The Word

NOTE: In my last blog I referred to coming across a book in the second-hand book section of a store in downtown Long Beach.  Here’s the result of another such browse in another store.  (This, an outright thrift shop; the other one was mostly a music shop.  Which, in that genre, was mostly in a foreign language to me.  I have, obviously, been ‘out of it’ for quite some time.  Living in a spiritual community for nearly half of one’s life can do that to one.)  Chronologically, it came first; but, in the mysterious nature of such things, it is placed here for reasons best known to ‘itself’ - the Force that gently organizes such things.  (I know that you have had your own experiences of that Force in your own life, so you know what I’m talking about.)

---

Little did I know precisely how ‘time flies’ until I woke up one day (so to speak) and saw the signs of not only impending but positively present civilizational collapse all around me.  I am speaking of the appalling state - at least in the English-speaking world (if you are from another country and culture, you will have to speak for yourself in this regard)  of the standards of punctuation and grammar.  I jest; but barely.

It is - really and truly; deep down, beneath the level of chuckling over it (because, really, you have to laugh) - no laughing matter.  It goes, e.g. (and how many in this day and standards-depleted age even know what those initials/that expression ‘they’ stand/‘it’ stands for?), to the same process, set of indices that delineates the decline and fall of the Roman civilization.  And so my opening paragraph was not so far off the mark after all.

I was reminded of all this just the other day, when browsing in a thrift shop near where I now live.  I have, in my doddering years (and so there’s a bit of a giveaway of where I’m coming from right there), returned to my old home town of many days of yore, to ‘see my days out’ in the sun (this is in southern California; Long Beach, to be precise),1 after many years of living in the north of Scotland.2  Though, I am back for more than my retirement years; but that’s another story.  For this one, it is sufficient just to say that I have had a lifelong love of reading, and it has led me to many a nook and cranny in life, to check out their collection of books. Hence (the main reason for) my visit to a local thrift shop in my new neighborhood; and hence my coming across there a (pristine) copy of a book, by one Lynne Truss, entitled ‘Eats, Shoots & Leaves’. 

Bear with me for a moment, for a little history here.  And please pardon the pun.  I couldn’t resist.3

Whilst living in the UK, I had a bit of a running battle with one of their leading national newspapers - the Guardian, since you ask - over what I took as their failure to be ‘a light unto the nation’ as regards the matter, very serious to me, of upholding good and proper standards in the realm of punctuation and grammar, before I retired from the field in defeat.  The particular bane of my existence with them was their - sporadic, I will admit, to give credit where credit is due, but nevertheless continued use of the apostrophied form of ‘its’ to denote the possessive.  Whereas I am sure, if you have bothered to read this far in this little rant of mine regarding the written word, you at least understand that ‘it’s‘ is always a contraction - standing for either ‘it is‘ or ‘it has‘ - and never the possessive form.  Is the exception to that rule, of apostrophes denoting possession.  Which fact seems to have disappeared from the teaching of English in the country.  The  Americans, you may be able to give some leeway to; being the bit of barbarians that they are.  But the very home of the language - !  No excuses.4

I was even assured, at one point, by one of their Readers‘ Comments staff, that no, they hadn’t cut down on subeditor staff, and no, they didn’t just take their reporters‘ and commentators‘ ‘word for it’.  But the proof of the pudding is in the eating (to use a good old British expression),5 and I continued to be assaulted with the offending motes in my eye.  Not just the ‘its - it’s’ offender, but the likes of misplacing the full stop - the period, to Americans - either within or outside of the closing parenthesis of a parenthetical comment, depending on whether the comment was within a carrying sentence or was a parenthetical sentence of its own...    

So my unhappiness with ‘the lay of the land’, written-language-wise, had to be put on hold a bit.  (After all, if even the Guardian...)  And then, out of the blue, as it were, came the thunderbolt of Lynne Truss’s book - and it hit a major national nerve!  I wasn’t so  alone in my unhappiness with the Way Things Were written-language-wise after all!  There was, in point of fact, a whole army of us!  (Or is that supposed to be ‘entire’??...)       

Alas, after a major media blitz - Lynne appearing on talk shows all over the tube and dial, and such - things quickly appeared to settle back into business as usual.  The greengrocers’ apostrophe is still with us.  And I’m sure that the Guardian’s otherwise admirable attitude towards Corrections still falls at the barrier of ‘the little things’.  Which, really, are a sign of major rot.  For they signal, and signify, a background zeitgeist of human indifference.

Indifference to detail is the foot in the door for more.  Is the nail for the want of, a battle was lost.  And then an entire country...

And speaking of an entire country being affected by a seemingly small detail, let’s turn specifically to America for a moment; and

Item: the presidency.

Did you know - and I am speaking specifically to Americans now, about an issue of major import to them and their country (and ultimately, really, the world) - that in the founding of your - our - country (as a republic; which means neither Church nor Crown in charge, but The People - you), the Founders thought so much of looking down the road at its possible direction (given the course, and lessons, of history.  Which James Madison, known as the Father of the Constitution, in particular was fully aware of and conversant with, having studied ‘the record’ diligently in the lead-up to the founding of this new nation, to be set on stronger bedrock than any other previously; we humans having learned something from all those previous examples) that they inserted ‘a small detail‘ in the Constitution regarding, specifically, the presidency: that that person - alone of all the prospective candidates for federal office (until the Constitution was amended to include the office of the vice presidency in the requirement, in consideration of the chance of the person in that office inheriting the presidential office) - would have to be, quote, a “natural born Citizen”, unquote.

Not just a ‘citizen’.  But a special kind of citizen.

What kind.  

There have been questions raised about this.  And there have been several definitions given of the term, as it may have been understood by the Founders.  For example, whether it included being born ‘on the soil’ - the legal term for which is ‘jus soli’.  But there can be no question as to its main thrust, in the minds of the Founders of the American form of government.  And that was to make sure - as sure as they could - that any prospective candidate for the highest office in the land - who was to become the Commander in Chief of the military forces as well - was born ‘jus sanguinis’.

Of the blood.

Meaning, of U.S. citizen parents.

Plural.

The whole point of the exercise, in constitutional government - not in government by Church or Royally, or other potential tyrants ruling by arbitrary law, but by the rule of  law - was to make as certain as they could, at least, that the person in that office - that particular federal office - did not have dual loyalties.  Dual allegiances.  - And ESPECIALLY not to Britain, with whom the fledgling Republic had just fought a war of independence.  They were certainly not going to fall under that specific yoke again. 

Times change. Laws change.  But there is a legal way to do the latter.  And an illegal way.

That special, constitutional requirement to be eligible to occupy the highest office in the land has never been changed.

Legally.

Meaning, specifically:

Barack Hussein Obama is not constitutionally eligible for the office that he is occupying.

At least, as far as the American people truly know.  In attempting to placate critics of his constitutionality, meaning his ‘native born citizen’ status, he has released a couple of documents - purportedly his Certification of Live Birth and his actual Certificate of Live Birth - that have only succeeded in muddying these waters further than they already are.  A very ignoble situation, especially considering the office involved.  

First, they purport to be ‘evidence‘ that his father was not a U.S. citizen.  So he fails the constitutional test right there.  

Second, they have been analyzed by experts in these sorts of electronic documents, and found to be - on many counts - forgeries.  (And, according to those experts, not very good ones at that; so someone is snickering at the American public, in thinking that their takeover crowd have such control over the media in the country that even if Obama came out and said in broad daylight that he was not a ‘natural’ born citizen, but a good enough one, they could orchestrate a sell of the matter, and so what are you going to do about it, silly ridiculous nitpicking ’birther’??)6     

Two matters of concern follow from this finding.  First: Without a bona fide, long-form, vault-copy birth certificate, we - the American people; and the people of the world, for that matter - don’t really know who this man is.  He could even be, after all, a ‘natural born citizen‘ of the United States; and thus eligible indeed for that office.  Except for the second of the two ‘little‘ matters that flow from this murky mess.  And that is, that a crime has been committed.7

And for that reason alone - that crime alone - this man - this fraudster - needs to be removed from that office, and made to appear before a court of law for his multiple crimes committed along his path to power (a false identity record; etc etc).  

And make that a true court of law.  Not one of the numerous ones that have been a party to this act of fraud.  And that includes the highest court in the land, for, in refusing it review, not letting justice be served in this matter.

This matter, of Barack Hussein Obama - or whatever his true, given name is - v. the rule of law.

Which is all that has stood between the American Republic - which started out with such promise, and hope; not just for its citizenry, but for all mankind, as potentially a beacon of light to the world - and a potential American Empire.  Living on faded glory, in its twilight years, as it dissolves into the dust of the history from which it came.  No better than all the rest.

All - when ‘you’ come right down to it - for the want of a nail.

And for those advantaged supporters of the status quo who might think, arrogantly, ‘No big deal; we’ll just pass a retroactive law making Obama eligible,’ I’ve - apparently - got news for you: the Constitution specifically forbids retrospective law.  (This is a contract, remember.  Not “just a damn piece of paper,” as another reckless occupier of the office recently characterized it as.  And reckless, as in thinking to assert: ‘I am the law.’  Along with assorted other tyrants down through the ages, and pages of time.  A pity we don’t do a better job of reading that book.)

Sneaky people, those Founders...

Although that sort of ‘detail’ doesn’t seem to have deterred some people - in the past, and in the present - from simply doing whatever they wanted to.  So it is up to us - the detail people; the ‘nit pickers’; the rule of law upholders - to hold the line.

‘You’ just can’t delegate that sort of responsibility.  At least not for long.  And not in a form of government that is ‘of, by, and for the people’.  Because if you ‘let George do it,’ he just might.  To you.

George.  Or whatever his name happens to be.

--

All of this, growing out of the consideration of a book on grammar, and punctuation...let me punctuate this little homily on playing attention to detail, and to the pages of history, with a closing, summarizing thought:

‘Sticklers of the world, unite!  You have nothing to lose but your’ - ...er......sense of humor?  Or...what, precisely??

I hope not your ‘attention to detail’.  For, details matter.

Far more than we seem normally to give them credit for.

---

footnotes:

1 And speaking of ‘correct’ grammar and such, there is a good example of how forms can change but the essence, of good grammar, can still be retained.  I speak of the ‘term’ southern California.  In my day in this state, there was a ‘movement’ of sorts among some segments of the citizenry to capitalize the ‘s’ in southern, and make of the term, the concept, a proper noun.  

     There were two main camps in the movement.  On the one hand, there were those who ‘purely’ felt that the area had attained ‘proper noun’ status as an entity, rather than the ‘southern’ being merely a geographical reference.  On the other hand were those of a more political bent of mind who seriously wanted to see the state split in two - and whose numbers also included some northern Californians, who were unhappy with so much of ‘their’ water being canalized to the south; etc. etc. in that vein.

     I don’t know where that particular argument is in this day and age; my point is that ‘things’ - attitudes - can change, but things can stay the same: the principle of capitalizing proper nouns - California, e.g. - still held true in the example.  Where I part company with the new spirit seemingly afoot in the culture is where there seems to be a desire for change for change’s sake: where even - or even especially - topflight language supporters and ‘custodians’ (first-class publishers and newspapers, say) seem to be enamored of experimentation.  Or of the kudos presumably attached to being ‘trendsetters’.  Whatever the reason, something important is being abandoned.  I would call that ‘something’: common sense.

     Example (and speaking of this very sort of thing, regarding proper nouns).  A major newspaper in the UK (who will ‘get it’ from me shortly - in the main body of this diatribe - in this same but general context) decided to change their house-style position to cease capitalizing all proper nouns.  So, e.g., a person’s name would still be capitalized; but if they were an out-and-out, card-carrying Nazi, say, that identifier would not be.

     I don’t know how they handle, e.g., the description of an American Republican or Democrat.  Presumably they revert to common sense there. 

     As they should have stayed with at the beginning of their process of change consideration.  For, where do you draw the line when you compromise the rule, and start being arbitrary??

     Ah - and there’s a subject I will get into in more detail later on; in this little treatise on language, and the ramifications of changes therein, perhaps not thought through fully, when engaged in merely - or even just seemingly - in the spirit of change for change’s sake.

     Or just, as a signwriter, deciding to drop a possessive apostrophe, because ‘it looks neater’.  Well; yes.  And how would you like that tie around your neck to be tied a little tighter, too, trendsetter?...

2 Just as an aside, an interesting point of awareness about moving from a place like the north of Scotland to the south of California (or Southern California,; as at least some folks call it): Scotland, and particularly the north thereof, has one of the highest rates of MS (multiple sclerosis) in the world.  There appears to be a correlation between levels of vitamin D and MS, in inverse proportion  ‘Modern medicine’ is finally getting around to recognizing this - though, typical of its ‘conservative’ roots, the prevailing attitude is still the likes of ‘correlation is not causation’ (and thereby the can is kicked a little further down the medical road).  Well; no.  But if you knew, Doctor - as is known - that vitamin D, among its therapeutic properties, is an anti-fungal; and that fungi and molds can attack the myelin sheathing protecting the cranial nerve systems; and that such fungi and molds are rampant in cold climates, and especially amongst those cultures which do a lot of smoking of fish - wouldn’t you normally be just a little suspicious, Doctor, that there might be just a tad more than ‘correlation’ going on here??

     Unless you just want to leave it to the drug companies - your buddies in your industry - to come up with drugs to treat the conditions that come about from a ‘professional’ lack of an attitude of prevention, and just get on with your lucrative business...

     I couldn’t get the authorities in Scotland (or the UK-wide MS Society either, for that matter) to listen to this reasoning.  Perhaps I will have a little more luck in my new-old home town in Southern California.  But somehow, I think not.  Because people don’t listen to what they ‘constitutionally’ don’t want to listen to.

     And I will have more to say on that subject later on in here as well.  In this little treatise on language, and the processes of communication that people engage in.  Or don’t.

3 For the uninitiated: the title of the book is based on a joke about a panda bear who “eats, shoots and leaves”; thus dramatizing the importance of good punctuation in giving the written word clarity of meaning - “the basting that holds the fabric of language in shape,” as referred to in the book.

     But back to the main thread, and this little essay on the downfall of standards, and the potential repercussions from such downfalls.  Which can be very ‘noisome’ indeed. 

4 I was told, in all sincerity, by an intelligent, well-educated Brit, whose Minutes of a business meeting I gently took exception to for her making the (all-too common) its - it’s mistake (using the contractive form for the possessive form), that no, I was wrong; that that was unmistakably how she had been taught.

     And I have come to believe, and have no doubt, that she was right   That she was, indeed, taught that way, in her (presumably) first-rate school.

     And just so, the deterioration of standards in the wider culture as well.

     Note: In this vein, Lynne comments at an early point:

     “I don’t know how bad things are in America, but in the UK I cannot emphasise it enough: standards of punctuation are abysmal.  Encouraged to conduct easy tests on television, I: discovered to my horror that most British people truly do not know their apostrophe from their elbow  ‘I’m an Oxbridge intellectual,’ slurred a chap in Brighton, where we were asking passers-by to ‘pin the apostrophe on the sentence’ for a harmless afternoon chat-show.  He immediately placed an apostrophe (on no!) in a possessive ‘its’.  The high-profile editor of a national newspaper made the same mistake on a morning show...”

     Does it matter?  Yes.  This is not just a matter of being pedantic.  it is a matter of encouraging sloppy thinking.  And sloppy thinking can have wider socio-political ramifications; as I will get into later on in here.

     For now, I sigh, despairingly, with Lynne.  Perhaps that is all one can do.  Well; one can get angry.  At another early point, Lynne comments, regarding the oh-so-British, nicely-nicely approach in the UK of an informal body called the Apostrophe Protection Society: “Why did the [APS] not have a militant wing?  Could I start one?  Where do you get balaclavas?” 

     I know the feeling, Lynne, believe me  But indignant passion over apostrophes?  With so many of the youth these days not even knowing what they are??

     ‘UR kidng me.  Y4ru gtg so uptite ovr sum marks on papr. UR livng in de 21st cy?? LOL.’

     LOL indeed.  Sometimes, it’s all you can do...

5 A quick word to the American audience here (Hello?  Hello??...) about the distinction between ‘English’ and ‘British’.  The UK - the United Kingdom - is the country, consisting of England, Scotland, and Wales (and Northern Ireland; and note the capital ‘N’).  The citizens of the country are all collectively called British (after Great Britain, an earlier designation of the country); but in addition, the citizens of the constituent entities have their own sense of identity, as English, Scots, or Welsh.  (I don’t know what the North Irelanders call themselves.  No one is going to be tested, here.)  And in point of fact, the whole enterprise is up in the air as we speak, with the Scots in particular looking to go fully independent; or at least, have a referendum on the matter.

     And if you knew all that, how come you didn’t know that ‘it’s’ is always...and never...and so forth?  Where are your priorities, man??  Who cares about some uptight place where they all walk around with umbrellas, man???  I’ve seen that dude, what’s his face.  John Cleese, man, yeah, that’s the one.  That’s some funny dude, man,  The Minister of Funny Walks, an‘ all that sort o’ shit.  Heh heh heh.  Yeah.  Brits.  LOL, man.  ‘Brollies.‘  That’s what they call’em.  Umbrellas.  LMAO, man...

     Now where were we...oh yes.  Brits, ‘n stuff.  Thought you might be interested in a little history lesson, there.  Didn’t want you to get bored just with all this ‘good grammar’ stuff.  Now, moving on...

6 To the MSM in America, I want to say: Where were you effing people when this country - the American government and its form of government - was hijacked by your real employers?  But the answer is contained in the question.

         I don't know how Sharyl Attkisson gets away with her honest, responsible investigative journalism.  Maybe it's her legs.  (It was all I could do, in her interview with Dr. Andy Wakefield in his office, to keep track of what they were saying.  I hope others got more out of it than I did.  In the way of information, that is.)  Anyway: CBS, you are to be commended for giving her free rein.  So I acknowledge that exception to the prevailing climate.  As for the rest of you sorry lot of journalists...why don't you grow a pair??   

7 And not just by him.  He had a lot of help along the way; and from both sides of the political aisle, and the secret government behind the public scenes (including the CIA, and the moneyed elite running things from behind that curtain).  But on all that, another time.