Let a smile be your umbrella . . .

Somewhere around fifteen years ago, maybe a bit longer, I was in a meeting with some Apple Computer representatives, and one of them pointed out that in email, still at the time a fairly new form of communication, the reader didn't have facial expression and tone of voice to cue him or her. This meant that something written in jest could be misunderstood, and cause the reader to take offense. Since then I have heard and read the same thing over and over and over. Be careful! No one can tell if you're joking!

As a result of this writing paranoia two equally obnoxious phenomena have developed.


One is the emoticon. That collection of punctuation marks that are supposed to represent a face seen lying on its side, which I just discovered I didn't know how to do. They are supposed to show that the statement you just made:

• is a joke  :-)
• was just kidding  ;-)
• made you sad  :-(
• was amazing  :-0

and so on. They seem to be limited only by the writer's imagination and keyboard skills. One problem with emoticons—I'll get to the graver, more serious issue in a moment—is that the writer will sometimes say very inappropriate or hurtful things, and then excuse them with an emoticon. "God, you're fat! ;-)"

The second obnoxious phenomenon are those little collections of letters—I am stodgy enough that I hesitate to call them acronyms—that seem to follow some writers every sentence. You've seen them, or are guilty of using them. lol for laughing out loud; rotfl for rolling on the floor laughing; etc, etc, etc. These seem to get used for no logical reason at all. "I went to the store today. lol" Going to the store is so funny you laughed out loud? Going to the mall must make you laugh hysterically.

Some will say that the pseudo-acronyms are needed because it takes too much time to type all those letters, or because Twitter and its ilk only allow 140 characters. The answer to these is don't be so damn lazy, and do your communicating in a medium that actually allows you to communicate.

The really serious aspect of both phenomena is that assumes the reader has limited abilities, and allows the writer to be equally inept. You don't have to read anything carefully, because the emoticon will tell you if something was humorous. You don't have to write carefully because you can throw a :-) or a lol in at any time to excuse the clumsiness.

As a writer you have an obligation to choose your words and construct your sentences in such a way that your meaning is clear. If the intent or mood of your writing isn't clear then it is your responsibility to rewrite it until it is. And as a reader you have the obligation to actually read what is there, and to interpret  what you are reading. It is not a passive activity. You have to put some effort into it. You can't sit there and say, "Well, how was I supposed to know that story by Poe was scary? I couldn't hear his voice or see his face."

It makes you wonder how a modern transcript of Twain or Swift would look with smileys all over them to let people know they had just said something humorous or satirical. Then again, maybe Swift really thought the Irish could be bred for food.