negro.

Comment/Question: I think it’s “a junior college,” not “a Junior college,” or “a Junior College” unless it’s a specific junior college, as in Johnson County Junior College. 

Answer: Yes. When the type of school is included in the name, it’s all capitalized. “I visited a community college last April or May. Actually, it was Cochise County Community College.” In that example, both are capitalized correctly.

Comment/Question: Similarly, do we or do we not capitalize high school or college classes?  

Answer: Don’t overthink this. Capitalize proper nouns, including the names of specific classes. So this depends on You, the writer. If you feel like you’re talking about a particular subject, capitalize it. If you don’t, don’t. “He teaches Algebra, Science and History (specific classes).” Then again, “I first met her in Algebra, and she’s also in my science class and I’m in her history class.” All are correct. It’s easier if the class is followed by a numeral or if it’s otherwise more specific: Algebra 101, Honors Science, History of the Free World, Science 1.  

Comment/Question: If we use the word “etc” how do we punctuate it, with its own period and then whatever punctuation the sentence also requires? etc.? … etc.!

Answer: It’s supposed to have its own period, but if it occurs at the end of a sentence, I’m not gonna put two periods back to back. (If you’re interested, “etc.” is actually a bastardization. “Et” is Latin for “and,” and “c.” is an abbreviation for “cetera,” which means “so forth” or “so on.” The abbreviation should actually be “et c.” What makes it much clearer is to just spell it out (et cetera) or just omit it altogether. One famous poet, Howard Nemerov, when he wanted to write an abbreviated form of “et cetera” often wrote an ampersand followed by a lower-case C and a period:  &c.

Comment/Question: Several places I put “if” and you changed it to “whether.” There is probably a “rule” like the ”different from” and “different than” rule. Please share.  

Answer: As I’ll bet I put in an imbedded comment in your manuscript, use “whether” when there’s a choice (when there’s an “or not,” either written or implied). Note that this rule does not extend to characters, but only to the narrator. (The narrator has to be correct. Characters should talk like themselves.) This error is something that will never go away, because even teachers, news anchors, et al apparently are too lazy to learn. Countless times, I’ve heard the same person (a news anchor) say “The governor couldn’t say whether she’d attend or not” or “The governor couldn’t say whether or not she’d attend” (both are correct) and then say “The governor couldn’t say if she’d attend” (the “or not” is implied). It’s exactly the same sentence all three times, and all three sentences mean the governor has a choice (to attend or not to attend) yet the anchor continues to mangle the language. I hope this is enough to explain it. 

Comment/Question: Sentence word order… When I edit for others, I OFTEN find that they have a complex sentence that “feels” wrong. I can’t get any closer to telling them why it’s wrong than to say “you have things out of the important order.”

Answer: When people confuse word order, I tell them to read the sentence aloud. If they have more than one version of the sentence, they should read both versions aloud and use the one that feels or sounds better. Rule of thumb—when something is being read alound and sounds right, it usually is.

Comment/Question: What about the use of italics and ellipses? Are there rules for these? Or at least ways to think about those two forms of “punctuation”?

Answer: If you read Punctuation for Writers (note: this writer has a copy of PFW) you’ll find both answers in there. Italics is used to indicate unspoken thought and (rarely) to put stress on certain words. The ellipsis is used in fiction only to indicate halting or unsure speech. It lets the reader hear the character pause while he’s talkingyou’re your manuscript, when the character was saying something that sounded halting or uncertain (because of the context), I inserted an ellipsis.

Comment/Question: How do I form the em dash?

Answer: To create an em dash in Word, press Ctrl/Alt and the hyphen key on the number pad. If you want to use two hypens or something and have Word automatically replace them with an em dash, go to AutoCorrect. Put two hyphens (or whatever) in the Replace box and put an em dash (Ctrl/Alt and the hyphen key on your number pad) in the With box, then click enter. (Your version might vary some, but the key is to begin in AutoCorrect.)

Comment/Question: Exclamation points: Is it okay to put an exclamation mark after Maggie’s sentence, “I’d show them it wasn’t poison!” This applies to the “how do we use exclamation marks when they are NOT in dialogue” question. She does not SAY this, only think it, but it’s a strong thought and not really narrative.

Answer: Unspoken thought is exactly the same as dialogue, except that dialogue is actually spoken. Both immediately engage the reader. And we don’t use exclamation points (99% of the time) in narrative because 1) the narrator isn’t supposed to be emotionally involved in the story, and 2) the exclamation point conveys emotion. Yes, I know Maggie is both a character AND the narrator, but when she’s being strictly a narrator, she doesn’t use the exclamation point. In her thoughts (as in her dialogue) she’s being a character.

Comment/Question: Is it all right that in “I told Maggie, ‘Hell yes, that mean ol’ lady ’s still alive’” the word “Hell” is capitalized rather than in lower case? It seems to be its own sentence, within a sentence. Also on that page, “what ch’a gonna’ do?” Is the way I have that here correct?

Answer: Yes, capitalized “Hell” is correct the way you have it written because “Hell” is the first word of an imbedded sentence. In any other case, if you’re using “Hell” as a place, of course it’s capitalized. If it’s used simply as a swear word (and not as the first word in a sentence), it isn’t. So there’s nothing wrong with having both in one book: “Hell yes she’s still alive” and “Aw hell. Why’d you do that?” are both correct. And if you’re referring to a place, it’s capitalized: “You’re gonna go to Hell for that.” You know those are all correct, right? In your two examples above, you’re comparing apples and oranges. In the first, it’s the first word of a sentence, so it’s capitalized. In the second, it’s just a swear word, not even a place. And in the last one I used, it’s the name of a place (a proper noun). This is important to remember: You can’t just capitalize or not capitalize all instances of a word. If you do, how would you capitalize “John” in the following: “Hey, did john go to the john?” or “Hey, did John go to the John?” No, of course not. It would be “Hey, did John go to the john?” Right?

Comment/Question: You made it “whaddya say” but you’ve told me (firmly) that I mustn’t use “ya” for “you,” EVER! Help.

Answer: The rule holds. “Whaddya” is a phonetic spelling of “what do you.” But you should never use “What do ya want to do?” because that would be using “ya” as a replacement for “you.” What I’ve told you is never to use “ya” as a whole word to replace “you.” It just sounds stupid, and people don’t ever say aloud “What do ya want ta do?” (Yes, I’ve seen that atrocity) but they often say aloud “Whaddya wanna do”? I’m sorry, but I can’t explain it any better than that. I strongly recommend you say both sentences aloud. I think you’ll hear what I mean.

Comment/Question: What about “shocking even myself.” Shouldn’t it be “shocking even me”?

Answer: Pick one. “Myself” sounds more stuck-up than “me,” but either is probably correct.

 Comment/Question: We only capitalize directions (east, west, north or south) when we are HEADING there, correct? “We drove West,” not “We drove west.” 

Answer: I never capitalize a direction unless it’s used as a place. “Go West, young man” but “To get there you have to drive west.”

Comment/Question: If it’s known in a story that someone has three brothers, say, isn’t it correct to put commas around the brother’s name in question: I got bunk beds for me and my brother, Jim. Or can I write “for me and my brother Jim.” (A client’s book)

Answer: We’re taught in school to set it off with commas, but it depends on the sentence. In the sentence above, for example, putting a comma before Jim could be interpreted by the reader that you’re speaking to a person named Jim: “Do it for me and my brother Jim” definitely means “Do it for me and my brother, whose name is Jim” but “Do it for me and my brother, Jim” COULD mean the speaker wants Jim to do something for the speaker and his brother.

Well, there y’have it, Sports Fans. Hope this helped you out a little bit too. Also, I hope you had a wonderful Christmas and will enjoy a safe New Year’s Eve.

‘Til next time, Happy Writing!

Harvey

Questions About Writing Memoir

Hi Folks,

First, an exciting announcement. I truly am blessed, and my blessing is about to be transferred to those of you who attend my Writing the World seminars. During the 2010 seminar season, my friend Marilyn Anne Pate, who is both an excellent memoirist and an exceptional writing instructor, will teach Writing the Memoir I and Writing the Memoir II for me in both Tucson and Huachuca City. The new seminar schedule for the whole year is up now at http://stonethread.com/events.html. Check it out. Marilyn’s classes will begin in April and run through June. In the meantime, though, I offer the following thoughts:

I often hear from folks who are considering writing a memoir, but wonder whether anyone other than their family will want to read it. They say things like, “My life just isn’t all that interesting, y’know?” I always respond the same way. Your life is unique. You are a character on the world stage, and almost everyone is interested. Ever notice how much more interesting a famous sports figure or celebrity or Joe Schmuckatelly down the street becomes when you find out something unique about him? So if you’re considering writing a memoir, stop considering and start writing. Consider this: Say a person lived his entire life in one room of a basement. He never went out, never saw anything but the basement walls. Aside from the sheer horror of that thought, this person might be said to have lived the most boring life ever. Now, given that, if that same person managed to write a memoir of his life in that basement, would you pay to read it? I would.

Recently a correspondent asked whether I’d written a  post about writing memoir. Specifically, she wanted to know whether it was all right to use the techniques of fiction while writing her own memoir. Here’s my response:

Most of my blog posts pertain to writing in general, and therefore pertain as well to writing memoir. For example, the use of various types of punctuation, quotation marks, paragraphing, using strong action verbs rather than state-of-being verbs when possible, the difference between active and passive voice (don’t let the narrator use the “sense” verbs), etc. But to answer your question specifically, memoir is MUCH more similar to fiction than dissimilar. Consider…

• Fiction is real life that might happen, but with all the boring parts omitted. Memoir is real life that did happen, but still with all the boring parts omitted.
• Fiction is told from a particular point of view (usually the narrator), and memoir is told from a particular point of view, again, usually the narrator. 
• Hmm… that’s about it.

But what about using dialogue in memoir? The writer was concerned that she couldn’t accurately quote dialogue unless perhaps she had recorded the dialogue of the day in her journals, or unless she could remember specifically what was said. Another memoirist for whom I was editing awhile back had told me I absolutely was not allowed to “adjust” any of the dialogue she wrote down because “it’s written exactly as it was said.” I told her and the current correspondent the same thing: Actually, you wrote the dialogue exactly as you remembered it was said, and we often hear things differently than they’re actually said. In other words, it’s simply dialogue. And as dialogue it serves more than one purpose. Although certainly it’s meant to convey an accurate record of what was said, dialogue between characters (yes, even in memoir) immediately makes the reader lean in to the story, as if he’s eavesdropping. It forces the reader to be immediately engaged in the story, invested in it. And again, the dialogue doesn’t have to be exactly what was said word for word. As I wrote the first memoirist, “After all, you aren’t transcribing for a court of law.” 

So how does a memoirist handle dialogue? Of course, you don’t want to tell outright lies in your memoir, but many memoirists take certain literary liberties when they encounter “missing” gaps even when they’re writing based on someone’s diary. Surely, when you’re writing based only on your journals or your memory, shouldn’t you also feel free to fill in the gaps with literary license? And if that holds true for narrative, it holds true for dialogue as well. In memoir, as in fiction, dialogue must be smoothed out so it both engages the reader and helps the reader through the story. What dialogue does have to be is interesting, and that isn’t hard to do. For the reader, it’s immediately interesting simply because it’s dialogue, a direct communication from the character to the “eavesdropping” reader.

As you write dialogue in your memoir, look at yourself as a translator. You’re translating the Spirit of the conversation, the essence, not the exact words. You’re getting your story out there, and that’s what matters. And it really does matter. As Marilyn Pate wrote to me (and I shamelessly posted on the course description for her memoir class), “Your story is unique. It is the treasure you take with you when you pass away unless it is written or recorded.”

Got your Christmas shopping finished yet? Only two more days ’til Christmas! Have a good one. I’ll check back with you next week.

Harvey

The Writing the World seminars are now available on DVD! See http://stonethread.com. Also, for a limited time, I’m offering a package deal on Punctuation for Writers and its companion, Writing Realistic Dialogue & Flash Fiction. Buy both now, signed by the author, for $25, including shipping. For information, email h_stanbrough@yahoo.com.

Writing the Christmas Letter

Hey Folks,

Well, here we are again, many of us scrabbling around for last-minute gifts and worrying and fretting about what to buy for whom. And as of today, there are NINE shopping days (including weekends) until Christmas. It’s really odd, isn’t it, how Christmas sneaks up on us? It’s almost as if last year, on December 26, we somehow experienced a memory wipe and failed to realize we had only 366 days until Christmas. So what’s any of that have to do with writing?

If you’re a person who enjoys writing the annual Christmas letter, this will pertain. If you aren’t, maybe this will convince you to start. If you’re reading this at all, chances are you’re a writer. What better way to share your talents with your loved ones et al than writing a Christmas letter?

I heard a comment recently that sparked the notion to write this blog post. A lady who had received my Christmas letter said, ”You had me worried. I thought certain I’d open this and find things like ‘my kid made the honor roll’ and ‘my other kid joined the Peace Corps’ and ‘my third kid received the Nobel Peace Prize,’ blah blah blah.” But no.

Over the  past several years I’ve used the Christmas letter as an opportunity to let my insanity flow. It makes me feel as if I’ve been creative, and with any luck at all, it will entertain the readers. At the worst, since you’ll be sending your Christmas letter mostly to family and friends, they pretty much have to read it. And if they aren’t entertained… well, that’s their fault.

I generally pick one major topic or event from the previous year and expound on it without mercy. Here’s a slightly revised version of the Christmas letter I sent out this year:

How difficult can it be to grow a garden? That was the thought irradiating my poor little brain when I set out to plant a garden in the lush soil of Southeast Arizona in the Spring of this year. All it takes is a little sun, a little water and the proper mix of soil and nutrients, right? Of course in Arizona, which I understand is Swahili for Arid Zone, we have all the free sun we need, but very little water even if we spit a lot.

Well, we got the garden in, but it started disappearing pretty much overnight. See, there are these things called javelinas. They’re basically giant rats who eat everything in sight. People out here ride ‘em in rodeos. Anyway, there was no way to keep the vegetables away from the javelina hogs, so we figured we needed a fence. Only I’m seriously adverse to digging postholes in this dirt-laden rock when even a hydraulic post hole digger mounted to a Cat won’t get through. Okay, time for a bright idea. We’d lay railroad ties around the perimeter, nail upright 2×4s to the railroad ties, and then string fence around the whole blasted thing.

Did you know that one railroad tie weighs close to 200 pounds? Well, we loaded ‘em one by one into the bed of my pickup, then unloaded them one by one close to the garden site, then maneuvered, cajoled, kicked and cussed them one by one into place. Then we sat back, popped a tab, and thought of how smart we were. Ahem… then we realized what we really wanted all along was not only a vegetable garden, but also a walking garden with vegetables, paths, seating areas and a maybe even a water-feature, though a “sand feature” or an “air feature” or a “rock feature” would make considerably more sense out here.

Okay, so a few weeks later, we expanded the area with more railroad ties and more fence — TWICE — each time working during the day to complete what we could and stringing temporary fencing each day to keep out the javelinas that night. Oh, and those “features?” Eventually we settled for several “mesquite features” and a few “white-thorn acacia features,” mostly ’cause they were already there and they’re a LOT easier to leave be than to dig up. 

Well, about that time we realized that since the ground is hard enough to bend a steel post, there was no way we could dig a garden plot. Vegetables need dirt — not rocks — to grow (well, except for devil’s claw wild okra, but that’s a topic for another time). Have you ever seen a pickup going down the road with the bed resting on its springs, its front end swaying and front tires barely touching the ground with every bump? Yep. We bought 200 bags of topsoil and transported it to the garden. It’s easy to develop assembly line techniques when unloading and dumping 200 bags of topsoil. Later… much later… we found out all we needed was sieved, native dirt and horse… umm, manure.

Okay, so where to find a manure factory? Turns out my buddy Johnny Mangum, who raises and trains racehorses, also owns a front loader. He dumped a quarter ton of the stuff into the bed of my pickup and he didn’t laugh at me hardly at all. He has the front loader, but we have only our backs, arms, shovels, rakes, and a pitch fork.  Casey (our Chihuahua) couldn’t understand why for days we smelled like horse apples. We bought tomato plants — ten of them — and tomatoes clearly LOVE horse manure. Each plant, even the cherry tomato, was over four feet high and about 4 feet around. The beefsteak was probably six feet high and a good six feet around.

That was our year, live and learn. For one thing, we learned not to plant so many freakin’ tomatoes! We feel about tomatoes like Forest Gump felt about shrimp. We have dried tomatoes, boiled tomatoes, frozen tomatoes, tomato soup, tomato juice, tomato spaghetti sauce, tomato salsa, and enough of all of those to last several years. Ever had tomato enchiladas? They’re wonderful. Dry cereal in tomato juice? Tomato pies, tomato cakes, tomato candles, tomato soap, and I recently topped off the differential in my pickup with 90 weight tomato oil. Ahem…  

So there’s an example for you of a “creative” Christmas letter. Anyway, hope you have a great Christmas. And if you need any tomatoes, let us know. 

Special Announcement: I just received telephone confirmation that we have secured a new space in Tucson for our Writing the World seminars. I’ll publish the seminar schedule for 2010 later this week.

‘Til next time, happy writing!

Harvey

The Writing the World seminars are now available on DVD! See http://stonethread.com. Also, for a limited time, I’m offering a package deal on Punctuation for Writers and its companion, Writing Realistic Dialogue & Flash Fiction. Buy both now, signed by the author, for $25, including shipping. For information, email h_stanbrough@yahoo.com.

A Room of One’s Own

Hi Folks,

A while back, in response to my plea for topics for this blog, Hugh Starkey wrote “a question that comes up quite often among writers at all levels of experience has to do with what constitutes the perfect writing space. As Virginia Wolf once put it, ‘Give me a room of my own.’ J. K. Rowling wrote much of Harry Potter in coffee shops, and Wayne Dyer once rented office space.”

Hmmm… I remember hearing or reading somewhere that the great poet, Dylan Thomas, actually built a second house, a small cottage, just down the hill from the house he shared with his wife. Seems she had quickly grown tired of hearing him “rant at all hours of the day and night” (reading his work aloud and e-mo-ting, don’tcha know). 

Several years ago I saw an interview on television with (I believe) either Ray Bradbury or Isaac Asimov. Whoever it was, his “writing space” office walls were lined with shelves on which sat an eclectic mixture of odds and ends: masks from Africa, a drum or two, a few Matchbox cars, figurines of every sort carved of stone and wood, etc. He said when he wanted to write but lacked inspiration, he had only to sit at his desk and look about his room for a few moments, that at least one story resided in each part of his collection.

The famous poet and national icon, Richard Moore, recently passed. I’m not certain of his writing space, never having found time to visit and take advantage of his wide-open hospitality, but having read much of what he wrote and having been fortunate to enjoy occasional correspondence with him over the past several years I strongly suspect his writing space was a mish-mash similar to the one described above. I wish, now, that I’d broached the topic with him. 

Jack Williamson—the Science Fiction Grand Master whose first works were published in pulp magazines before there even was a genre called science fiction and from whose wonderful mind came such now-common words and phrases as “android” and “humanoid” and “terraforming” and  “prime directive”—wrote in an office in his home in Portales, New Mexico. His office also was lined with shelves, floor to ceiling, but his shelves were neatly arranged and contained one copy of each of his novels in each language. At age 92, he was still turning out two novels per year for Tor.

I know a very successful novelist whose “writing space” is not a physical place but the connection between her mind and her laptop. She pulls out her laptop, most often in a hotel room or her office (she’s also a successful business woman), reads the last few lines of what she’s written, and begins writing again. It’s an amazing process to behold.

Another extremely good novelist, whose work is not yet published but is placed with a nationally well-known agent, does most of her work on her laptop as well, while sitting in a coffee shop.

If you’re curious, my own writing space used to be wherever I happened to be. When I was on the road a lot speaking at conferences and my only computer was a cumbersome HP that remained at home where it took up entirely too much of my desktop, my writing space was a hotel room or a lobby or a large rock near a pond or a patch of grass beneath a palm tree outside the hotel. I always carried with me a pen and either a yellow legal pad or a spiral notebook. And I wrote. Later, back at my desk, I’d perform the first rewrite as I transcribed what I’d written to the computer. But I digress… today my writing space is a small room in my home, replete with shelves (yes, on which reside a mish-mash of idea starters) and a vintage 1930s single-pedestal maple desk I bought at an estate sale. The lady said it was only right that I should buy the desk. She ran a delicate, fragile hand along its leading edge. “My husband spent many, many hours writing his novels at this desk.” How could I refuse? When I sit at this desk now, I feel as if I’m part of it, or it’s part of me, and we, in concert with my laptop, are a writer.

So back to the question. As Hugh so aptly put it, “What makes a space perfect for writing, or is there such a thing?”

Comfort and routine, Hugh—comfort and routine comprise the perfect writing space, not only physically but mentally and emotionally. Put yourself in an environment you enjoy, one with which you’re an integral part, one in which you feel completely safe and warm, one in which you can establish and maintain that ethereal connection between the mind and the page, a place where outside influences fade into white noise and you can focus on the love at hand. I know, it’s “the task at hand.” But isn’t “love” a better word to describe what occurs between the writer and the page during that very special time?

What about you? What is the “perfect writing space” for you?

Until next time, happy writing.

Harvey

Special Announcement: Want Writing the World writing seminars? The following are now available on DVD: 

• Creating Realistic Characters
• Conveying Emotion Through Dialogue
• Point of View & Narrative Voice

Writing Realistic Dialogue and Writing Electric Narrative are coming soon. Many more coming early next year. For information, please click http://StoneThread.com.

Got writing friends? Christmas is coming. Punctuation for Writers (http://www.booklocker.com/books/4056.html) and Writing Realistic Dialogue (http://www.amazon.com/) would make excellent Christmas gifts.

A Quick Guide to Punctuation for Writers

Hi folks,

Since I’ve written and published a book called Punctuation for Writers, the first of which went through two printings and the second edition of which has just come out, I thought it was high time I posted an entry on punctuation. Here it is, quick and dirty:

Whether you’re a beginning writer or an old pro, punctuation is one of the most important but overlooked tools in your inventory. Consisting of nothing more than a system of agreed‑upon symbols, it shows readers where to pause, indicates the length of the pause, and alerts them to the relationship between what they have just read and what they are about to read. The keyword here is pause, and the most important thing to remember is that the writer controls the pause, and by its use directs the reading of the work. Punctuation should not be used simply because some rule somewhere says to use it in a given case. Rather, it should be used intentionally to enhance the reader’s understanding.

Bear with me here. Conisder, in school, we typically learn about punctuation from the viewpoint of a reader (punctuation as a mild form of direction), but we seldom have a chance to consider it from the viewpoint of a writer (punctuation as a valuable tool). Ours is a living, breathing, necessarily flexible language. The rule says to join two independent clauses with a comma and a coordinating conjunction:

John’s eyes snapped open, and he sat bolt upright in bed. Something isn’t right. 

But the comma, as you can see (and as you’ll hear if you read the example aloud) interrupts the action. As a writer, I don’t want to interrupt the action at this particular point, in this particular sentence. I’m trying to get the reader involved in the story. (I mentioned this awhile back in the post on Creating Flow.) I want the reader to feel this tension himself, so I want to rush the reader through the sentence. I don’t want him to pause, so I would omit the comma:

John’s eyes snapped open and he sat bolt upright in bed. Something isn’t right. 

I hope you’re thinking Hmm… okay, maybe it’s all right to break the rule in that case. But my point here is we don’t need rules in any case. As a writer, I need to know only two things:

1. How the reader will react to a given mark of punctuation every time he encounters it, and
2. How I want the reader to react to a given sentence or situation in my story or book or poem.

I can teach you, right now, in this blog post, how the reader will react to each mark of punctuation every time he encounters it. If you pay attention, when you finish reading this post you can throw away your Strunk & White, your HarBrace, and any other book that simply regurgitates the rules. Here you go:

Long‑pause punctuation is used in normal writing (prose or poetry) only at the end of a complete thought. Yes, that’s per the “rules” but it’s used there because it forces the reader to take the longest pause he’s going to take while he’s reading. Don’t use it because a rule tells you to; use it because you want the reader to pause for a long time. (The long pause gives the reader’s brain time to digest what it’s just seen and get ready for the next item.) Long-pause punctuation consists of

• the period, which indicates the end of a declarative (normal) sentence;
• the question mark, which indicates the end of a direct question;
• the exclamation point, which indicates the end of a command or to show strong emotion, surprise, or disbelief;
• and the colon, which is used at the end of a complete thought to call attention to forthcoming important information. The colon is also used following a complete thought to introduce a list; for example, “These are my favorite things: whiskey, horses and women.” Finally, a brief note of caution—a colon should never be inserted between a verb and its object. After all, it forces a long pause, and who wants the reader to pause as if he’s hit a period in the middle of a sentence? (Compare the use of the colon with the use of the em dash, below.)

Medium‑pause punctuation, which consists of the semicolon, the em dash, and the parentheseses, is transitional; that is, it shows the reader that what follows is very closely related to what she just read.

• In creative writing, the semicolon is most commonly used to join two closely related independent clauses. (The medium pause, as opposed to the longer pause forced by long-pause punctuation) allows the reader to “rush” to the second independent clause. In this way, the semicolon has the ability to show cause and effect or contrast:

Mary walked to school in the rain; she was drenched clear through.

Don’t use the semicolon because a rule tells you to; use it because you want the reader to pause for a shorter time than he would pause for this period.

• In creative writing, the em dash is most often used to indicate the abruptness of an interruption or a break in thought. When it’s used to indicate a break in thought, it should be used in pairs:

Our car—one that had lasted us most of our lives—finally gave out.

• The em dash also is used after a list to introduce the sentence (compare with the colon, above):

Whiskey, horses and women—these are my favorite things.

• In creative writing, parentheses usually are not used except to enclose parenthetical (extra) information. If the information is nice to have but not really necessary, you can subdue (quiet) it with parentheses. If you want the information to stand out, set it off with em dashes (see above) instead. If you want it to have the same weight as the rest of the sentence, set it off with commas. Look at this example I used earlier:

Our car—one that had lasted us most of our lives—finally gave out.

Our car, one that had lasted us most of our lives, finally gave out.

Our car (one that had lasted us most of our lives) finally gave out.

The only short pause punctuation is the comma. Besides using commas to connect clauses, we also use them to separate three or more items (words,  phrases, or clauses) in a series and to bracket (set off) parenthetical information in a sentence. I used to assume that most writers know how to use commas, but my experience as an editor proved me wrong. If you will follow these brief rules and break them only intentionally and only for a very good reason, you will make the reading experience much smoother for your reader: 

1. Never place a comma between a subject and its verb or between a verb and its object. (Realize that a subject may have more than one verb and that a verb may have more than one object.)
2. When a subordinate clause introduces an independent clause, separate the two clauses with a comma. (If you aren’t sure about clauses, Rule #2 is an example of itself, as is this explanation.)
3. Do not use a comma when a subordinate clause follows an independent clause. (In Rule #3, “Do not use a comma” is an independent clause and the remainder is a dependent clause.)
4. Use a comma before the appropriate coordinating conjunction to join two related sentences. (The coordinating conjunctions are for, and, nor, but, or, yet, and so.)
5. When you are in doubt about whether to use a comma, leave it out.

Finally, what I refer to as spelling punctuation are symbols that are used almost exclusively to form either new words or different versions of old words. Unlike true punctuation, these symbols do not create a pause when they are used:

The hyphen, which is used with the prefixes ex‑, self‑, and all‑, the suffix ‑elect, and between any two words that function as a single word, has no spaces on either side. It is also used between two or more adjectives that describe a single noun and between the words of spelled‑out fractions and spelled‑out numbers from twenty‑one to ninety‑nine (or twenty‑first to ninety‑ninth). I covered the hyphen, the em dash, and the en dash in an earlier post.

The apostrophe is used to show possession and to form contractions, but don’t use it to form plurals. Personal pronouns do not take an apostrophe to show possession (i.e., “it’s” = it is; “its” = belonging to it). The apostrophe also is used to indicate “single quotation marks” or “single quotes,” but it’s most often misused in this regard. Single quotation marks should be used only when a character, in dialogue, is exactly quoting another character word for word. Most of the time, there’s no need for that. When in doubt, paraphrase.

Quotation marks indicate direct quotes and short titles (songs, essays, short poems, short stories, etc.). Longer titles (books, CDS, TV shows, long poems, etc.) should be underlined, indicating italics. Or just set them in italics yourself.

Don’t let your inability to handle the little dots and dashes cost you a sale or confuse your reader. Your mastery of punctuation is a powerful tool that will save your editor some work, bring you that much closer to having your work published, and ensure your message is getting through to your reader.

Until next time, happy writing!

Harvey

For a lot more on punctuation as well as a grammar refresher, pick up your copy of the second edition of Punctuation for Writers at the Book Fair in Green Valley on December 5 or at any of my seminars. You can also order it online at http://www.booklocker.com/books/4056.html.

Taking a Break

Hi Folks,

Instead of tossing out writing advice today, I thought I’d share a few venues I’ve found, or that have come to me from others, that can be valuable to writers, depending on what you write. Let’s jump right in:

BookLocker—If you’re considering self-publishing, I strongly recommend you take some time to browse www.BookLocker.com. I know the owners, Richard and Angela Hoy, personally and I vouch for their honesty. In fact, having published on the traditional-publishing side of the fence before, I now publish exclusively with BookLocker. On their site, they provide straight answers to the hard questions. For example, at http://publishing.booklocker.com/reasons-not-to-use-us/ they list several reasons not to use POD (Print on Demand) publishing. On the other hand, if you decide POD is right for you, check out their submission guidelines at http://publishing.booklocker.com/publishing/. You even get to see their contract. You’ll be surprised when you learn that BookLocker charges considerably less in set-up and printing fees than do other POD publishers. You can also find what Angela calls the Print on Demand industry’s “dirty little secret” at http://publishing.booklocker.com/secret.php. Also, unlike most other POD publishers, BookLocker does not accept just any old group of words that are thrown at them. If they feel your book is not a good investment, they won’t accept it for publication. Finally, I also strongly recommend signing up to have Angela’s weekly newsletter sent to your email inbox (it’s free) at http://www.writersweekly.com/. In it, she lists several paying markets as well as valuable insights and information that you probably can’t find anywhere else.

The Author’s Roost—A dear friend passed along The Author’s Roost (http://www.authorsroost.com/), “an interactive resource portal for authors, writers and public speakers who would like to extend their spheres of influence by becoming more available to the media and to other communicators.” According to my correspondent, the gentleman who runs this, Joe Carroccio, was the editor of Arizona Goodlife magazine for several years. I suggest you check it out.

Press Kits—Carol Barnes has put together an article titles “The Author’s Press Kit—What Is It? Do I Need One?” Visit http://carolebarnes.com and click the Article link at the top right corner of the page.

Rose & Thorn—I strongly suggest you drop by Rose & Thorn, the literary magazine that two of my friends are now editing. Take a look at www.roseandthornjournal.com. This is an aesthetically pleasing literary e-zine. You will find some excellent fiction and poetry here, and well presented. Scroll to the bottom of the page to find submission guidelines.

Our Stories—I’ve only recently found this one myself. Good fiction and great contests.  Take a look at http://www.ourstories.us/.

Predators & Editors—Many people already know about this next one, but in case you don’t and you want to know whether an agent or editor or publishing company is legit, take a look at http://anotherealm.com/prededitors/. This is “a guide to publishers and writing services for serious writers.” This site is loaded with information, including whether agents charge fees (legitimate ones don’t), what other writers have to say about particular agents and publishers, etc.

Here are some more links from my Friends of StoneThread page. Some are invaluable for writers:

Abney’s Typing Service—Teresa Abney offers much more than a typing service. Check it out at www.abneystypingservice.webs.com.

Authorlink—An important site that brings together editors, agents, writers, and readers. www.authorlink.com

The People’s Poet—The actual site is now closed, but they still carry several great links for poets and writers. www.thepeoplespoet.com

St. Louis Writers’ Guild (SLWG)—A thriving, multi-genre writers’ organization based in St. Louis, Missouri. These folks are serious about what they do and have a vibrant website. www.stlwritersguild.org. Also be sure to visit their literary blog at www.stlwritersguild.org/wordpress/index.php. You don’t have to be a member to glean some great information here.

Winning Writers—Winning Writers finds the best resources and contests for poets and other creative writers. For the second year in a row, this excellent site was recently named to the Writer’s Digest list of “101 Best Websites” and won the Preditors & EditorsTruly Useful Site Award for March 2006. Visit www.winningwriters.com

Word Journeys—The beautiful, well-designed site of Bob Yehling, offering interviews and a plethora of services for writers, including online classes, marketing help, and the Writes of Life SeriesTM. www.wordjourneys.com

Richard Moore—The website of a renowned American poet, offering poems, epigrams, information concerning his books, and much more. www.richardmoorepoet.home.att.net (Note: It’s come to my attention that Richard Moore recently passed from this life. I strongly urge you to visit this site while you can.)

B. E. Warne—A website in progress that offers tips and warnings regarding website design, continuity guides for some TV shows (this is a great resource for writers—think about it) and other features. www.bewarne.com

Mitch Whitington’s World of Writing—This crazy Texan’s many tips include press kit information and other links for writers. A fun and informative site. www.whitington.com

Treble Heart Books—Check out this great publisher in Sierra Vista, Arizona! Lee Emory publishes westerns, romances, SF, Fantasy, Horror, Mysteries and others. www.trebleheartbooks.com

Writing the World—I almost forgot to list this bit of self-promotion. See http://stonethread.com/events.html for the current schedule of Writing the World seminars. I’ve added (or will soon add) new seminars to the list.

Finally, here are a few more I haven’t checked out personally, but thought some of you might find them useful. Most of these have to do with Science Fiction and Fantasy:

Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America: http://www.sfwa.org

SFWA Bulletin (Professional journal): http://www.sfwa.org/bulletin

Writer Beware (Anti-scam site): http://www.sfwa.org/beware

Association of Authors’ Representatives: http://www.aar-online.org

Basement Full of Books: http://www.sff.net/bfob

Pitfalls of SF/F: http://www.vondanmcintyre.com/pitfalls.html

Do you know of any great writers’ resources you’d like to share? If so, let me know and I’ll do my best to get the word out. Also, if you have a topic that would be of interest to most writers and would like to see it addressed in this blog, email me your ideas at h_stanbrough@yahoo.com. If I use your idea, I’ll give you your choice of a free book or free admittance to one of my Writing the World seminars.

That’s it for now. Until next time, keep writing!

Harvey

The Second Edition of Punctuation for Writers is now available at http://www.booklocker.com/books/4056.html in both print and electronic versions. With two new chapters and several new examples, you don’t want to miss this one. I’ll also have the print version available for sale at my seminars soon.