Martin: I don’t accept your catholic interpretation of my compulsive necessity to rewrite every word at least 1000 times. Guilt is the key, not sin, guilt. Re not writing the best that I can. Re not considering everything from every possible angle, balancing everything.
Hank: Well how about guilt, censoring your best thoughts. Your most honest primitive real thoughts. Because that is what your laborious rewriting amounts to.
Martin: Is rewriting really censorship, Bill? Because I’m completely fucked if it is.
Bill: Exterminate rational thought. That is the conclusion I have come to.
Martin: What is the man talking about, I’m being serious.
Hank: So is he.
From Naked Lunch (the movie)
I was reading an online review of a self-published book recently. It was on WordPress or something that allowed commentary not usually seen on Amazon. Most of the reviews were very positive, but one from a purulent looking woman was caustic. She did not complain about the story, but attacked what sounded like a relatively few grammar and punctuation inconsistencies. She, frankly, sounded like my college English professor who stated within the first few classes that she wanted to help change the way commas are used in written English. The author responded to the review, asking for specifics. Two were given, one which as written seemed to follow The Chicago Manual of Style - not that I believe Chicaugou is definitively the ultimate authority of all linguists.
Contrast that review with a written eulogy in a magazine I read a couple years ago. I do not remember the magazine, editor, or writer, but the editor wrote that on taking the editor position, he was initially frustrated by the now-deceased outdoor writer's poor use of grammar and especially punctuation. But, after working at the magazine for some time, he found the writers stories so compelling, that correcting the grammar became more of a calling, not a frustration. The writer, apparently, would occasionally end his written text with a series of punctuation marks; initially confused by this, the editor eventually decided this was an admonition by the writer that his writing wasn't always perfect, and it was the editors job to find the place for the trailing punctuation.
Some spelling, grammar, and syntax errors are a bit hard to understand as software like Microsoft Word and Google Chrome love to put squiggly lines under algorithmically identified errors. I'm not sure that these actions along with auto-correct are not partially to blame for any apparent deterioration in spelling; the mechanization of intellect.
This is not to say that there are not places for purulent grammarists. Our textbooks should be nearly perfect; my own experience is that they are often not. It is wise for the New York Times to have well-paid and capable copy editors.
This can be taken too far. At the risk of being overly cliche, the syntaxinista too often ignores the forest for the trees while ignoring the trees for the leaves.
The grammarist is too quick to send the classic car to the crusher due to a faulty window winding mechanism, rather than take a step back and enjoy the beauty of the car and the thrill of driving it on a perfect April day. The spelling police will self-righteously chortle at a misuse of bear when bare is meant (but is the spelling police sure?). The syntaxinista will quickly kill the newborn calf since the spots on the calf are not symmetrical between her left and right side, rather than enjoy the milk for years.
Tell me a story and keep me interested from the first word to the last. Write a book which is so filled with non sequiturs that I can't tell what is going on, but refuse to put it down. Make me late for work while I finish listening to a compelling story in parking lot. I'll accept the flaws in the writing. I'll ignore a tumbling of the words or the odd spelling mistake.
The human brain has the unbelievable ability to take a slightly garbled sentence and turn it into a completely comprehensible thought. We should embrace that ability when called on. I'll accept the sin of poor vocabulary if what is being said demands it.
Rather than anger or resentment, I feel pity for the purulent, caustic woman who was compelled to give a negative review on a book for a few spelling mistakes. In addition to her perfect use of punctuation, I hope she has something worth saying.
No comments:
Post a Comment