Interrobang Redux?!
Sometimes, when people disagree, we shout at one another, as shown writing by an exclamation point (!). Sometimes, we ask each other questions, denoted by a question mark (?). Sometimes we do both at once, and aren’t sure which piece of punctuation to use. This is especially true when the question is rhetorical.
The accepted literary solution to this problem is narrator intrusion:
“What is your fucking problem?” he screamed.
This is a perfectly acceptable solution, and one often required in order to provide more detailed emotional information.
However, there is a school of thought that says sometimes, that extra information is unneeded, in which case you’re wasting characters, and it is acceptable to go with the more informal:
“What is your fucking problem?!”
This is known as the interrobang. By simply combining the two pieces of punctuation, you get all the impact of both without needing extra words. I’m not sure how far back this solution dates. Wikipedia describes a combined symbol that was created in 1962, but I would wager using the two symbols together dates back further, to the origin of comics, at least, where authors needed to conserve space to make room for art, but also had the advantage of that art and word balloons to denote speaker and emotion.
For decades now, “low” forms of literature, advertisements, low budget fanzines, dimestore novels, etc., always pressed for space, have adopted the shortcut, and it was widely popularized in the last 20 years by common e-mail and text message usage.
Granted, this parlance has also brought us such wonders as :), omg, lol, ~@, <3, and wtf.
Or WTF!?
To a modern reader, these shortcuts contain a wealth of information, but they are also considered cutesy, their use considered beneath “high” literature. Most editors don’t want to soil prose novels by bathing in that kiddie pool, and in this I generally agree. But I think there are a few fish in that pool we can catch, wash the pee off of, and transplant to the adult pool, making fishing more delicious to our adult palates. Because that’s how literary evolution has always worked. Remember when it was taboo to use “ain’t”?
So I say we should open our doors, let the interrobang in, and just make sure he washes his hands before dinner and brushes his teeth after. He ain’t hurtin’ no one, no matter what those stodgy old 50’s proofreading books we still adhere to say.
However, amongst the hordes of publishing professionals I know, including many of my own friends and family, there is division on this issue, with the majority in favor of the status quo. Many times I feel like I am a lonely voice, shouting in the dark.
Loyal Peephole readers may recall that I whined about this the last time I was editing a book, and it sparked something of a debate. Now that I’m in editing mode again, let’s test the water once more.
Anyone out there want to weigh in? Can I get some love for the interrobang, or y’all still hatin’?
I have love for the lonely old interrobang, if only for the awesome name. So yes, I’ll join your crusade to uplift the humble interrobang.
I’m pro-interrobang. In rare situations, I’ll even accept its complement. (“Dear, there’s a Mister… sorry, what was your name? … McMahon on the phone for you, and he’s calling regarding … may I ask what this is regarding? … regarding the TEN MILLION DOLLARS YOU WON!?”) There are an even rarer set of situations in which I’ll accept multiple exclamation points, such as to emphasize one sentence in a series of sentences which all end in exclamation points. But even though I only allow them rarely, that marks me as mighty liberal with my punctuational permissiveness, which makes me a weak co-crusader. I’ll cheer from the sidelines.
Oh…so that’s what it’s called?! GOOOO INTERROBANG!
I could get used to it very quickly. I’ve seen it for years in the comic section of the newspaper and as you mentioned, in comic books.
It’s certainly better than “he screamed.” Although in my opinion, “shouted” is as transparent as “said”. One must indicate volume somehow. Screams ought to be confined for truly terrifying situations, and probably ought to be further restricted to true exclamations.
Those who spurn the interrobang should take heed: accept it, for you cannot stop it. English is an organic and living language. “Dis” is now in the OED. Lol, wtf, omg and even smileys will probably be in there some day too. Like it or not, the interrobang is here to stay.
My problem is “what is your f$#king problem?” could refer to one man yelling at another about his boorish behavior.
But it could also refer to a doctor asking you, in calm tones, if Viagra is right for you.
Normally I would rely on the placement of the comma for assistance, but here it’s no help at all.
Here in Russia interrobang’s been in vogue (and acceptable by publishers) for years, or even decades. So yeah, by all means, go interrobang!
You already know that I don’t mind it. 🙂 As long as the editor hasn’t required that interrobangs be deleted, I think they are often better left in.
It does depend, though. Certainly they can be overused.
Hmm, I wonder if this font supports interrobangs …
‽
Well hey yes it does!
Check this link for how to call it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang#Display
It’s an HTML reference, just take the spaces out of the following code, and it should work.
& # 8 2 5 3 ;
Forget “One Arm and the Night Wolves” — “Interrobang Redux” is going to be my new band name!