Dot, Dot, Dot, a guest post by Celia Johnson

Celia Johnson will be starting her Masters of Arts in Teaching program this summer at Southern Oregon University.

Dot, Dot, Dot

“It doesn’t say Molly and Roger, Forever. It says Molly and Roger Forever… dot, dot, dot! Like maybe it’s forever, maybe it’s not.” – The Truth About Forever, Sarah Dessen

The most fascinating part of the ellipsis is that at its most basic definition it means a lack of something, or nothing at all. When looking into the classical uses of this piece of punctuation I was shocked to find almost no reference to the current uses of the ellipsis in a formal style guide. However, as the quote above demonstrates the ellipsis has taken on new meaning in the speech and writing of today. This change is not restricted to the youth and new generations, but by an entire network of technology using writers.
In order to understand how the ellipsis has taken on new meaning, it is important to know the definitive rules of usage that have been used throughout writing history. Although there are some slight variations between style guides the most concise definition came from Grammar by Diagram, “An ellipsis of three dots indicates that words have been omitted from the direct quotation. No ellipsis is needed at the beginning or end of a direct quotation if it is clear that words have been omitted” (Vitto 305). Although Vitto and some other authors go on to examine more carefully the usage and placement of the three dot ellipsis, and even four dot ellipses, there was never more than a page of detailed examinations of the punctuation mark. That might not seem odd with a period or even a question mark which are incorporated into the basic grammar lessons of young elementary classrooms, but the ellipsis is not taught very often and has a much more complicated use. In fact, even the name of the ellipsis is fairly unknown. It is most often referred to as the “Dot, dot, dot,” or the three periods.

The ellipsis does not have the large sweeping history of usage change, or even of usage. Until recent shifts in daily usage, the most controversial arguments that surround the ellipsis is whether it was three dots or four, spaced or grouped, and how to pluralize the word. There is a difference between three and four dot ellipses. The three dot ellipsis is used at the beginning or middle of a sentence when a period is not also essential. A four dot ellipsis is more common in the middle of a quote or at the end of a sentence when an omission and the end of a sentence are occurring simultaneously (Vitto 306). A good example of correctly used three and four dot ellipses is in dialogue when only on side of the conversation is being written: “Hello, may I speak to the manager please … Oh, OK, can you help me? … Please send the bloodmobile right away … Have you got a pen ready? … I’ll give you the address….” (Taylor). There is a serious of three dot ellipses in use because the speaker is either ending statements as questions, or is being interrupted on the other half of the conversation. However, the last line in cut off and the end of the statement requiring the four dot (ellipsis and period) ellipses.

Unlike other punctuation marks which are single characters, the ellipsis is made up of three dots, but how do you type out an ellipsis? Do you put spaces in between the dots? The answers to those questions are not as straightforward as one would assume. Some style guides show a preference for no spaces because it can take up too much space on the page, or even cause your reader to forget the information at the beginning of the sentence. The Elements of Typographic Style, author Robert Bringhurst suggests using dots right next to each other or inserting a special character that utilizes spaces smaller in width (305). Some typing programs are programmed to insert that special character whenever the user inserts an ellipsis. However, additional style variations may completely disagree. The Chicago Manual of Style suggests typing out three dots, “there is the potential for character-mapping problems—the ellipsis could appear as some other character across software and browser platforms—an added inconvenience. So it’s best to type three spaced dots, like this: . . .” (“Chicago Manual”). The spaced version is most accepted by schools and official writing styles such as MLA and APA. All ellipses are automatically changed to that version in Microsoft Word and Google Documents. Finally, the plural of ellipsis is ellipses, which is extremely confusing when typing a paper about them.

Although the ellipsis has found its use in the world of formal writing, it has been carving an entirely new niche in informal writing. Media such as texting, posts, tweets, and emails have all been affected by the introduction of the ellipsis. Even the users are confused as to how they picked up the habit of adding those three little dots at the end, or middle, or beginning of almost every communication. Lukeman in his grammar guide, A Dash of Style, warns against the overuse of the ellipsis and how its use becomes a writers addiction ““In an amateur’s hands, though ellipsis points can be a problem. They can become a bad habit a crutch to use whenever a writer doesn’t know how to firmly end a sentence. Worst of all… some writers think that merely because they conclude with (…) it will force the reader to read on” (Lukeman 189). Used sparingly the ellipsis can help lead a reader through a time jump, quotation, dialogue, and even into the emotion of uncertain. But informal writing has reinvigorated the punctuation mark into the queen on a chess board instead of the king. In this faction of communication an ellipsis can move in whatever direction she chooses, and become the agent of emotion, inflection, and implied meanings.

The ellipsis has ensnared more than just teenagers; there are countless blogs and articles written by writers who have found themselves entangled in the ellipsis revolution. “Recently it struck me that I have been using ellipses (. . .) quite a bit in my informal writing. Like most people I compose at least a few emails each day and while, by most standards I am an infrequent texter, I do send out a modest amount. In both of these formats I’ve been dot, dot, dotting left and right” (Sacasas). Teenagers, parents, college students and even professional writers have been affected by the trend of inserting ellipses. There are many different uses for it, each with a slightly different effect which has become second habit to read and comprehend. And it is not always easy to figure out why.

Some might suggest that it is out of laziness, but typing three dots takes more time than one. So why has this piece of punctuation taken over our writing? The theory that seemed most prominent and logical is that we are using ellipses more often in messages that still convey our personal voice. In formal writing we can avoid usage, but when we want the audience to read it with our inflections they start to appear more frequently. Matthew J.X. Malady, a writer and editor for Slate Magazine, noted his own usage: “I was delivering drifting, whiny telegraphs of emails: ‘Hey… this is great… I don’t know when I’ll get to an edit but… one thing is you should think about the ending there… but maybe I’ll find one in the middle for you, so don’t worry too much… okay more soon!”’ (1). While Malady found that his usage made him sound less authoritative in tone, the quote does read conversationally. Adding a more inviting conversational tone to texting, emailing, and updating statuses is a trend that has been evolving for some time. Teenagers have been dropping declarative sentences instead opting for phrases and patterns that display humility and the possibility of being wrong. A comedy sketch replicated this pattern perfectly using the ellipsis as the punctuation of choice: Declarative sentences … so called, because, they used to you know … declare things to be true … ok … as opposed to other things that are like totally … you know … not … They’ve been infected by this tragically cool and totally hip interrogative tone … as if I’m saying, “Don’t think I’m a nerd just ‘cuz I’ve like noticed this okay … I have nothing personally invested in my own opinions … I’m just like inviting you to join me on the bandwagon of my own uncertainty …” (Sacasas). Once again, this style of writing and speech is allowing for the input of others, allowing the speaker to not take a strong position and avoid offending anyone else. While this style of usage is prominent it is not the only one, and can sometimes even be reversed with the usage of ellipses.

Many text messages read with more emotion when adding the ellipsis. Some people use them to indicate flirting, while others use them to show worry or sincerity. A phrase that changes drastically in meaning with the addition of an ellipsis is the simple phrase ‘hi’. When an ellipsis is placed before the word ‘…hi,’ it can indicate a reluctance to start the conversation. The parties involved might have been fighting and the person sending the message is the one angry. If you reverse the order ‘hi…’ it indicates that the sender might be worried that the other party is angry. Using of the ellipsis to display emotion allows the user to communicate how they are feeling without being too harsh or overwhelming. One example is the statement “I had a really great time…” by adding the ellipsis there is an implied flirtiness that can be ignored without causing humiliation to the sender.

Of course in order to make the usage of an ellipsis successful the reader needs to understand the implied meaning. The ambiguity can be confusing if the reader does not know the sender very well, or projects their own meaning to the text instead of the intended. Malady did a small experiment by sending out ten random texts to his friends and family with no meaning behind them. The results were ten completely normal responses, thus demonstrating how the receiver will fill in meaning when an ellipsis is in use. “Next I sent an even vaguer text to my mom: “All Star Game………….” Who knows what I meant by that one. I didn’t, certainly. Sure, the All-Star game was on TV at the time, but beyond that, what was I getting at? Mom wasn’t fazed in the least: “I’m falling asleep…Really tired” (2). When the intent can be discerned by the reader the ellipsis can be a great writing tool to show emotion, invite conversation, ask a question, or even just demonstrate a lack of a response.

The ellipsis is being repurposed, and in some cases writers have developed an addiction to the usage. It is versatile, takes little thought, and runs the least amount of risk of offending someone. However, when the usage starts to interfere with professionalism and clear communication an intervention might be necessary.  

Works Cited

Bringhurst, Robert. The Elements of Typographic Style. Point Roberts, WA: Hartley & Marks, 2004. Print.

Lukeman, Noah, and Noah Lukeman. A Dash of Style: The Art and Mastery of Punctuation. New York: W.W. Norton, 2006. Print.

Malady, Matthew J.X. “Why Everyone and Your Mother Started Using Ellipses Everywhere.” Slate Magazine. 29 July 2013. Web. 28 May 2014.

Sacasas, Michael. “Dot, Dot, Dot.” Web log post. The Frailest Thing. N.p., 10 Aug. 2011. Web. 28 May 2014.

Taylor, Luke. “Grammar Grater®.” Minnesota Public Radio News. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 May 2014.

“The Chicago Manual of Style Online: Chicago-Style Citation Quick Guide.” The Chicago Manual of Style Online: Chicago-Style Citation Quick Guide. 28 May 2014.

Vitto, Cindy L. Grammar by Diagram: Understanding English Grammar through Traditional Sentence Diagraming. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 2009. Print.

Posted in Ideas and Opinions, Language | Comments Off on Dot, Dot, Dot, a guest post by Celia Johnson

An interview with Tod Davies, author of Jam Today Too

Tod Davies is the author of Snotty Saves the Day and Lily the Silent, both from The History of Arcadia series, and the cooking memoirs Jam Today: A Diary of Cooking With What You’ve Got and Jam Today Too: The Revolution Will Not Be Catered. She is the editorial director and publisher of Exterminating Angel Press and has worked as a screenwriter, film and television producer, social activist, radio show host, actor, and amateur cook.

Davies lives with her husband Alex, and their two dogs, dividing their time between Colestin, Oregon, Boulder, Colorado.

We sat down to talk about Jam Today Too.

EB: Jam Today Too is a memoir of great meals, and it’s revolutionary, spiritual, and funny. What were you aiming at?

TD: Wow, those are great targets! I don’t think I was consciously aiming at any of them, although come to think of it, they’re all combined in what I WAS aiming for: to really encourage everyone (and this includes myself most of all) to realize and act on the fact that any kind of positive change in the society at large has got to start with the individual. We all have, not just a stake in the world around us, but a responsibility to try to change things for the better. And we can do that. We can! I meet too many people who think the whole landscape is just too overwhelming, there’s nothing to be done, let’s just give up. Completely wrong, and, if I might be so bold, lazy, too. What we can do, every one of us, is become ever kinder, ever more knowledgeable about who we actually are and what we are actually doing. And then, most of all, what each one of us can do is learn what truly makes us and the people around us happy…and then get doing it! Honestly, a truly happy, balanced life is the single best contribution you can make to the polity. It’s contagious. Really. And food can help us find that happy balance.

EB: I like the way you’ve organized things into different life events: food for disasters, grief, home, friends and feasts food for oneself and, of course, food for thought. Where do you think our food associations come from?

TD: From our bodies, of course! What our bodies are trying (sometimes, these days, almost desperately) to tell us is who we are, and what are our real, authentic human needs. The more the poor body’s messages get drowned out by frantic media stimuli, drugs (recreational or otherwise), and/or commands that counter what the body needs, the farther we get away from what food really means to us. And since food is nourishment, and nourishment is what keeps us healthy and alive, we can see where obliterating that message is going to get us.

EB: How do you keep track of meals? Are you a food diarist?

TD: I used to be. I have a whole book chock full of menus from meals I particularly enjoyed with (sometimes hilarious) notes attached. Now I just find when a new recipe really impresses me, I want to sit down and write about the circumstances surrounding it. Hence the Jam Today series.

EB: You’re an advocate of cooking without worrying too much about recipes. Why? Do strict recipes get in the way?

TD: I think there’s a place for ‘strict’ recipes. They are terrific as a benchmark of a certain kind of excellence…if they’re good recipes. Certain cookbooks are great for this. Julia Child, of course—if you follow one of the recipes in “Mastering the Art of French Cooking,” you are going to get an undeniably excellent result. James Beard. Deborah Madison. And for every day cooking, Marion Cunningham. But what I’m trying to get across is the art of strengthening one’s personal autonomy through the meditation of cooking every day. If you interact with a recipe, instead of letting it dictate to you, you’re already starting to change your way of interacting with other authority sources as well—mass media, for example. You’re questioning, you’re interposing who you are into the stated ideal, you’re ACTING. That’s what I’m after. That’s what I’m always interested in supporting.

EB: Do you have a favorite non-recipe from the book? I’m personally excited to try the dried tomatoes.

TD: Really, my favorite non-recipe is the cup of tea. I make that every day of my life. And tea gives me more pleasure than red wine, even. Imagine that! (But I do have to admit, that dried tomato recipe is hugely useful in my kitchen. In fact, I have a bowl of them in the fridge even as we speak.)

EB: You’ve listed the cookbooks in your kitchen. Do you have a favorite or two? What are some must reads for cooks or eaters?

TD: I have a short bibliography in the book about both the cooking memoirs I love, and some of my favorite cookbooks. But there are so many. The ones I like best are the ones where you get a clear picture of the character of the person writing them. These are not necessarily always those that have a lot of prose attached to the recipes. Deborah Madison, for example, who I think can be called the Julia Child of vegetarian cooking. You just know from her recipes that she’s the kind of friend you would want to have if you were hit by some kind of personal disaster. She’d be right there, and she’d be able to give you the best advice. I love reading her recipes. Fergus Henderson, of St. John Restaurant, is another one where you just know you would love to sit down with him and a couple of glasses of wine. There are others.

Obviously M.F.K. Fisher is a must read for ANYONE, let alone anyone interested in food. And Elizabeth David is always a pleasure, though I must say, reading her you know she would probably look down on any “little person’s” efforts. That is a bit annoying of her. But she so loves what she’s doing that I tend to forgive her snobberies.

EB: Your husband is a vegetarian. How does that complicate your omnivoracity?

TD: It just adds another dimension to the never endingly fascinating game of deciding what we want to eat today. And I am really grateful to Alex for being a vegetarian. Twenty years ago it opened up a whole new world of cooking to me. He’s the one who got me onto brown rice. Which I now adore to the extent that I think white rice is an active bore. Thank you, Alex!

EB: You mention some bad meals you have had in restaurants. Do you have a favorite worst meal?

TD: We ate a meal in Hull, in England, that was so spectacularly awful, as well as poisonous, that I still remember it with something approaching awe. It was at a chain restaurant that shortly thereafter went bankrupt, and no wonder.

While the poisonous part of the meal is best left unmentioned, the bizarre part was the salad, which was composed of: Diced avocado. Canned tomato pulp. Partially defrosted frozen raspberries. And a blueberry-honey vinaigrette. It was the most astonishing desecration of the noble avocado I have ever come across. To this day I cannot get over how someone would do that to an avocado, when all you have to do for maximum enjoyment is cut one in half, take out the stone, squeeze a lemon over the whole thing, dab it with maybe a little soy sauce, and ENJOY.

That salad was so memorable, I wrote it into the script of the film we did later: THREE BUSINESSMEN. One of the businessmen orders it in the restaurant in Liverpool. He is exactly the kind of fool who would, too, that character.

EB: There seems to be a lot of umami. Is that a favorite flavor?

TD: They do say that people are one or the other: those who enjoy savory foods, and those who enjoy sweet. I’m definitely one of the former. If you give me a choice between blue cheese and chocolate, it’s blue cheese for me every time. Although nothing against chocolate.

EB: After a flood, your kitchen was remodeled. What’s new?

TD: It’s pretty much the same kitchen—only better. It always had the perfect triangle for me of refrigerator, stove and sink, and it has always had a pretty view out the window of a meadow. But now the cabinets are actually beautiful and designed for my own uses. And best of all, oh heaven, the countertops are now granite. Before they were the weirdest, most useless display of tiny one inch avocado green tile. This kind of counter is impossible to keep clean. As well as being hideous. It was almost worth having a flood to get rid of it.

EB: You also have a section on the portrayal of men in the kitchen. Why are they portrayed as either geniuses or bunglers?

TD: For one thing, because both those images are of individualists unconnected to anyone or anything around them…and this is one of the major myths of our culture, the myth of the individual who triumphs or fails ALL ALONE. Both of these stereotypes come out of an idea that we all act in a kind of ideal void, separate from the actual web of community and event we are truly embedded within.

Most men I know—and certainly the ones I know who enjoy the arts of the kitchen—understand this. They understand that food is an opportunity for mutual celebration, rather than individual aggrandizement. It’s ‘look at us!’ rather than ‘look at me!’ I do think that attitude should get more acknowledgements in the mass media than it does.

EB: Thanks for talking with us. I’m off to try your recipe for “The World’s Best Upside-Down Adult Hamburger.”

TD: It’s fabulous, I promise. And don’t forget to fry more onions than you think you’ll actually need. You won’t regret it.

Posted in Interviews | Comments Off on An interview with Tod Davies, author of Jam Today Too

Summer 2014 — what are you reading?

This summer I’m planning on catching up on some reading: Tod Davies’s Jam Today, Too: The Revolution Will Not Be Catered, a bunch of books by Megan Abbot and Wallace Stroby and whatever is new from John Sanford and James Lee Burke. And I’m hoping to get to José Saramago’s The Cave (suggested by Robert Arellano, Ivan Doig’s This House of Sky (suggested by Les AuCoin),

I asked some soon-to-be SOU grads what they were planning to read, once their course work was behind them.

Haley May is looking forward to Wanderlust by Rebecca Solnit, Confessions of an Eco-Sinner by Fred Pierce, Letter to a Christian Nation by Sam Harris, and The Magic of Reality by Richard Dawkins.

Julie Kanta recommends Adulting by Kelly Williams Brown, which she has already read but says has lots of great information on what to do after college. And it’s funny. She’ll be reading some books based on some of her favorite films: American Psycho, A Clockwork Orange, A Good Year, Out of Africa, and Stephen King’s short stories (Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, and more).

Kristy Evans is going to read The Ocean at the End of the Lane by Neil Gaiman and An Object of Beauty by Steve Martin, among (many) others.

Celia Johnson will be reading Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace and Let’s Explore Diabetes with Owls by David Sedaris.

Lefty Barber would like to start The Game of Thrones series and work through the Collected Essays of David Foster Wallace.

Holly Deffenbaugh can’t wait to read is A Prayer For Owen Meany by John Irving and The Shantaram by Gregory David Roberts.

Daniel Alrick will be reading The Other America by Michael Harrington.

New dad Randal Lee will be reading Christianity and Liberalism by John Gresham Machen and All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque.

Matthew Kent will be tackling Midnight’s Children and The Silmarillion.

And I heard from a few faculty colleagues too about their summer reading plans. Diana Maltz will be reading the Life of Pi, since she is planning on teaching a new class on The Animal in Literature in the fall.

Charlotte Haddella is planning to read both of Mary Szybist’s books: Incarnadine and Granted (Mary Sazbist will be the Chautauqua Poets and Writers headliner in the fall).

For fun, Bill Gholson will be reading All I Did Was Shoot Your Man: A Leonid McGill Mystery by Walter Moseley. He plans to read lots of nonfiction too starting with I Must Not Think Bad Thoughts by Mark Dery.

Margaret Perrow is looking forward to What is the What? by Dave Eggers and also hopes to finish The Kite Runner this summer.

Bobby Arellano is hitting the Oregon books with Sometimes a Great Notion by Ken Kesey and The Klamath Knot by David Rains Wallace.

How about you?

Posted in What People Are Reading | 1 Comment

The Food Blog, or the evolution of the online culinary narrative

Published in 2005, Digital Dish compiled culinary bloggers’ notes, reflections and recipes before blogging was as huge a home industry and commercial tool as it is today. Linderholm says in his introduction, “At the time this book begins, in the summer of 2003, there were fewer than 50 food blogs that were easy to track down. By the time the book ends, in the summer of 2004, there were several hundred.”

Today it seems as if sites like Grub Street, Foodista, FoodNetwork, Christopher Kimball’s empire and Eater dominate, but no, the power of individual influencers reign: here’s Saveur’s vote, here’s HuffPo’s, here’s the Weblog Awards, now in it’s 14th year, the International Association of Culinary Professionals gives firsts to blogs in several categories, and there are several pretty big conferences dedicated to food blogging, among them: Foodista’s International Food Blogger Conference (bloggers get in for $95 watta deal!), BlogHer Food (food is just one of BlogHer’s content areas), and IACP (more professional, mixed culinary professions).

But back to Digital Dish: Five Seasons of the Freshest Recipes and Writing from Food Blogs Around the World. Organized by season and indexed by blog, recipe and main ingredient, the work provides a fascinating perspective on a transitional period in culinary narrative, as the web evolved into a more personal form populated by WordPress and at the same time more commercial, fueled by advertising. Digital Dish is text rich, with long musings, detailed recipes and comments by Linderholm. Brand names are almost never noted in ingredients or in the narratives. The urls of the blogs are convoluted typepad and BlogSpot addresses and are not optimized. There are few photos in Digital Dish, though the actual blog posting probably had more. Today, photos rule and text often takes a back seat or is even a no-show in blog entries. Bloggers are courted as paid brand ambassadors, their blogs openly promoting brand partners.

Researching each of the blogs noted in Digital Dish, and their bloggers would be a really interesting project; understanding the evolution and transformation of early influencers.

Sadly, some of the blogs cited in the work are no longer active – checking Spiceblog, hitting a domain for sale page.

Some of those that are active have migrated to later software with updated templates and contemporary color palettes, though again, for some, posts are infrequent or not current. Looka! last posted in 2013, commenting on the use of “weblog”, some distain resonates as he mentions the clipped, contemporary form, “blog”.

Some bloggers may have migrated to other digital platforms, as Sasha Wilson (A Girl’s Gotta Eat) seems to have done: “dudes, i moved to instagram. find me there. blogging regularly is totes too difficult for these crazy times. but i’ll update this here and there…”. And others may have moved to digital platforms managed by others, to share the work of keeping content current.

At least two stalwarts are still active, Cook Sister and Domestic Goddess.

Ultimately, blogging is a huge investment of time and energy and so we have a debt to these early bloggers who made such an investment to an early digital narrative form. They paved the way for all who followed. My thanks too to Owen Linderholm for preserving these early writings in print, many probably now lost to time.

First posted to Goodreads.com in April 2014.

 

Posted in Ideas and Opinions | Comments Off on The Food Blog, or the evolution of the online culinary narrative