I suspect our estrangement -- the semi and me -- is traceable to the legacy of that darned 1903 textbook advising teachers to steer students in the direction of periods whenever they were "tempted to use a semicolon." You know, I actually do remember high school writing teachers discouraging their use. Like they could be dangerous in the hands of the inexperienced. Like they belonged in those categories of subjects we should only broach once we got older, like alcohol or sex. Funny -- isn't it? -- that punctuation can conjure such visceral memories.
I suppose I should respect the fact that this is unlikely to be interesting to anyone other than fellow editors and grammar geeks. Ok. Yes, I do happen to find it endlessly fascinating when the forward motion of real life (especially legal cases; they get life-and-death dramatic) gets stuck in the snare of misused punctuation. I collect those stories like precious gems. But maybe it's better I leave all those sweet nothings for Bryan Garner's ears. (Oh! Bryan! And then the lawyer said, "Clearly the ruling finds my client innocent. These clauses were separated by commas -- not semicolons." Mmmm...Are you close sweetheart?)
But one particular thought in the article struck me as being universally poignant:
[in 1943] the Times editorialized against 'the war that is being waged in some quarters on the semicolon.' Their favored villain was now 'the writer of action fiction. ...The semicolon is the enemy of action; it is the agent of reflection and meditation.'The semicolon as an agent of reflection and meditation; how lovely a thought is that? In fact, even hoping it could be true makes me want to interject semicolons everywhere; there I'll go; dropping them now with devil-may-care abandon.
Shameless! Rebellious!
Oh, I know.
No comments:
Post a Comment