I may have addressed this already, but in the interests of both my sanity and new readers of my blog, I’m going to take it up again.
Repeat after me: it is no longer the convention to place two spaces between sentences.
To my amazement, this seems to be one of the most difficult changes to the way we produce copy for people to accept. And some simply don’t. One of my consulting clients, a marketing firm, has two very highly placed employees who refuse to believe me and continue to place the two spaces between sentences despite my constant and no doubt annoying entreaties to remove one of them. They’re both old enough to have taken typing classes on typewriters, so I’ll cut them a very little slack; but other clients, far younger, are having the same difficulty.
Yet there’s not a single usage guide today that advocates doing so. In fact, a colleague of mine tells me that when he was learning typesetting in 1954 he was told to not insert two spaces!
Typewriters use fixed-width or monosized fonts. Computer fonts (with the exception of Courier, meant to duplicate the look of a typewriter) do not. Treating computers like typewriters –– and making the assumption that rules that work with one will work with the other — is just plain silly.
There are a few resources out there that deal with this particular issue along with other transitions from fixed-font to variable-font devices: Robin Williams’ two books, The Mac is Not a Typewriter: A Style Manual for Creating Professional-Level Type on Your Macintosh (as well as an edition for PC users) are excellent if a little dated (they came out as revised editions in 1995).
A succinct summary of the convention is available in an article in Upper and Lower Case Magazine, Double Spaces Between Sentences … NOT!, in which the author, Ilene Strizver, notes,
Conversely, nearly all computer fonts (except Courier) have proportional spacing, which means that the width of the characters and the spacing surrounding them are in proportion to each other. Proportional spacing results in a more even, balanced appearance. Because of this, a single space is enough to create the necessary visual separation between sentences.
So … don’t do it. One space after punctuation (periods are most frequently abused, though some writers add double spaces after colons, semicolons, and even commas as well) is the current law of the publishing land. Don’t make your manuscript stand out because of its errors, especially one as easily fixed as this one (a global search-and-replace will take care of it nicely).
And then you’ll be … beyond the elements of style!
Posted in Doing the Right Thing, About Writing, Usage on June 29th, 2008
(It’s not just for SF fans anymore!)
It has often seemed to me that science fiction writers are the people most at home on the web, the people least surprised by its possibilities, the folks most likely to see its uses. This only makes sense: they are, after all, the ones most at ease with potential technology, spending their days writing coherent stories about complex possible worlds.
So it’s not surprising that they’ve come up with new and different ways to approach issues specific to writing and publishing.
During the early brouhaha over Publish America’s legitimacy (or lack thereof) as a publishing venue, it was a group of science fiction authors who banded together to disprove PA’s claim that it vetted manuscripts by composing a truly awful novel (that did, in fact, get accepted for publication). And it’s science fiction authors who co-host Predators and Editors, which has hopefully helped steer many unwitting authors-to-be in the right direction.
Not new, but not widely known, either, is the Turkey City Lexicon, a site meant to help science fiction writers workshop (or critique) each others’ work by giving them nice packages that say, far better than could any one individual, what might be problematic about a given passage. Named for the Austin, Texas workshop that was the cradle of cyberpunk, the lexicon has gone through a number of different editions (carefully uncopyrighted), and is as hilarious (and as thoughtful) today as it was back in 1988.
Here, for example, we can find Brenda Starr Dialogue (”long sections of talk with no physical background or description of the characters”), the Squid in the Mouth (”the failure of an author to realize that his/her own weird assumptions and personal in-jokes are simply not shared by the world-at-large. Instead of applauding the wit or insight of the author’s remarks, the world-at-large will stare in vague shock and alarm at such a writer, as if he or she had a live squid in the mouth”), and the Kudzu Plot (”Plot which weaves and curls and writhes in weedy organic profusion, smothering everything in its path”).
Much of what is offered in the Lexicon is, in fact, very good advice for anyone writing anything, and I highly recommend reading it, laughing over it, and taking it to heart. And then you’ll be … beyond the elements of style!
Posted in The Writing Life, About Writing, Fiction, Technology on June 25th, 2008
The Times of London recently made its 200-year archive available at the Times Archives.
The presentation is very user-friendly: you can use the site search functionality, of course, but you can also click on a scrolling timeline, which allows you to browse for something that may be of interest. As a historical novelist myself, I’m very excited about the potential here, both for research and also — frankly — for trolling for ideas!
You’ll also see a separate photograph archive, some featured articles, the ability to do a single-day search (along the lines of “this day in history”), and Times recommendations.
Why am I so excited? After all, the History Channel’s been offering something similar on its site for years.
The point is that this is primary source material. It’s not someone’s account of what may have happened, it’s what the newspaper reported happening. Authentic, not too biased (no reports are completely unbiased), and arranged in such a way that the user can get information quickly and easily.
Note that there is currently a free introductory period for use of the archives; it’s unclear what the cost will be later on down the line, but it’s sure to be well worth it to those of us needing the resource. It has my vote for Site of the Month, that’s for sure! Check it out yourself, and you’ll be … beyond the elements of style!
ADDENDUM: My colleague and friend Dick Margulis (he of Ampers&Virgule fame) has helpfully noted that “The date widget is day-month-year rather than the American-style month-day-year. So if someone is looking for news on a particular date, they should be careful to enter it in the right order.”
(You can tell that he’s beyond the elements of style!) Thank you, Dick!
Posted in Etc., Research, Ideas on June 21st, 2008
In the Tools for Writers category, I want to make sure that everyone out there knows about Google Alerts. Indeed, as Google moves forward in its plan for world domination, there are quite a few helpful applications it offers its willing subjects (I love Google Earth, for example), and one of them, Google Alerts, is almost indispensable as a marketing tool, a research tool, and a general find-out-what’s-going-on tool.
Google Alerts––still, surprisingly, in beta––sends you notices any time the keywords you’ve chosen get mentioned on the web. You can input your name as a Google Alert, your book title, or your general topic. I have a Google Alert for the word “stepmother,” for example, since I am one and hope someday to write something about it; it’s a great way to do research and accumulate resources.
If you have something specific you’re looking for, no problem. You can put the title of an article, for example, in quotation marks, and that brings in more results.
And it’s a marvelous marketing tool. When you’re sending out articles or press releases, Google Alerts will tell you where they’re being picked up. You can set up alerts for your name, for clients’ names, for various topics, etc., and it helps you see how successful you marketing efforts are. One other way to use Google Alerts in terms of marketing is to respond to reporters who are writing on topics similar to your own. Often if they just did a story on a topic, they might be willing to do a follow-up. It doesn’t always work, but it’s been fairly effective for me.
There are no limits on the number of Google Alerts you can set up, and they’re fairly easy to terminate at the end of a project or when your interest in a given topic wanes.
To try out Google Alerts for yourself, go here and fill in the form. And then you’ll be … beyond the elements of style!
Posted in Publicity, Tools, Creativity, Technology on June 19th, 2008
A client recently confessed to me, “I wouldn’t know the subjunctive if it bit me on the nose!” He sounded, if anything, somewhat pleased with the assertion, and part of me mourned as I heard it … just as I mourn the passing of any part of the language I love so well.
It reminded me of a conversation with Terry Bates, publisher of a wonderful series of ESL books, and I happily received Terry’s permission to reprint that conversation here:
Many people insist that English use the subjunctive mood more. This will probably never happen looking at the tendency during the last one hundred years. Other languages still heavily apply the subjunctive and this can be an essential learning experience for English speakers who usually have a weak subjunctive understanding.
First of all, you must remember that the subjunctive is not a verb tense in the sense of directly expressing time. Rather, it tries more to express attitude or manner. For that reason it is called mood.
The structure of the subjunctive in English is very easy in relation to other languages. It usually uses the root or base form and that’s it. Other languages go through very complicated conjugations of which are sometimes even difficult for native speakers. Even modern English has some complicated subjunctive structures. Many wish that the subjunctive were easier to understand.
In the examples that you give (”If she finish the day without company,” “unless she be blonde,” and “whether he do it or not”), they all express condition. If, unless, and whether communicate a sense of condition. Put into their historical context, they are put into a subjunctive mood.
Modal auxiliaries are related to mood. Notice that the word modal comes from the word mood. With the modal auxiliaries we express requests, possibilities, necessities, intentions, ability, etc. The English language has developed a very complicated and intricate use of modals for daily expression. This could be a answer to the slow loss of the subjunctive mood.
Mood and modals expose a very interesting aspect of language. They go beyond the superficial act of simple communication and begin to reveal the human condition. They reflect a people, their culture and the way they deal with each other. By fully understanding mood and modals, you begin to be more aware of the language and life of a society whether it be in the historical past or in the present.
The use of mood and modals is in constant change reflecting the change of society and the communication it demands. Even though many people feel that it is necessary that language stay static, changes within the English language reflect modifications that have taken place with the cultural demands of its speakers. Language changes just don’t happen illogically. They are due to cultural and historical reasons which in many cases are deeply hidden within tradition and trends of a society.
May the subjunctive live forever!
Terry Bates
terrybates@andeanwinds.com
www.terrybates.andeanwinds.com
And I think you’ll agree that Terry Bates (and Andean Winds!) is far … beyond the elements of style!
Posted in About Writing, Grammar, Words, Language on June 11th, 2008
It’s a sad fact of modern life, but most people, once published, spend an inordinate amount of time checking their book’s ranking on Amazon. I’ve done it. You’ve done it. We’ve all done it. We don’t necessarily know what it all means, mind you, but we do it anyway.
If you’d like to feed the obsession and have someone else keep up with the comparisons for you, then you might want to check out TitleZ, a website mysteriously still in its beta version (and therefore still free) that will help you navigate the complexities of Amazon ranking for your particular title.
Want to learn more about what it all means? Then check out this article, written by one of TitleZ’s developers (looking oddly like Harrison Ford, gotta love PhotoShop…) who gives the following bottom lines:
Bearing the above very much in mind, here’s a temperature gauge you can use to get an idea about a particular title’s success. The following numbers apply to average sales ranks over time:
- Less than 100: Best-seller. Author, publisher, agent are all getting rich
- 101-1000: Extremely good performer. Any publisher/author would be thrilled.
- 1001-10,000: Very successful book. A few of these can sustain a small publishing company.
- 10,001-50,000: A successful book by most industry standards.
- 50,001-100,000: Not bad.
- 100,000 - 500,000: Not good.
- 500,000 or more: Poor.
Keep in mind that books with average ranks above 100,000 may have performed much better before we started tracking them on TitleZ. However, books that launch with ranks above 100,000 are probably not considered successful from a publishing industry point of view. Of course, the book could be selling well through non-bookstore channels such as trade shows, speaking events, etc. In general, though, we’ve found that Amazon sales ranks provides a good indicator for how a title is doing throughout the book market as a whole.
Bear in mind, also, that Amazon isn’t everything. Write a good book, develop an aggressive marketing plan, and leave the counting to others.
If you can.
And then you’ll be .. beyond the elements of style!
Posted in Books, Publishing, Getting Published, Publishers, Words on June 8th, 2008
I was going through some old bookmarks in my web browser and came across an article published last year in HR World, a super compilation of why it makes sense to do what some of us do: 101 Reasons to Freelance.
Freelancing isn’t for everyone. If you need some sort of external discipline and structure in order to get things done efficiently, then it’s probably not a good thing to consider. If you’re just starting out as a writer or editor, it’s probably not a good idea, either: there’s something to be said for an apprenticeship, for learning one’s craft in a place where there are others to consult, to guide you, to show you how it’s done.
But if you read the article and it seems attractive, then it’s perhaps something you might want to explore. There are a number of books and websites available to help you with the nuts and bolts of freelancing, but you also need to consider the emotional side of the work.
I work best in silence and solitude. At the end of the day — literally — it’s nice to “go down the pub” and have a Guinness and talk to people; it’s good to have a writing group, as I do, and friends I can contact; but the core of my work happens in silence and solitude. And to me that’s really the best and the worst part of freelancing.
If that thought scares you, then it’s probably not for you. If you’re smiling at the thought, though, take a look at the article and see if it speaks to you. Either way, take a moment and consider what your life might be like if you made that choice, challenge yourself to see your life taking a different turn. No matter what you choose, as long as you’re always challenging yourself, you’ll be … beyond the elements of style!
Posted in Process Matters, About Writing, Words on June 5th, 2008
It’s been a lovely Sunday here in Provincetown, center of (my) universe: just warm enough, a breeze coming from the harbor, the Cape Cod Times consumed with lunch at an outdoor café. Sitting there I perused a brochure from a yoga studio that I’m considering attending — a great brochure, nicely designed, and it noted that the studio features an “alter.”
Was it me, or did a cloud just pass in front of the sun?
Now my family, of course, was quick to point out that no-one else in their right mind would have noticed, much less cared that altar is not spelled with an “e.” My spouse quickly envisioned a world in which I’d be the Spelling Queen, sitting on a throne of semicolons and exclamation marks, sentencing to die those who make sloppy mistakes such as those. We all had a good laugh about it.
But the reality is that I’m probably not going to go do yoga at that particular studio, and, yeah, it’s because of the brochure. If someone’s that sloppy about writing/proofing, they may well be sloppy about other things as well. Probably not; but I’m not taking that chance.
When I approach companies about doing marketing communications for them, most people’s first reaction is along the lines of, “I can write; anybody can write; we don’t need you to write.” Well, respectfully, no: many of us have been taught to write (though I’ve seen some of the grammar used by my stepchildren’s teachers and hold out no hope that schools are doing anything to increase correct spelling, usage, and grammar); but that doesn’t mean that we can all do it well. Or even correctly.
That yoga studio just lost a potential client. Can all businesses afford that kind of loss? Paying someone like me to write — or even simply edit — marketing communications is, at the end of the day, a bargain at any price. Those saavy enough to know their limits are the ones who will continue to prosper, even in a recession. And they’ll be … beyond the elements of style!
(Oh, and if you hurry, you can probably still get that brochure out of the rubbish …)
Posted in Frustration, The Writing Life, About Writing, Words, copywriting on June 1st, 2008
