Contemporary Grammar- The Elusive Semi-Colon

If you ain't got no use for good grammar; or speaking good; then this won't be of no interest to you, so skip it.

One of the hardest parts of reviewing books is avoiding nitpicking about meaningless stuff; and for the most part I think I do a good job in that respect. But I have held my piece for 6 long years now concerning the disappearance of the semi-colon from our language. It’s a kind of “endangered species” in the world of grammar. And, even when one is used, it is often used incorrectly.

Let me be up front about this; I never went to college. Actually, I went for 2 days. Took a look around and realized that I was only there for other people and their expectations of me. So, I stopped going. Maybe not the brightest decision; but it’s the path I chose. But that doesn't mean I don’t know my grammar. I learned it in grammar school; of all places. And the lessons stuck.

See what I have done in the last two paragraphs? I have used a semi-colon to extend sentences beyond simple statements and add nuance to the writing. In the first sentence I used one to judge my own statement, while still keeping the integrity of the first part. And I did that 3 times in the second paragraph. That’s one use for the semi-colon.

The other great thing about semi-colons is that they can be used as a sort of parentheses to insert an idea in the middle of a statement. This allows for more complex sentences and the insertion of a different thought, which may not be directly related to the one at hand; but adds to the sentence nevertheless.

Here’s an example from a book I am in the process of reading right now. As a matter of fact, this is the sentence which broke this “camels’ back”; resulting in this silly little article.

“Eliot personally convinced Vernon Stoufffer of the popular Stouffer’s restaurant to cooperate, even though the restaurateur, worried about the impact on his business, had refused to help Cullitan four years earlier.”

Remember the first rule about a comma? It’s used to separate something from the main body of a sentence. Moreover, it is supposed to leave intact the words on either end of the commas as a complete sentence. Read that one above again and see if it meets these criteria. Clearly this sentence is crying out for a breath; which can be supplied by my old friend the semi-colon. Let’s try it on for size.

Eliot personally convinced Vernon Stoufffer of the popular Stouffer’s restaurant to cooperate, even though the restaurateur; worried about the impact on his business; had refused to help Cullitan four years earlier.

Still doesn’t satisfy the rule about the two ends of the sentence making sense while standing alone. So, let’s try and break it up into two sentences for the sake of clarity.

Eliot personally convinced Vernon Stoufffer, of the popular Stouffer’s restaurant, to cooperate. The restaurateur; worried about the impact on his business; had refused to help Cullitan four years earlier.

That’s much better. It even provides proof of the rule concerning the joining of the two ends of the sentences as one coherent thought. It also shows very clearly the difference between the use of a comma; as shown in the first sentence; and the use of a semi-colon in the second sentence. Where the first sentence needed a breath; the second one needed a pause.

This is just me finally getting something off my chest which has been bothering me for some time now. It’s no big deal; my chest or the something I just got off of it. But I do feel better. And, by the way, if you go back about 4 years or more on this blog, you will find me guilty of everything I am complaining about here today.

1. com·ma

   ˈkämə/

   noun

   noun: comma; plural noun: commas; noun: comma butterfly; plural noun: comma butterflies

   1. 1.

      a punctuation mark (,) indicating a pause between parts of a sentence. It is also used to separate items in a list and to mark the place of thousands in a large numeral.

1. sem·i·co·lon

   ˈsemēˌkōlən,ˈsemīˌkōlən/

   noun

   noun: semicolon; plural noun: semicolons; noun: semi-colon; plural noun: semi-colons

   1. a punctuation mark (;) indicating a pause, typically between two main clauses, that is more pronounced than that indicated by a comma.

Greg Hardy - Buying Justice

The Appeals trial of Greg Hardy; football player for the Carolina Panthers; was terminated in a dismissal Monday when his accuser; the elusive Nicole Holder; did not appear. Nothing sinister going on; she has been sighted skiing and partying elsewhere in the country in recent days; leaving many with the impression that she’s spending the money which Hardy provided her with to not appear at the trial. Indeed the media have confirmed that a deal for an undisclosed sum has taken place.

It seems odd that the Prosecutor’s office in Mecklenburg County; which is where the offense and original trial took place; sees nothing wrong with this. On the surface many will agree. But examine this a bit more closely and see if it passes the smell test, or if it smacks of a double standard.

First you have to forget the victim in this case; as she has seemingly done herself. That leaves Justice as the defendant; an ironic twist considering that the victim was the original Plaintiff. Her actions; or should I say inactions, along with the acquiescence of the Mecklenburg County Prosecutor’s office; have turned justice on its head by allowing Ms. Holder to walk away from the Appeals portion of the trial she initiated.

That’s right; the victim here has now become the person obstructing justice in her own case; in which she alleged she was beaten and threatened with physical violence at the hands of Greg Hardy. She has; of her own volition, and for profit; sold her status as a victim and become the criminal. She has done irreparable damage to the claims of women everywhere who have been legitimately assaulted.

As for the Prosecutor’s Office I have but one question; what is the difference between offering someone money to withdraw testimony, and intimidation of a witness? Surely there is an element of intimidation involved in this. If someone is willing to give you $100,000 to go away quietly, then I must assume they would pay $50,000 for you to disappear if you refused the offer. And the recipient of that $100,000 knows this is true to a certain degree. And that constitutes intimidation, even if she accepts the money which should never have been offered.

When someone files charges with the Court there is a perceived bond between the two. The victim has asked for the court’s help in resolving a problem which is beyond the Plaintiff’s ability to solve on their own. When that person then walks away from the Court; in this case by not showing up for the trial; they sever that bond and the expectation of protection that it offered. And when money changes hands that victim becomes a criminal.

But the real victims in this travesty of our Justice system are the thousands of people who will not be taken seriously when they file domestic abuse claims. Then there are the rest of us; we have all been robbed collectively of our faith in the Justice system to go beyond the money and deliver real justice.

The Prosecutor has said that this is just a misdemeanor case and not worth pursuing; but it seemed to be worth a lot more to Greg Hardy; underscoring just how wrong the Prosecutor is, as well as undermining the credibility of Ms. Holder’s original charges in the first place. As I said, the real losers here are you and I.

Note: The Prosecutor’s Office was unable to answer my questions concerning why they did not seek a subpoena for Ms. Holder to appear; citing only that the judge would have had to sign off on one if it were issued. In this case it appears that the Prosecutor’s office did not consider it to be worthwhile according to District Attorney Andrew Murray.

  

Mr. Murray’s office has not been able to locate Ms. Holder since November, in spite of her numerous appearances on social media. If this assertion is true; that the DA’s office has not been able to locate their star witness since November; in spite of what Mr. Murray describes as “extraordinary efforts”; then it smacks of gross indifference of the well-being of Ms. Holder by the DA’s office.That in itself will serve as a deterrent for other victims to come forward.

You can contact the District Attorney’s office directly at 704-686-0700. Tell them Rooftop sent you.

  

"The Catered Affair" with Bette Davis and Ernest Borgnine (1956)

How could I not review this film after Saturday's post? The two films are among the best of Bette Davis’ long and storied career; both being outside of her usual comfort zone. There is more of the stage in these two films than there is of Hollywood.

In this wonderful film adaptation of Paddy Chayefsky teleplay, Gore Vidal has created a concise version of a common problem; where do we fit in as individuals when compared to the happiness of those around us? Director Richard Brooks did a superb job with this movie; but then again, look at the talent he had to work with!

Bette Davis plays Agnes Hurley; a woman who is a romantic at heart yet faced with the reality of her life married to Tom Hurley; played by Ernest Borgnine; fresh from his Academy Award winning performance as “Marty” in the film of the same name; which was also written by Paddy Chayefsky. Tom drives a taxi cab, and with a little bit of luck; and some time; he hopes to own his own taxi someday soon.

But fate has a way of working its own way with things and accordingly, Agnes and Tom’s daughter Jane; played by Debbie Reynolds in her screen debut; has planned to be married to her boyfriend Ralph; played by Rod Taylor. When she tells her parents of her plans at breakfast a chain of events ensues which expose not only the shortcomings felt by Agnes in her own life; but the desperation Tom feels when he thinks that his dream of owning his own cab may be threatened by the expense of a lavish wedding for his daughter.

On the one hand Agnes feels cheated at never having had a real wedding of her own; while Tom feels trapped by an expectation that will derail his dreams; as well as making him aware of just how unhappy his wife may be over events of the past. Complicating matters is the presence of Uncle Jack Conlon; played with the usual brilliance of Barry Fitzgerald.

This film is one of those gems that seem to get lost in the greater array of older “classical” films. It’s more cerebral than the usual fare offered up by the gangster films of the 1930’s; or the romances and war films of the 1940’s and 1950’s. This type of film is timeless in its subject matter. People dealing with their own emotions, while trying to understand the emotional needs of those around them, is a subject which will never grow old. This is an excellent film.

Here's one of my trophies - it hangs on the wall of my TV room. He read the draft off a review I did of his book and actually sent this back to me! It is one of my treasured possessions

"The Day Lincoln Was Shot" by Jim Bishop (1955)

Abraham Lincoln was born on February 12, 1809. My reading of this book, and the resultant review you see here, are both coincidental to the occasion. But it does lend more of a relevance to the narrative when reading it.

I chose this book from the “stacks” in the library precisely because it is an older book, and as such it was written in closer proximity to the event. The author was writing at a time when these events were less than a century past, and there were a few people still living that had been alive when it occurred. They may have just been children at the time, but they would have remembered the events and the stories told by their parents and relatives.

Over the years the stories have changed. Prior to about 1970 most accounts agreed that Booth uttered his famous “Sic Semper Tyrannus!” as he leapt to the stage from the private box where he had just shot the President and stabbed Major Rathbone. But the contemporary accounts of the time tell a different story. That is, the individual eyewitness accounts. But history on this night would be written by one man; Edwin Stanton, Secretary of War.

Booth said two things after shooting Lincoln. The first was “Sic Semper Tyrannus!”; which was the motto of the State of Virginia, and also “The South has been avenged!” It was after saying these two things that he hung from the ledge of the box and dropped to the stage, breaking his ankle when his foot caught on the bunting draping the President’s box. But, I have to admit, the leap is a great flourish and Booth would no doubt be proud of this added highlight; true or false.

In 1954 and 1955 Mr. Bishop spent 6 months retracing the steps of the assassin and his co-conspirators, traveling from Maine and Canada to Virginia, reading all the old newspaper articles he could find and visiting the locations which were involved.

One of the strangest aspects of his research was in finding that news of the Presidents assassination was on the street the day of the assassination; as far away as Maine and almost 10 hours before he was killed. Even at a time when telegraph was the quickest means of communication, this still does not explain how the reports were so accurate as to name the theater, when at the time the President was himself still unsure of his plans. Remember that Mrs. Surratt’s son John was just then shuttling papers back and forth between Canada and the Confederate government in Virginia.

But this book is not given over to conspiracy theories. Rather, it is more concerned with an hour by hour description of what each of the participants were doing from about 7 AM on Friday April 14, 1865 until the President succumbed to his wound at 22 minutes past 7 AM the following morning. It is of interest to note that had Booth not killed Lincoln on Good Friday the late President might not have gained such stature as a martyr. In a way Booth helped bestow that honor on the man he claimed to loathe.

Each chapter of the book explores not only the events of that hour, but also the prior history of how the events led there. This is as an exciting account of the night Lincoln was shot as you will find. Robert Redford’s film; “The Conspirators”; was a fine film, but it relied on the “smooth” version of events. There is something lacking in the film which Mr. Bishop has captured so well within these pages; the confusion of the night as Booth was getting away.

One example of the contemporary inaccuracies which found it's way into the movie is the scene in Secretary of State Seward's room. The room was in complete darkness. Due to extreme amount of noise made by Lewis Paine as he attempted to shoot, and finally stab the Secretary's son at the top of the stairs, his daughter had extinguished all the lights in the room at the time and even tried to hold the door back when Paine attempted to enter. As a matter of fact he wound up struggling in the dark with two persons, one of whom was the daughter. 

As the streets of Washington filled with throngs of people on foot; and some in carriages; Booth stuck fairly to the script he had planned to make his escape over the bridge at the Navy Yard. That bridge was closed to traffic at 9PM nightly; and so no one really thought that Booth had gone that way. After all, the sentries were there to stop anyone trying to leave or enter the city. But, with the war just about over; General Johnston’s troops had not yet surrendered; the sentries were lax and allowed two of the assassins to pass over the bridge and on toward Surrattsville and the Surratt Tavern where there were guns and binoculars awaiting them.

The book has a sense of immediacy about it which can only come from the careful pacing of the author, as he lets you in on each piece of information as it happens over the course of the night. And even though you know the story; indeed the author references the outcome in several places; the reader is still held captive to the narrative.

Jim Bishop wrote a syndicated column for about 6 years between 1957 and 1963. In 1964 he released ''A Day in the Life of President Kennedy,'' which he had just finished 10 days before the assassination in Dallas. The book had been approved by JFK without revisions. However, Jackie Kennedy asked for 60 minor changes after his death and prior to publication; all of which the author acceded to. 

Mr. Bishop later wrote “The Day Kennedy Was Shot”, which was first released in 1968. TV personality Bill O’Reilly has had a successful run of books about the Lincoln and JFK assassinations, and I’ve even read them. They add nothing to the stories and in some places are very reminiscent of the style which Jim Bishop used in writing his books on the same subjects; only several decades earlier than Mr. O’Reilly. That’s why I like to roam “the stacks” at the library. A lot of “new” things can be found there.

Understanding the Difference - ISIS vs. ISIL

Talking about ISIS always ends up with a joke or two aimed at either the Islamic extremists who make up ISIS/ISIL; or an assertion that President Obama is pandering somehow to the terrorist group by calling them ISIL instead of ISIS; as if that makes a difference. So, what is the difference? It’s a pretty large one; involving what is known as the Levantine Basin at the eastern end of the Mediterranean.

The Levantine Sea is at the water’s edge of Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Egypt and even part of Libya. So why does this matter? Because it encompasses not only a huge oil reserve but also the islands of Cyprus and Crete, which were once stepping stones to Europe during the Crusades;  and can be likened to our own island hopping to Japan in World War Two. So, the designation ISIL more accurately reflects the wider goal of the terror group to conquer territories beyond the Middle Eastern battleground of Syria and Iraq. The entire area encompasses over 320,000 square km. (That’s about 123,000 square miles.)

The northern part of this sea between Turkey and Cyprus is called the Cilician Sea. The main port there is Iskenderun, which sits just above the border to Syria. I spent a hundred years there one summer.

The real prize for the ones who wind up controlling this area will be the Leviathan gas field which lies beneath the ocean floor. The possibility of the revenue from that resource finding its way into the hands of a militant and radical group such as ISIS/ISIL is frightening. And make no mistake about it, this is their goal.

This is actually the reason the group calls itself ISIL rather than ISIS, and it clearly demonstrates their intention to control not only the territory on which they are currently fighting, but also the entire Levantine Basin. So, the next time you laugh at the media sparring over the name of the group, try and remember that this is no joking matter. 

While ISIS stands for an Islamic State in Syria; ISIL is the more accurate moniker and stands for an Islamic State in Levantine. The former sounds almost like a small regional conflict, while the latter is more emblematic of the long term danger posed by this group; whatever you choose to call them. 

"Pocketful of Miracles" with Bette Davis and Glenn Ford (1961)

Here’s a movie which captured my attention; as well as my heart; back when I was about 7 years old. As I grew up I was only ever to catch this one on late night TV reruns; and later on when it was released on VCR I was probably the only one to borrow it from the library. And that’s a shame because this is one fine movie.

From the original story by Damon Runyon (“Guys and Dolls”) to the direction by Frank Capra (too many films to mention) this movie has everything going for it. The acting is excellent, with none of the cast playing their roles “over the top” and chewing up the scenery. Even Peter Falk; who is known for being a bit too much like Peter Falk in all his roles; manages to pull off his role as Joy Boy with just the right mixture of comedy and pathos.

The story centers on the relationship between Apple Annie; played by Bette Davis in one of her finer roles; who is a poor street peddler selling apples on the corner during the Depression. Her best customer is Dave the Dude; a successful gambler played by Glenn Ford in one his most memorable roles; who is superstitious and never does anything without buying an apple from Annie before he does it. He believes in the power of luck, and that luck; as far as he is concerned; comes only from Annie’s apples.

Annie has a secret. The old woman has a daughter, Louise; played by Ann Margret; who lives out of town, where she attended a very prestigious school. Now grown, she is returning to New York City to see her mother, who she has not seen since she was a little girl. She believes her mother to a wealthy socialite named Mrs. E. Worthington Manville. She believes this because her mother has been writing her letters to this effect for many years. So, while Louise is excited, Annie is completely unhinged. Her daughter knows nothing about her mother’s real circumstances in general; let alone that she has been reduced to peddling apples in the street.

Annie has been conducting this ruse by obtaining stationary from the fancy hotel where she claims to be living. She uses that stationary to write the letters to her daughter and reinforce the fantasy of her life as a rich woman. But now that the gig is up Annie is terrified that her lies are about to be revealed. This is more than she can bear.

When Dave the Dude becomes aware of the problem he does what he does best. He’s a gambler after all; so he takes the long odds and with the urging of his girlfriend Queenie Martin; played by Hope Lang; he decides to help Annie. With Queenie coaching Annie on the refinements of being a socialite, Dave arranges for all their other friends to pitch in on the effort to save Annie’s reputation.

Pool hustler "Judge" Henry G. Blake ; played by Thomas Mitchell;  poses as Annie's husband. Dave also arranges for Annie and the Judge to occupy an out-of-town friend's hotel suite. Even the man’s butler, Hudgins; played by veteran character actor Edward Everett Horton; gets involved.

Dave, meanwhile, is having his own problems postponing a very important “meeting” with some very important “people”.  The whole film is pure Frank Capra as the two plots unfold and you are left wondering how all this will work itself out in the end. But it’s a Frank Capra film and everybody winds up being exactly where they should be. And along the way Dave the Dude learns that true luck; and love; don’t necessarily come from apples.

"You Got Trouble!" - Selling Fear

With only about 22 months left before the next Presidential election, the fear mongers are already out in full force, selling their two most potent products; the twin politics of fear and division. And the demand is great; with consumption by the masses at an all-time fever pitch. How else to explain the leading news stories of the day?

First though, let’s take a look at the science and art behind fear mongering. And what better example of this than Professor Harold Hill as he ramps up the fear in River City, Iowa against the latest unknown demon in the town. In his case it was a pool table. Watch the clip and see how the good Professor is desperate for an issue to arouse the town into needing his help. They don’t even know they have a problem until he seizes on an offhand comment by Buddy Hackett and then invents one for them; after which the townsfolk quickly fall in line to save their “culture”; in this case embodied by a billiard table.

It’s kind of like that in America today; with politicians casting about for anything that will arouse the concern of the public and create a demon for the people to unite against; all behind a politician as a leader of course.

Take the measles thing; it has been laid largely at the door of the illegal immigrants, who often do not have the required immunizations when they arrive here in the U.S. It’s a very easy thing to get the people riled up against that portion of the population. Very simple; illegals arrive without the shots required to attend school; and are allowed to go anyway and they get our kids sick. Pretty plain until you scratch the surface a bit.

I live in North Carolina, where we require immunization against the measles and several other diseases to attend public school. But we have a lot of kids here who are not immunized. They must be getting a waiver based upon their status as illegals, right? Wrong. They are allowed to attend school because the law allows an exemption for RELIGIOUS reasons. No proof required; just write a letter stating that you do not believe in immunizations and you can enroll your child in school.

So, what we have are people on the right complaining about illegal immigrants going to school and infecting their children with a disease that was all but eradicated until the right came along and got an exemption for the vaccine under the guise of religious freedom and smaller government. And the liberals even joined in with the flawed claim about the vaccines causing autism; which was proven to be false about 3 years ago.

Fear rules the day if you let it. And there is always somebody willing to don that nice looking Music Man costume; ready to lead the band and incite the fear which will keep everything static.

Here are the applicable portions of the NC statute concerning vaccinations required to attend Public School;

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 130A-152. Immunization required

(a) Every child present in this State shall be immunized against diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, poliomyelitis, red measles (rubeola) and rubella. In addition, every child present in this State shall be immunized against any other disease upon a determination by the Commission that the immunization is in the interest of the public health. Every parent, guardian, person in loco parentis and person or agency, whether governmental or private, with legal custody of a child shall have the responsibility to ensure that the child has received the required immunization at the age required by the Commission. If a child has not received the required immunizations by the specified age, the responsible person shall obtain the required immunization.

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 130A-157. Religious exemption

If the bona fide religious beliefs of an adult or the parent, guardian or person in loco parentis of a child are contrary to the immunization requirements contained in this Chapter, the adult or the child shall be exempt from the requirements. Upon submission of a written statement of the bona fide religious beliefs and opposition to the immunization requirements, the person may attend the college, university, school or facility without presenting a certificate of immunization.