Marks of Madness

I admit I'm a Virgo, a star sign associated with a pedantic attention to detail, so you won't be surprised when I admit to a ridiculous obsession with one of the oft neglected details of written communication - and that's punctuation.

As the frequent creator and/or editor of pieces of professional writing, indeed, I've been known to angst for hours over an incorrectly placed comma or, horror of horrors, an apostrophe.

Punctuation, it seems, wasn't established as a proper system until the 1400s and has its roots back in the 3rd century BC when some bloke from Byzantium came up with a system of dots and dashes, basically to help people reading verses know when to breathe.

It's kind of ingenious when you think about what just a bunch of tiny marks can achieve.

But I've come to find that the way we use puncutation in itself contains a secret discourse that I have attempted to decode in recent weeks. What I mean is that the kinds of punctuation marks you either favour or forget in themselves may say something about your intentions as a communicator.

Today I'll begin this subject by considering first the full stop, and second, the exclamation mark.

1. THE FULL STOP

First. The Full Stop. (Not to be confused with the Half Stop which is, I understand, a position in a Baseball line-up). Now I have no idea what bloody genius discovered that by simply stalling the nib of his pen to create something that looked like the carcass of a dead tea-fly, a rabble of words spilling forward in a kind on goggle of excitement might be contained and quickly settled. All I know is that it seems to work brilliantly.

But let's consider the unlikely scenario in which. The. Full stop is. Overused. It's easy to see. That the flow of language. All. But. Stalls. And you come across as. A bit of an experimental, literary. Wanker with absolutely no conscience when it comes to your readers' general impatience. With. Time wasting. They just. Want you to. Get on with. It.

Conversely, the under-use of fullstops too may have dire consequences as pieces of writing that contain absolutely no clues as to when would be a good time to stop reading can leave the reader in a kind of limbo and wondering when in God's name this paragraph is going to end or this sentence is it now or now or now without a full stop or two there can be no cue to the reader as to a good time to take a toilet break or have a nice cup of tea or perhaps a quick shag so the appropriate use of full stops certainly has its practicalities. And, by the time you choose to put your reader out of his misery, as biology would have it, he will most likely be on the floor with blue-tinged lips and gasping like a half-dead halibut.

2. THE EXCLAMATION MARK

The Exclamation Mark is one of a handful of punctuation marks that I believe should be approached with extreme caution.

Known variously as a 'shriek', or a 'bang' this little mark has its origins in the Latin word for admiration - io - in the sense that it referred to a 'sense of wonderment'. That resulting mark was known as the 'sign or note of admiration' until the 17th century and made its first appearance in the Luther Bible in 1797. (Not much admiration, but one assumes plenty of shrieking and banging happening in religious writing. I'm sure Jesus would agree).

Of all the punctuation marks at your disposal, the exclamation mark it seems is one of the most overused in common writing and inevitably sends a shudder up my spine!

There is a sense of melodrama to this mark that can imbue even the most mundane sentence with a hyperbole you may not always intend! It is not, as some foolishly assume, a mark that amplifies importance! Instead, it you may unintentionally subvert your meaning! You may find otherwise harmless phrases convey to the reader an unintentional urgency or significance!

It all gets horribly worse when the writer, in a florid state of emotion opts for not one but a collection of exclamation marks!! Remember, an exclamation mark is a bang!!!! It's a shout!!! Imagine one shout or bang becoming several!!!!!!! You'd think you were being attacked by either gun-wielding brigands or Neanderthal villagers bearing burning torches!!!!!!!! Your reader may be forgiven for questioning your mental state!!! Or if you've gone completely insane!!!!!!!!!!!!

The best way to illustrate it is with an otherwise inoffensive statement that you may find in an office memo or, perhaps a police statement (depending on your character).

Exhibit 1: No Exclamation Mark

"Look at what's happening."

Without an exclamation mark, this phrase sits their somewhat sedately as you position yourself as a focused, reasonable observer.

Exhibit 2: One Exclamation Mark

"Look at what's happening!"

The senses are stirred! One begins to wonder, "Where? What should I be looking at!"

Exhibit 3: Exclamation Mark Overload

"Look at what's happening!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Aside the statement looking like it's been hijacked by a revolution of organised sperm, it's easy to see how the writer or speaker has been transformed into a hyperventillating maniac!!!!! There is no calm observation here, but panic!!!!!!! There's an urge to adopt the crash position, take cover under your desk, suck your thumb and scream for mummy!!!!!!!!

Now breathe, breathe, breathe. You'll be fine I promise once you realise that in the world of exclamation marks, less really is more.

As F. Scott Fitzgerald once advised:

Cut out all those exclamation marks. An exclamation mark is like laughing at your own jokes.

He meant, it's like an orgy of self-admiration that may not always work in your favour.

To be continued....

Blog or Be Damned

You've been invited to subscribe to a blog, but hang on, what should you expect? What are the rules of engagement?

After all, this isn't like a mainstream newspaper you may be familiar with. Blogs, generally, aren't guided by any formal 'editorial policies'. They aren't niched to specific target demographics and they're not sustained by advertising dollars. So how do you know if a blog is for you?

Should you subscribe to my blog, you'll come to know that I'm one of those people who has a theory for just about everything. It's a congenital weakness that I have absolutely no explanation for. Although if pushed, I'm sure I could provide you with a theory as to why I have a theory for everything.

Here is my theory about what makes a good blog. Like all good theories, it is open to testing.

HOPE'S THEORY ON BLOGS

Blogs are generally written by people who:

1. Believe they are interesting (and yes, sadly, some are kidding themselves).
2. Think they have something to say (not always meaningful)
3. Have time they wish to invest in the process (often, arguably, a little too much time).

Blogging can be inspiring and interesting and provide a worthy platform for you to showcase your writing talents, your ideas and takes on life. They can also reflect a certain narcissistic attachment to the daily minutiae of life, and a desire to analyse one's thoughts on a specific issue or the day's events.

It is arguable as to whether such attachment and the predisposition to analysis is healthy. As a writer, for example, I do read the occasional blogs posted by my colleagues in their fervid attempts to promote themselves. I am always struck by the high levels of self-involvement in these blog and I imagine the writers, sucking on their lukewarm cups of coffee while seated at their desks in their pyjamas and looking like Phyllis Diller on a bad hair day, posting their latest with one mantra driving them on. That mantra is: "It's all about me."

Call me cruel, folks, but frankly YOU may not be all that interesting. Much as I'd love to share your breathless reports about how fabulous YOU is progressing on your fabulous journey through your fabulous life (or alternatively, how depressed Dora is coping with the latest miserable episode from a tawdry, little life), this is not what blogging should be about.

I for one have always imagined that any communication, blogging included, however small, should be motivated by some simple guiding principles that I consciously attempt to apply in all my daily interactions (not always successfully). I urge all bloggers to consider these:

Firstly, any communication, should be targeted at a specific audience with the process of targeting providing good boundaries for determining, for example, appropriateness of topic and style of language used. In communication strategising, audience targeting is the first step in good planning so why not apply this as a blogger. Ask yourself, who are my subscribers? What are they interested in? Apply the WIFM principle as all good marketers do. Every reader is looking for a level of engagement that delivers a personal benefit. Whether it is to make them laugh or cry, whether it is to enlighten and enthuse them, whether it's to establish a connection with them through your own life, it doesn't matter. Just spare some time to determining what your audience wants and expects from you.

Secondly, every communication, however mundane, is necessarily driven by a specific objective. "Pass thee salt", "lend me some money", "come over for coffee". Whenever we open our mouths or consign anything to paper, there is usually something we want to achieve or to get.

There are three main outcomes we can want from any communication. To:

• Inform
• Persuade
• Entertain.

These outcomes, as you can see, apply to the WIFM principle (What's In It For Me). Most people love learning new things. They respond to new points of view that might have them thinking about or doing something differently. They like to laugh! Information, persuasion and entertainment, ultimately aim to deliver something of value to your listener or reader.

Over arching it all should be the desire to impress because every communication ultimately impacts on your public and personal image. Let me say here that gushing self love is not certain to make you impress. Let me be blunt: nobody likes a wanker so err on the side of caution. Be proud of your accomplishments but sandwich the exuberant ego masturbation between a top and tail that puts your accomplishments in the perspective of your reader and what he or she may gain from your journey.

Finally, in determining if or when you should disseminate your communication, whether it is to have 'that' chat, or send out 'that' email, or even write this blog, the single, most important criteria you can apply is the ibe I learned in the very first week of my journalism degree: Is it newsworthy?

Knowing what's newsworthy is like breathing for any journalists worth their salt. A good story will get a journo's spidey senses tingling almost quicker than a rumour of a 75% off sale at David Jones will send my ESP (Extra Spending Potential) into a spin. Journalists know what makes a story newsworthy and it is based, on a variety of criteria. For example.

1. Is it timely?
2. Is it relevant to your audience?
3. Does it have a high immediate value?

(I found a more detailed description of newsworthiness at www.cybercollege.com).

Be aware though, that newsworthiness along can provide no clear guarantee as to the attractiveness of your story or material. True journalists, I'm sure, are with me in rueing the impacts of checkbook journalism and celebrity-fever on the calibre of news with a tendency today for front-pagers to be dominated by a fawning kind of populism. Opinion masquerading as news has tarnished the quality of many news reports in my view.

Still, if you haven't managed to secure a picture of Rihanna's cellulite to help sell your site, be assured that if your material is timely, relevant and valuable, you will have an audience somewhere.

Happy blogging!