Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation
by Lynne Truss ISBN: 1592400876
Post Your Opinion | | A Review of: Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation by Michael Kinsella"Dancing with abandon, turning a tango into a fertility
rite."
Marshall
Pugh, The
Chancer
Apostrophe, comma, colon, semicolon, question, quotation and
exclamation marks, italics, dashes, brackets, ellipsis, hyphens and
solidus are all tackled with gusto by Lynne Truss in this showpiece
of a book. And in order to sex-up a subject, which at its most basic
level is about different kinds of interruption, Truss quotes from
Thomas McCormack's book The Fiction Editor, the Novel, and the
Novelist (1989), arguing that punctuation should "tango the
reader into the pauses, inflections, continuities and connections
that the spoken line would convey." This comparison with Latin
dance would like to be very suggestive. It is as if Truss wants to
promote punctuation as having deep tribal rhythms and ecstasies,
when, in actuality, putting marks upon a page is really about being
"a stickler" and about the preservation of "standards".
To be punctilious about punctuation might be redescribed, by a
Freudian, as a form of sublimation. Truss confesses, "while
other girls were out with boyfriends on Sunday afternoons, getting
their necks disfigured by love bites, I was at home with the wireless
listening to an Ian Messiter quiz called Many a Slip, in which
erudite and amusing contestants spotted grammatical errors in pieces
of prose. It was a fantastic programme." If to be fascinated
with punctuation is about not being sexual, then punctuation is,
in itself, an insistent signal that sabotages the sensual. James
Joyce knew this. And so Molly Bloom's final monologue in Ulysses
has no punctuation marks at all.
If punctuation must be compared to dance, it is certainly not doing
the tango. But it might be likened to the starched and mannequin-like
performances of the strictest ballroom. The feigned mannerisms of
ballroom dancing seem, to me, to be closer to Truss's favourite
definition for the function of punctuation-"a courtesy designed
to help readers to understand a story without stumbling." For
her, the analogy with good manners is "perfect," and she
goes on to argue, with an after dinner etiquette, that punctuation
marks are like "truly good manners"; they are
"invisible"; "they ease the way for others, without
drawing attention to themselves." And her comparison of questions
or quote marks with good manners, for example, gives some indication
that the ideal reader of this book would prefer Jane Austen and the
delicate ceremony of afternoon tea to the seduction of Latin rhythms.
Truss's exorbitant expressions of discontent about poor punctuation-it
will trigger a ghastly private emotional process similar to the
stages of bereavement'; part of one's despair'; It hurts, though.
It hurts like hell'-not only disclose that she is a terrible idealist
in search of a punctuation Utopia, but that her punctuation fetish
seems to be a covert way of talking about what it means to be English
and of discussing England's history, politics and its relationship
with the United States. For Truss's examples of punctuation use and
maltreatment suggest that beneath her story about "the tractable
apostrophe" or the classical colon, for instance, rage those
old debates that are partly about national identity-which interrupt
her tale as interesting as they are.
Reflecting on England's religious history, Truss argues that
"huge doctrinal differences" hung on the placing of a
comma. For example, "Verily, I say unto thee, This day thou
shalt be with me in Paradise" could also be "Verily I say
unto thee this day, Thou shalt be with me in Paradise." The
first is the Protestant version of Luke, xxiii, which "lightly
skips over the whole unpleasant notion of Purgatory and takes the
crucified thief straight to heaven with Our Lord," whereas the
second, "promises Paradise at some later date (to be confirmed,
as it were) and leaves Purgatory nicely in the picture for the
Catholics." Britain's union with Ireland is touched upon in
the case of the Irish rebel, Sir Roger Casement, who was also
"hung on a comma." Charged under the Treason Act of 1351,
Casement's defence argued that the law was unpunctuated and therefore
open to interpretation. But the magistrates, after consulting the
original statute, discovered a "helpful virgule", confirming
their interpretation of the law and his guilt. A similar example
is made with New Labour's infamous dossier on Iraq which reproduced
the punctuation errors from a thesis by an American doctoral student.
Another case, filed by Truss, demonstrates the importance of healthy
punctuating and how, if we ignore rules, we do so at "our
political peril as well as to our moral detriment." Yet, the
rules of punctuation-such as whether a full stop should come in or
outside quotation marks-do not just show how Britain and America
are separated by their comma practice. The different usages define
their divergent histories. And there are so many examples of Americans
misusing punctuation in this book that we might suspect Truss of
blaming the United States for things becoming so "outrageously
slipshod."
Eats, Shoots and Leaves is in many ways a lament, an elegy for a
lost world without proper punctuation, for the loss of "the
Queen's English" and the fact that the bulk of its shares are
now the property of the U.S. And Truss's sense of loss is about the
decay of the values she cherishes. She remembers how, as a teenager,
she blasted an American pen-pal "out of the water" because
of the punctuation and spelling errors in her letter; she cites,
with indignation, the misreading of a line from Macbeth, in a
production in New England, where, all because of a misplaced comma
the actor proclaimed "Go get him, surgeons" instead of
"Go, get him surgeons." The American writer, Gertrude
Stein, does not escape whipping. She is described as the "energetic
enemy to all punctuation" and denounced for her description
of the comma as "servile", the semicolon as
"pretentious", for being "uninterested" in the
question mark and for condemning the dash and italics.
Although there is fun to be had teasing out the furtive repressions,
politics and punctuation policies of Eats, Shoots and Leaves-even
if it is a little at Truss's expense-her entertaining and instructive
account on the uses and abuses of punctuation is not, at heart,
anti-American. It is, rather, a "rallying cry" that goes
in fear of the abandonment of standards, a "small islander's"
account of the invasion of Coca-colon and "emoticon"
cultures. She may be overly pessimistic about the effects of text
messaging, email and the internet, yet surely they have helped
punctuation speciate by giving, for example, the military-like full
stop, which calls a sentence to a halt, a rather transgressive,
camp side, online, called dot. We might even want to temper Truss's
claim that "proper punctuation is both the sign and the cause
of clear thinking." And if where we place punctuation, and the
marks we prefer is partly a matter of taste, as has been argued in
Eats, Shoots and Leaves, we might want to think of more versatile
and illuminating terms with which to describe our practice. Perhaps,
in this way, we could imagine flirtatious, democratic or superior
punctuation, rather than having a "zero tolerance approach"
with its tyrannical implication of correct and incorrect usage.
|