A question y'all might be able to help with...

Belegon

Still Kicking Around
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Posts
17,028
I'm editing a BDSM anthology and there are capitalization and jargon issues.


Specifically, the non-capitalization of names/nicknames for subs. On a related subject, there is the use of "hir" as a pronoun, which from context seems to mean a "female (perhaps strictly lesbian) sir."

I'm waiting for a response from the publisher, but I wanted opinions...

My belief, as an editor, is that these terms are jargon. They are like "LOL." Or referring to an "ODP Report" in a financial operations meeting. That is to say, people who are in the know will see these and have no problem with them.

However, people who are NOT insiders will be merely puzzled...and perhaps thrown out of the book.

And the readership of BDSM erotica and romance is not primarily from people already within the lifestyle. Perhaps 15% of the readership is active or formerly active (a generous estimate.) The great majority is indulging a fantasy by reading and slipping into a different world.

So, the decision to me is clear, although the publisher will have the final say. Jargon is not appropriate for a generally released book, whether it be jargon from an insurance company or from a club.

What I want to know from you is... how would it affect your enjoyment of the work? Would it throw you out of your immersion in the text to have a sub's name or nickname capitalized?

What if I took the "hir" references and changed them to "her" or a similar pronoun depending on context? How would that affect you?
 
Jargon can lend authenticity and I don't think it throws people out that weren't already thinking of heading for the door.

I think if someone's interested in a book and they run across a word they don't know, they look it up, just like any other word.

Leaving out jargon also leaves out a lot of flavor.

Leave it in.
 
Jargon can lend authenticity and I don't think it throws people out that weren't already thinking of heading for the door.

I think if someone's interested in a book and they run across a word they don't know, they look it up, just like any other word.

Leaving out jargon also leaves out a lot of flavor.

Leave it in.

To clarify: I'm not talking jargon in the sense of a word... I'm talking about things that appear to be grammatical errors.

A word is easy to leave in... and appropriate. Nor is it grammatically incorrect.

That said, I value your opinion. I may need to force down my need to correct it.
 
"jargon," as you put it, within the lifestyle, that goes against the rules of the English language, drive me up a wall.
 
To clarify: I'm not talking jargon in the sense of a word... I'm talking about things that appear to be grammatical errors.

A word is easy to leave in... and appropriate. Nor is it grammatically incorrect.

That said, I value your opinion. I may need to force down my need to correct it.

Yeah, it's tough, as someone might think it's just a misspelling. I get it. I'd still leave it in, because if it's used more than once and in context, it gives the reader a chance to be curious.

I learned here what sammy was, and that it wasn't a name. But I did trip over it a few times wondering what the hell.
 
Yeah, it's tough, as someone might think it's just a misspelling. I get it. I'd still leave it in, because if it's used more than once and in context, it gives the reader a chance to be curious.

I learned here what sammy was, and that it wasn't a name. But I did trip over it a few times wondering what the hell.

I sent you a PM. Nice to have a response from someone I already know.

00Syd, your opinion is important too... and it sounds like you get that same "squick" I get from it. And I am not normally a "by the book" kinda guy, not at all.
 
Bel, my sense is that your gut reaction is pretty much on the money. Some of the capitalization practices that you may have seen are popular among small minorities of the folks in the lifestyle. Further, these practices can vary quite a bit so it's not like you could follow one and "teach" your vanilla readers something true and real about folks who are into bdsm on a regular basis.
 
I sent you a PM. Nice to have a response from someone I already know.

00Syd, your opinion is important too... and it sounds like you get that same "squick" I get from it. And I am not normally a "by the book" kinda guy, not at all.

Its just annoying to see improperly capitalized words in the middle of a sentence, you know? Lifestyle specific "slang" like 'sammy' and 'subbie' and stuff like that don't bother me, but things like 'W/we' and 'O/our' and capitalized words like 'Dom' and 'Master' (when they aren't someones proper name or the beginning of a sentence) really bug me. Just because we're sexual deviants doesn't mean we can't be grammatically correct!

I feel like if "sammy" or something like that is used in context enough times the reader would probably be able to pick up its meaning. I did. Or, if your worried that your readers aren't going to get it, you could have a glossary in the back of the book.
 
Yes, I would change the "hir" and capitalize where you feel necessary. I'm a published writer, avid reader and a BDSMer. When I first found Lit and started reading the posts in this forum and some of the BDSM stories, I found the non-capitalization of sub/slave names and especially the use of "i" instead of I, really annoying. I'm used to it now, on the forum, but in stories it still really bothers me. It immediately pulls me out and gives me the impression that the author is an amateur.

My gut feeling is that readers who are not in the lifestyle will feel the same way I do.

I suppose Stunk & White will always be my true masters, LOL.
 
Just because we're sexual deviants doesn't mean we can't be grammatically correct!

I feel like if "sammy" or something like that is used in context enough times the reader would probably be able to pick up its meaning. I did. Or, if your worried that your readers aren't going to get it, you could have a glossary in the back of the book.

High fives!

Something like "sammy" can be explained in the context of the story easily enough. I don't have any problem with that. However, slang of any variety should be used sparingly, in my opinion.
 
Yes, I would change the "hir" and capitalize where you feel necessary. I'm a published writer, avid reader and a BDSMer. When I first found Lit and started reading the posts in this forum and some of the BDSM stories, I found the non-capitalization of sub/slave names and especially the use of "i" instead of I, really annoying. I'm used to it now, on the forum, but in stories it still really bothers me. It immediately pulls me out and gives me the impression that the author is an amateur.

My gut feeling is that readers who are not in the lifestyle will feel the same way I do.

I suppose Stunk & White will always be my true masters, LOL.

I am an editor, but I would leave it myself.

"Tact" being the key word and you're going to offend the writer. Possibly a lot. It was an artistic choice in this case and taking it out also robs the author of a lot of their choices.

I'm not sure it's wrong. I think it's consistent and specific, and it means something to them. You're changing the story. No doubt.

Completely invalidating a writer's choices I think could be argued that you're overstepping editing boundaries.
 
I did some weird shit on my blog for a while and stopped it. It's not necessary in my opinion. I love e but her pronoun stuff drives me batty.
 
BUT...nobody here every corrects anybody else's expression of the PYL/pyl.

Which I think is significant.

I think this transcends grammar into telling someone who they have to call themselves or how they have to see the world, and that's what this is NOT about.
 
I am an editor, but I would leave it myself.

"Tact" being the key word and you're going to offend the writer. Possibly a lot. It was an artistic choice in this case and taking it out also robs the author of a lot of their choices.

I'm not sure it's wrong. I think it's consistent and specific, and it means something to them. You're changing the story. No doubt.

Completely invalidating a writer's choices I think could be argued that you're overstepping editing boundaries.

Hm, I've had a lot of my choices invalidated. I might have thrown minor tantrums in the moment but, looking back, I thank my editor for being such a ruthless bastard.
 
BUT...nobody here every corrects anybody else's expression of the PYL/pyl.

Which I think is significant.

I think this transcends grammar into telling someone who they have to call themselves or how they have to see the world, and that's what this is NOT about.

No, on the forum I would never correct anyone's PYL/pyl choices, out of respect. In fiction, that would be a different matter. To me, it's no different than if I read something like...

"It was a dark and stormy night :eek: but I was :D."

Just because we all know what the smilies mean, doesn't make them appropriate.

Adds: I use smilies only in the rarest of circumstances, usually ironically. I'm so freaking anal.
 
Last edited:
Hm, I've had a lot of my choices invalidated. I might have thrown minor tantrums in the moment but, looking back, I thank my editor for being such a ruthless bastard.

Well, Belegon's a ruthless bastard and I wouldn't mind either.

But this author might.

And if it isn't flat out wrong, don't fix it. I don't think this is flat out wrong. I think it's debatable and an interesting side note, but the convention means something to a lot of people.

e. e. cummings would likely agree that capitalization is an author's choice.

It's not like they're not capitalizing the first word of a sentence. They're changing the entire sense of "proper noun" by redefining someone as not being one. That's meaning. Not grammatical error.

Would you fix something where a drag queen was addressed as "her" and make sure it was grammatically always male? That changes the tone and the culture and in fact corrects what's being intentionally subverted.
 
I'd say change it. Use correct grammer. I'm sure most of the people will still read it, changed or not. And I think it would look more "professional" with capitolization and whatnot. But, your the editor and it's your choice.
 
No, on the forum I would never correct anyone's PYL/pyl choices, out of respect. In fiction, that would be a different matter. To me, it's no different than if I read something like...

"It was a dark and stormy night :eek:. but I was:D."

Just because we all know what the smilies mean, doesn't make them appropriate.

Stop making me laugh. Bitch.
 
Well, Belegon's a ruthless bastard and I wouldn't mind either.

But this author might.

And if it isn't flat out wrong, don't fix it. I don't think this is flat out wrong. I think it's debatable and an interesting side note, but the convention means something to a lot of people.

e. e. cummings would likely agree that capitalization is an author's choice.

It's not like they're not capitalizing the first word of a sentence. They're changing the entire sense of "proper noun" by redefining someone as not being one. That's meaning. Not grammatical error.

Would you fix something where a drag queen was addressed as "her" and make sure it was grammatically always male? That changes the tone and the culture and in fact corrects what's being intentionally subverted.

Although, I didn't get to read this until after I posted. I think you have a very good point. :rose:
 
Back
Top