 |
| Positively scrumptious: Vermont Maple Cookies! Click here for the recipe. |
I am sick again. If I'm not better by Monday I will have to cart myself off to the doctor's and pay too much money for advice that comes from a laptop. "Any nausea?" "Yes." Tap, tap, tap. "Body aches?" "Yes." Tap, tap, tap. "Swollen glands?" "I think so." Tap, tap, tap. Doctor looks up from screen with self-satisfied smile: "It looks like you have ___ , but we'll do these five lab tests to be sure."
When I was a kid I thought that doctors were super heroes. They were better, smarter, more dedicated to the good of humanity than the rest of us. Now I feel like they are primarily business people with special computers and a license.
What does the word "care" mean in our culture? I care about you. I will take care of you. She is a care giver...I no longer have a sense of this word. It could mean anything. It could mean tapping on a computer screen, running some tests, and sending me a bill for $500.00.
~*~
A lot of the snow has melted. There are patches of green showing everywhere. I am beginning to believe in spring again. Here is the thing about belief: it is born out of experience. I believe in spring because it has come every year at the same time, and I can see the signs of it coming now.
It is no surprise when I plant a seed and it grows. It's a wonder, but not a surprise; you see, I always believed it would grow--that's why I planted it. No, the surprise comes when I put a seed in the ground and nothing happens. That's, when my brow furrows with worry and I think, what happened?
Nine years ago when I was becoming Catholic I understood quickly that there is a wide chasm between what the Church teaches and what Catholics actually believe. The Church teaches that contraception goes against God's holy plan for marriage. I look around my mostly Catholic neighborhood and wonder, so where are all the children? The reality is that most American Catholics don't believe in God's plan for marriage. They believe in their own plans.
No matter what kinds of things people say, our lives bear witness to what we really believe. "Don't smoke, it's bad for you," says a mother to her child as she lights another cigarette. "We need to support American workers!" says the man who drives a Toyota.
~*~
How important are rules to you? Do you color within the lines? Are you conventional or an original? A free spirit or dutiful traditionalist? Which is better? Is one better?
Think about it for a moment.
"It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word." That quote has been attributed to both Old Hickory (Andrew Jackson) and Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens).
In his autobiography Mark Twain wrote:
I never had any large respect for good spelling. That is my feeling yet. Before the spelling-book came with its arbitrary forms, men unconsciously revealed shades of their characters and also added enlightening shades of expression to what they wrote by their spelling, and so it is possible that the spelling-book has been a doubtful benevolence to us.
I've been reading about punctuation and spelling. As a teacher and as someone who likes to write, these topics interest me. I am neither a free spirit nor a stickler about these things. For the most part I follow convention (but, then, I am naturally a good speller), however, I don't see punctuation or spelling as a series of rules that must be memorized and conformed to. As linguist David J. Peterson said (he created the Dothraki language for HBO's Game of Thrones series):
Spoken language is an oral phenomenon. Written language is an attempt to convey oral language; nothing more. As such, the role of punctuation is to convey all the information that words don't convey in speech. What are these things? Pauses, intonation, emphasis, etc. Things without which spoken language would fail. Punctuation should be seen as a series of marks that help a speaker let the reader know how exactly his/her writing should be pronounced.
IF U CN RD THS U CNT SPL WRTH A DM.
What does it matter if someone spells all right as alright? Is it even worth pointing out when the meaning is clear? What are we really saying when we do point it out? Although I understand your meaning perfectly, I want to make you feel stupid.
Comments are open. Let the first person who hasn't misplaced a comma or misspelled a word throw the first stone! (But be careful; I have a Doberman now : )
 |
| "Edna" ten weeks old |
Aww, shucks! I hope you are feeling well again soon! I'm not a big grammar buff. I try my best and occasionally mess up on purpose to bug the grammarians in my life. ;-)
ReplyDeleteYou and I are so much alike, Brandy! : )
DeleteThank you for the get well wishes.
I'm so sorry you are still feeling unwell :-( Please tell me you were joking about the $500 bill. Just yesterday I was complaining to someone that my doctor charges $50.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you about belief being born out of experience.
As for grammar - I think the written language has become an art form all its own, and alot of the time (especially with literary fiction) it has little relation to oral language. That's fine by me, it is after all my own artistic medium, and I love playing with structure and grammar in the same way painters love playing with brushes and different paints. :-)
I wish I were joking about the $500.00. My family's current healthcare plan has a $2,500.00 deductible. So far this year, we've already paid over $800.00 for just three doctor visits.
DeleteI liked reading your thoughts on language and grammar. Do you consider your usage to be more conventional or experimental?
Sarah, you've got me thinking about written language and literary fiction. : )
DeleteThe point of language, either spoken or written, is communication. Remove the meaning, the message, and language is not language; it is only noise or marks on a page. Since written language is derived from speech, I'm not sure how far we can distinguish it from oral language before it dissolves into something unintelligible. Indeed, there are some contemporary works of "literary" fiction that have pushed the boundaries so far this has been the result.
I don't know many writers who are brave enough to play with spelling and grammar standards outside of dialogue, although some are fond of experimenting with other structural conventions. For example, the late American novelist John Hawkes said, "I began to write fiction on the assumption that the true enemies of the novel were plot, character, setting and theme, and having once abandoned these familiar ways of thinking about fiction, totality of vision or structure was really all that remained." Of course, no one reads his books because they're godawful. (One might say that the true enemies of the novel are writers like John Hawkes!)
I read something the other night on D.G. Myers' "A Commonplace Blog" that rang true to me:
"All fiction is conditional. If a man is transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect then consequences will follow by force of logic—but they will follow if and only if the writer cleaves to his first intent, his entire scheme of implications. The moment that a writer violates the conditions of his own fictional world, the world falls to ashes.
The novelist’s job is generally to write a good novel, but inter alia that entails keeping faith with the particular and self-determined rules of his own particular novel. To break those rules is to screw up the job.
Is there an appropriate term for a writer who sets out in a new direction to see if the horizons of fiction can be effectively expanded?
Yes: “novelist.”
The question of whether she succeeded in expanding fiction’s horizons will belong to the necessary critical evaluation of her.
The ambition, however, does not particularly distinguish her. By definition, a novel is a “new direction.”
You should read some of the literary essays of Ursula le Guin. She talks about how so much of the standard notion of narrative fiction is a masculine idea. She has visions of a more feminine language of story. Have you also read Angela Carter? She wrote in ways which proved structure is not important.
DeleteAs for spelling etc - I assume you have read Huck Finn? ;-) I just finished reading a book which was written in Appalachian dialect. Darned if I can remember the title - that's not a statement about the book, which was great - I simply have an atrocious memory! I know there are many other wonderful books which break conventions of language and structure.
I disagree with what Myers wrote about the giant insect. That story was very unconditional. At the end, we still didn't know if the protagonist was really an insect or had just gone mad. It was entirely subjective to the reader. Infact, it seems the perfect example to argue against what Myers is contending.
hope none of that came out sounding curt - I have honey oat cookies calling to me from the kitchen, so wrote in a hurry!
DeleteThose cookies look good.
ReplyDeleteI've never been with a doctor who was with his computer, looking up things. That would be a strange experience; I'm not sure how I would take it.
As for the spelling issue, you are making me think. Maybe it's my age, but I've always been a good speller, and nowadays I'm appalled at the poor spelling I see everywhere on the internet. And, when I see how badly the spelling is of mothers who are homeschooling their children.
But - I often see what else these children are learning, and they're often learning a lot, and wonderful things! So, this dismay of mine at the proliferation of bad spelling has been getting weaker lately.
On the other hand, if a word is supposed to be spelled a certain way, then what (other than ignorance) is really behind the idea of it being unimportant to spell correctly? Because if it's just a sort of an "I (the ego) just don't want to; I don't think it's important, (even though others before me certainly thought it was. Is this a result of a generation which was told they could be anything, do anything they want, so if they don't want to learn to spell, they are not going to? Is it a symptom of the breakdown of civilization? (which is definitely happening - definitely being the word I most often see misspelled!)
As a Catholic, I can see that a great importance is placed on continuity - the Apostles' Creed, for example (although they're not sure that it really originates with the Twelve). So, if as a people, we have come to spell words in a certain way, and now suddenly there are many who don't want to - what does that mean?
I'm not sure what it means. For one thing, I think that God find it easier to work when things break down - unfortunately; so He probably is unconcerned with our spelling! And at the bottom line, I can see better than I used to that a loving mother who doesn't spell very well can still teach her children many wonderful and very useful things and they will hopefully go on to become valuable members of society. I guess what I'm saying is I have mixed feelings on the subject.
Sorry for being so wordy, but this was very interesting, Susan!
Lisa, I appreciate every word of your very thoughtful comment--thank you so much for taking the time to write it.
ReplyDeleteMy own thoughts about grammar and spelling are quite similar to yours. On the one hand, these "standards" are quite new in the scope of written language (at least for English speakers). Up until 150 years ago variations in spelling were commonplace and acceptable.
And, grammar has always been a cloudy subject (although sticklers will disagree!). The finest writers not only break the "rules" all the time, but are often confused about them. In fact, even my heroes on the subject E.B. White and William Strunk (authors of the acclaimed English handbook, The Elements of Style) were fuzzy about what constituted passive voice, even while they cautioned writers never to use it! [From Wikipedia: "Professor Geoffrey Pullum notes that three out of four "passive voice" examples given in that book do not in fact contain passives: "There were a great number of dead leaves lying on the ground" (no sign of any passive); "It was not long before she was very sorry that she had said what she had" (again, no sign of the passive); "The reason that he left college was that his health became impaired" (here became impaired is an example of the adjectival, not passive, use of the past participle)."]
In regard to spelling, I agree that it seems like more people today have trouble with it. I'm not sure why this is. I suppose it could be an act of defiance, or laziness, but I am not so sure. One of my children cannot spell well even though she has devoted a great deal of time to it. I have come to the conclusion that she is not a visual learner. She is someone, however, who can hear a song once and remember all the lyrics and pick out the tune on the piano. She can also remember lines from movies verbatim. She has an astonishing auditory memory, and I think her brain favors auditory learning. I have come to accept that she is never going to be a good speller, which is a shame, because she is very intelligent, but I fear no one will take her written ideas seriously.
Sometimes I wonder if we haven't lost a certain flexibility of thought through the enforced (yet arbitrary!) standards of grammar and spelling. I have a theory that the brain routinely "dumps" information that it doesn't find useful/important in order to make room for more valuable things. What have we sacrificed by making these standards important? The supposed point of these standards is clarity of meaning, yet who, really, would be confused if I were to write "grammer" instead of "grammar"? No one. But,if I wrote "grammer" throughout my post it would cast suspicion and doubt on all of my ideas. "If she is ignorant of the correct spelling of grammar, then of what else is she ignorant?"
Who do these standards benefit most--society as a whole (by providing continuity) or the section of society who can master the standards (academic types like you and I : ) )?
Like you, Lisa, my feelings are mixed about the whole thing...but, since I do follow the standards myself, I suppose that is evidence of what I actually believe.
Oh, you give me credit where it isn't due, Susan - I am no academic! :)
DeleteI messed up some punctuation up there, but... oh, well.
I didn't know that our spelling standards were fairly recent - that's interesting! Perhaps I am just a snob - oh, what a muddle! Your daughter's situation is very interesting. How fortunate so many children are to be taught at home as individuals!
Hi Susan! I came over here from Sarah's blog b/c I liked what you had to say in the comments about Diane Setterfield. :)
ReplyDeleteThis is a post with much to comment on, so let me start by saying I had your same experience with a GI doctor I saw this week. My last visit with him was 3 years ago and I loved him, but now computers have moved into the exam rooms and since he can only 'hunt and peck,' this time he barely managed to make any eye contact or even hear what I was saying—he was too busy entering the answers to my questions (one of which he repeated three times! "So do you smoke?" "NO!") And I only have major medical insurance so believe me, I'm with ya on getting to the bottom of what is good care for the money.
Your thoughts on grammar (and subsequent comments) are wonderful. I think sometimes grammar nazis make much ado about nothing. But as writers we're so hardwired to notice those details.
Nice to meet you... hope you feel better. Tell me that smoochie cuteness of a puppy is helping your spirits.
Welcome, Barb! I'm so glad that you stopped by : )
ReplyDeleteThere are actually TWO puppies at my house! We have a ten month old pug puppy named Elvis, too. Both pups lift my spirits and make me smile (and laugh) every day.
That face!! Adorable!
ReplyDeleteHope you are feeling better.
Spelling: as the mother of a dyslexic who has his very own creative spelling of most words I've relaxed my beliefs about spelling and what it reflects of a person's intelligence.
Doctors and EMR's (electronic medical records) : most hate them as much as patients for the same reasons you mention, the fact that it puts a screen between them and their patients. Health systems are using them as a way of cutting costs as more accurate billing can be generated. Last, but not least, they free the dr. from burdensome paperwork. My husband sees 20-22 patients a day as part of a full 8-6 day. He then spends on average 2-3 additional hours each day on paperwork (writing notes, reviewing test results etc). EMR's will cut that additional time in half, allowing him to leave the office before 8:00! Once his office starts using them.