The Passive-Aggressive Comma War

I'm reading August 10th, free, at Sideshow: Th...
Image by rachelkramerbussel.com via Flickr

I made the mistake of volunteering to write grant proposals for a small, local, non-profit organization.  I have a little background in what a grant needs to say, and I enjoy writing, so it seemed a natural fit to make a contribution to a worthwhile cause.  Like every new experience there was some learning involved, most of it in the frustrating, irritating and regretting category. 

After figuring out how to overcome the first hurdle, how to request money for administrative costs when foundations are loathe to donate money for just that reason, and then learning to maneuver the Giant Charity Dollar Consolidator’s computer system, I thought my task was largely accomplished.  Until I ran into the Comma Queen, the underpaid, highly detail-oriented program coordinator of this unnamed local non-profit.  That’s Program Coordinator with a Capital P, Capital C as I was reminded in the first round of edits.  She also declared that a comma should be inserted in every series of nouns before the ‘and’ — papers, pens, and pencils. 

Whereas I was under the impression that particular comma style had been retired sometime in the ‘70’s and was no longer the standard.  After the third editing round-about, late the night before the grant deadline, I threw up the white flag and added in the last of the missing serial commas for the Comma Queen. 

Once the dust settled from our Passive-Aggressive Comma War, I decided to seek out who was right, me or the Comma Queen.  I found an old high school grammar text book, a 1965 edition of the Modern Grammar and Composition which is clearly marked THIS BOOK IS THE PROPERTY OF THE STATE.  The three students who were issued the book from 1966 through 1968 had signed their names on the front inside cover, the last being my brother-in-law.  Why it’s on my bookshelf, at a distance of a thousand miles, two states and  four decades, is a mystery to me.  Nevertheless, it served my purpose even if it is a crime of possession that hopefully the State of Texas never discovers.

Well, round one goes to the Comma Queen.  The text clearly showed that a comma is required before the ‘and’ in a series.  That was in 1965.  Unconvinced, I sought out more current sources of expertise and it turns out the series comma is an either or situation.  In journalism, the series comma, or as it’s referred to by some, the Oxford comma or even the Harvard comma, was dropped for expediency.  In literature it’s still the standard.

I was satisfied with a draw in the Passive-Aggressive Comma War.  However, after reading more about it, I must admit there are times when that extra comma makes for better clarity.  Example — I owe my life to my two brothers, Chloe and Lucy.

My brothers aren’t named Chloe and Lucy.  The intent was to identify three subjects, not two with subsequent names.  It’s misleading without the series comma.  There are lots of other examples on when the series comma is necessary. And, some claim, for consistency sake, it should always be used.

So now I’m going to have to sit down with the Comma Queen and show her the difference, when it’s needed and when it’s not.  Maybe then we can sign a treaty, calling an end to the Passive- Aggressive Comma War.  Hopefully negotiations will be concluded before the next grant proposal comes around.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Crash Course in Literacy: Part 3

Self made image of Eastern Cottontail
Image via Wikipedia

My previous book to brainwash convince my young illiterate that reading was fun was Call of The WildCall of The Wild is about a dog.  Everybody loves dogs and so even someone who’s new to reading should be able to get into the story.  Who doesn’t like stories about animals?

Watership Down is about a bunch of rabbits.  The first time I heard about the book was when I was reading The Stand.  Stu Redman of Texas is not much of a reader but buys Watership Down as a gift, for a niece if memory serves.  Stu supposed from the title the book was about some kind of shipwreck but he reads the first page and finds out it’s about a bunch of rabbits.  He can’t put it down and reads the whole thing in about two days. 

It was years later when I saw a copy laying around my house (still don’t know how it got there but I don’t question the book faeries) and had a similar experience to ol’ Stu’s.  I remembered Stephen King’s brief description and there was a rabbit on the cover so I wasn’t quite as surprised; but I was captivated.  By the middle of the first page I was totally in the world of these rabbits and the more I read the more immersive that world became.  Unlike Buck, these rabbits talk.  They in fact have their own language, myths and legends, and the world we see is wholly theirs. 

Some people label it allegory but that misses the mark.  Certainly there are political themes; each warren runs on a recognizable ‘political’ system.  Fiver and his small band’s search for freedom and sovereignty while respecting the individual should appeal to any red blooded American despite the quite English flavor of the book.  But these aren’t representations of people.  The characters are rabbits and this is an heroic tale about rabbits. 

Because the characters are bunnies (though not all of them are cute) the book is often considered children’s lit.  It is children’s lit and Adams started by telling the stories to his daughters.  But they made him write it down and we owe them because it’s damn good children’s lit.  The kind of book that if you read it when you’re nine you can read it over and over again and love it more each time. 

That makes it a perfect book to get someone like my poorly read protege to love reading.  So perfect that I debated putting this one before Fahrenheit 451.  If you haven’t read it, I insist you do so as soon as possible.  If it’s been a few years, like it has for me, then I suggest you give it another read.  In fact I think I’m gonna put that in my new Kindle right now.   

Enhanced by Zemanta

creative writing + self analysis

In our writing group, which all of the posters on this blog belong to, we have been picking a “logline” prompt to at least have one defined writing “assignment” to complete for each meeting.  A couple of weeks ago, I rejoined the writing group in earnest after an extended absence and brought this piece to the meeting.  While discussing it, I pointed out that there are a couple of style “traits” that show up in my stuff.  So, I am going to do some commentary on those traits after you read the piece.

Logline: Two sensible circus performers wage war against each other.

—————————————–

“And this, kind sir, is where I landed,” Stefano Graziosi stated, gesturing with pointed finger at an oh so slight indentation in the soft packed earth, “after falling from up there,” he continued, swinging that same finger to point at the neatly broken ends of a high trapeze.  Between the two points were situated several layers of netting, each with a man sized tear in the middle.

“And were you hurt in any way?” asked the other man, who, in his three piece suit, looked quite out of place under the big top as various performers bustled about, readying themselves for the matinee show.  “I would hate to fill out these insurance claim forms if there was really no injury sustained.”

“I landed deftly, I can assure you,” retorted Stefano, “I am a professional! Which is more than I can say for him,” this last phrase punctuated by a tilting toss of the head to indicate someone who was elsewhere.  “I still want to file the report, since this has been escalating of late.  Last week my tightrope was slackened a smidge and the week before that my slack rope was tightened just perceptibly.  I simply cannot entertain the children under these circumstances!  I am a”

“Professional, yes, I understand.  Well, I have a similar short stack of reports as filed by Mr. Corvallis, indicating that you have also engaged in random bits of minor subterfuge, interrupting his act.  None too severe so as to completely ruin a performance, they were more like annoyances.  If I didn’t know any better, I would think your hearts just weren’t into it.”

“Well,” replied Stefano thoughtfully, “the show must go on!”

—————————————–

So, the first thing to bring up is that I eat my own dog food on character names and got all of these from my spam folder as mentioned in a previous blog post of mine.  That there was a great name for a circus acrobat was a big plus!

The second trait I noticed occurs in the first paragraph where I interleave some action and dialogue, continuing a gesture as the speech also continues.  I think this comes from having written screenplays and trying to convey the “mind picture” around the words.

The third trait I noticed occurs during the interplay of the two characters where the insurance investigator completes the sentence of the acrobat.  I think this comes from actively developing an ear for “real world” dialogue where people often talk over each other.  This doesn’t always play very well when overused in screenplays, but I used it here with a callback for effect.

These traits are by no means present in everything I write, but they show up often enough -or- are something I have actively worked on refining over time.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Crash Course in Literacy: Part 2

I’m not sure why but when I made my five book reading list for my barely literate young man, I had a specific order in mind for the books.  Fahrenheit 451 was first because it’s fairly short and straightforward making for an accessible and enjoyable read with the ‘big ideas’ right there to grasp.  The next book is Call of The Wild by Jack London.  It’s longer yet still a pretty straightforward adventure story but has some more subtle things going for it.  It also has some fond personal memories so maybe I’ll go at it from that angle.

I don’t know about these days but there was a time when this novel was considered a classic ‘boy’s book’ like Old Yeller or The Yearling.  Perhaps it’s the adventure aspect which gets it cast as juvenile literature but it’s actually pretty dark and melancholy with some pretty intense scenes of violence and survival.  I couldn’t have been more than ten when I read it which, in retrospect, might have been a little young.  Not because a boy can’t handle the dark tone but because the underlying theme of Buck finding his way back to his wild and wolfish roots and the artful way London lays it out, might be lost on a young boy.

Buck, if you haven’t read it, is a dog.  A big and content domesticated dog in a respectable and comfortable California house.  The gardener of the household steals Buck and sells him and the dog is sent to Alaska.  The story takes place during the Klondike Gold Rush so sled dogs and their importance is a big deal.  Buck is taken on by a pair of French Canadians who train him for that kind of work.  Eventually he learns the ways of the pack well enough to challenge the lead dog.  Buck wins that fight and the loser is killed by the rest of the pack.

It was this fight and the aftermath where I started to get the idea that there was more going on here.  Even though Buck is the protagonist it’s not from his point of view.  We don’t hear his thoughts in English or anything like that.  We simply see what he does and the reactions of the humans around him and the reader has to determine what that really means.  In the case of the fight, the sledders are less concerned with the loss of one dog and instead admire Buck and his refusal to pull until he’s given his rightful place at the head of the pack.  He’s now a competent and valuable sled dog and he’s sold again to a family of greenhorns who are woefully ill prepared for life in the Klondike.  It was at this point that the book takes a big place in my personal memories.

My dad saw I was reading it and started to ask me what I thought.  My dad read a lot but usually military histories of the twentieth century and non-fiction books about the Old West.  Over the years though he would occasionally surprise me with some more ‘bookish’ literary knowledge.  This was the first of those times.  He had read it when he was a boy and now we shared that as father and son.  He never lectured me, just asked me where I was in the story and what I thought about what was happening.

In this manner I was able to realize that London wanted me to be disgusted with the greenhorns’ incompetence.  Buck eventually takes up with Thornton, a man who is much more in tune with Buck’s indomitable spirit.  Buck isn’t Thornton’s property but rather his companion and when Buck starts to hear that Call, Thornton doesn’t stop him.  Again, if you haven’t read it I won’t spoil the exact manner of the ending.  But Buck finally heeds the call and runs off into the Wild.  It was a deeply affecting book for a young boy made personal by sharing it with my father.  Since my young friend hasn’t read it I hope the same effect would make him hungry for more books with the same power.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Crash Course in Literacy

Jan van Eyck 059

My last post, Read a Book You Idiot, got some great responses so thank you all for reading.  As promised I came up with a five book list for my young friend.  It was actually a little easier than I expected since I had a specific person in mind and a specific goal for the books.  I jotted down eight off the top of my head and picked the five I thought best suited to the purpose.  First the list and I’ll talk about each in turn.  And keep the comments coming especially your own book lists.  I’m always interested in what others feel are must-reads and why.  Besides, Santa just got me a Kindle and it’s a good way to get new book suggestions.

My List:

  • Fahrenheit 451
  • Call of the Wild
  • Watership Down
  • Lord of the Flies
  • No Country for Old Men

Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury

I went back and forth between this one and Nineteen Eighty-Four.  Both are  typically cast as Sci-Fi and both are dystopian futures.  Both were cautionary tales that turned out to be eerily prophetic but I went with Bradbury for a few reasons.

It’s a tad more accessible for one.  1984 is a good book but it’s dense.  451 has a tight pace with a lot more of an ‘action movie’ flair complete with killer robot chase scenes.  Montag is also more of an active protagonist than Winston Smith and easier to get behind and really root for.

The big reason though is that Fahrenheit 451 has an great element of discovery for a new reader.  Most people who haven’t read the book have at least heard of it and think it’s about censorship in the early stages of the Cold War.  That’s pretty much what I thought until I read it.  By the time I did read it most of the things that Bradbury was making up were in full swing.  Constant and mind numbing entertainment, overmedication, obsession with television shows and participating in them, personal communication that kept people ‘plugged in’ to the network while they ignored the person right next to them.  It’s pretty recognizable as our society right now.

The big idea and discovery though is that it’s not really about censorship which is simply some government or authority trying to control what you read (and think).  The Firemen are acting for the government of course but it’s the society’s and the individual’s willing complicity that’s the point.  These people have chosen to be mindless consumers simply because it’s easier than thinking.  A bit on the nose perhaps if you’re trying to get a young fella to read a book instead of texting his idiot friends.  Still, it’s a good book and a quick read and a decidedly more hopeful ending than 1984.

Enhanced by Zemanta