The New Yorker’s grammar rules (and how to break them)

Mary Norris’s Between You and Me takes a charmingly pragmatic approach to its own eccentric advice

16 May 2015

9:00 AM

16 May 2015

9:00 AM

Between You and Me: Confessions of a Comma Queen Mary Norris

W.W. Norton, pp.228, £15.99, ISBN: 9780393240184

‘I had had a fantasy for years about owning a dairy farm,’ says Mary Norris, as she considers her career options in the first section of this odd but charming cross between a memoir and a usage guide. ‘I liked cows: they led a placid yet productive life.’

Instead, she found a productive life — if not always as placid as she might have liked — as a copy editor on the New Yorker magazine. In Between You and Me, she presents the accumulated wisdom and winsome anecdotes of several decades of proof-reading, editorial queries and office arguments, ‘for all of you who want to feel better about your grammar’.

New Yorker memoirs are a genre of their own — no other publication generates such stylish mythology, in such bulk — but Mary Norris has something distinctive to add: a layer of clerical intrigue beneath the famous writers and distinguished editors. There are the gentle eccentrics of the collating and foundry departments. There is the pencil boy, ‘who came around in the morning with a tray of freshly sharpened wooden pencils. And they were nice long ones — no stubs.’ (Not even the New Yorker has a pencil boy any more; nor, I suspect, foundry and collating departments.) Above all, there are two women, Eleanor Gould and Lu Burke.

Gould, a house pedant of bewildering exactitude, has had press before, although Norris adds some excellent stories about her (‘My all-time favourite Eleanor Gould query was on Christmas gifts for children: the writer had repeated the old saw that every Raggedy Ann doll has “I love you” written on her little wooden heart, and Eleanor wrote in the margin that it did not, and she knew, because as a child she had performed open-heart surgery on her rag doll and seen with her own eyes that nothing was written on the heart’).

Burke is a less exalted senior colleague who seems to have been both a mentor and a warning for Norris. She serves Between You and Me as an exemplar of a less fussy editing style than Gould’s and as a bad-tempered balance to Norris’s niceness: she was the kind of copy editor who throws tantrums in corridors, belittles newcomers who dare to question her hyphen placement, and conducts quixotic campaigns against house style. She kept a tin labelled ‘comma shaker’ on her desk as a protest against all the punctuation she had to insert. She fought the New Yorker diaeresis — the chichi umlaut lookalike with which the magazine reminds its readers how to pronounce coöperate and reëlect — by repeatedly badgering the elderly style editor: apparently he agreed to surrender after she cornered him in the lift, but then died before he could send out the memo.

Norris, by contrast, believes in sweetness, light, and commas. She is so protective of the Oxford comma — the one before ‘and’ at the end of a list: see previous sentence — that she considers it a patriotic affront to name it after an English city. (She repeats the old claim that removing it creates ambiguity. Sometimes it does, as in the internet example she gives: ‘We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin.’ But including the comma can create ambiguity, too: ‘My wife, a fluffy bitch called Fifi, and I were walking along the beach.’) Her grammar rules in general vary from standard-issue prescriptive (‘they’ as alternative to ‘he or she’ is ‘just wrong’) to the New Yorkerishly baroque (a dash may not follow a colon in a sentence; no sentence should contain more than one colon).

What makes her instructive as well as amusing is her willingness to make exceptions, and her vivid, sensitive explanations of particular exceptions she’s made. One confession tinged with genuine guilt concerns a dangling modifier she now feels she should have permitted to dangle. Even singular ‘they’ is let stand if the alternative is to spoil a joke. If she can encourage fellow copy editors (I am one) to ‘feel better about grammar’ by using it as a means to concentrate on meaning and nuance with a similar level of sympathetic attention, then her book will do writers — and readers — a service.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

Available from the Spectator Bookshop, £13.99, Tel: 08430 600033

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments
  • davidofkent

    Commas and defining relative clauses can be a minefield, can’t they?

    • Verbatim

      Just when real ‘relatives’ are a pain all by themselves, along comes ‘a relative clause’!!! Any relation to Santa?

  • polistra24

    Foundry and collating! Eye-openers.

    I’d read several NYer memoirs, but for some reason none of them had conveyed the vertical integration of the company. If you have foundry and collating depts, it means NO OUTSOURCING. NYer needed lots of woodcuts and special display fonts, so it must have done the engraving and etching and casting in-house.

    Nowadays, of course, ‘foundry’ is a slave-wage Photoshop temp in India. He may be a gentle eccentric or a raving party animal, but you don’t talk to him during the three hours of his ‘career’ with you, so it doesn’t matter.

  • Perseus Slade

    ‘My wife, a fluffy bitch called Fifi, and I were walking along the beach.’
    just the two of them, eh?
    If three, then would it be better to write:
    ‘Myself, my wife and a fluffy bitch called Fifi were walking along the beach.’

    ‘they’ as alternative to ‘he or she’ is ‘just wrong’
    yeah, just use “it”

    Oh, and by the way, isn`t “yea” just a bible spelling of “yeah”

    • Verbatim

      “yea” means “yes”. So you are correct.

      • Perseus Slade

        Did the bible-writer mean “yea” to be pronounces “yeah”
        That is the question…

    • Hamburger


    • Sam Martini

      ‘My wife and I, and a fluffy bitch called Fifi…….’
      It’s not difficult.
      NB. A false comma appeared in the original of this post and I didn’t proof-read.
      Now corrected, within seconds.

    • mikewaller

      “It” doesn’t work because it is generally considered offensive when applied to human-beings. If we could get away from the urinary connotations (as we do now with our smallest unit of coinage), I think that it might be best to settle on “person” as the uni-sex singular noun and go for “pe” and “per” as in “If a person trespassing on railway property is killed by a train, pe has only perself to blame.Now let us see if the elite who read the Spectator have the capacity to impose this on the wider world! [:-)]

      • Perseus Slade

        “pee” !?
        “it” works nicely and seems perfectly natural, just get over it.

  • vieuxceps2

    Good to see “Between you and me”. It is generally “Between you and I” by those wishful to be posh.

    • Verbatim

      Yes, between “you and me” is the correct form of English. Speakers/writers ask the hypothetical question, “who?” to instruct their usage and the answer has to be “me”. We don’t ask “who?” and have the answer “I”!! So, I’m not sure whether being “posh”, or attempting to be, can be grammatically justified!!

      Now, posh and dumb – that’s a horse of a different colour! And a very spicy idea, if you’ll pardon the pun.

      • Icebow

        ‘Who did this?’
        Correct. One should not say or imply: ‘It was me who did this’.
        Correct. One should not say or imply: ‘It was me who did this’.

        • Verbatim

          Grammatical “rules” have gone out the window since schools stopped teaching grammar decades ago. I gave up in the classroom when I realized kids didn’t know where to put full stops (high school). So, I’d ask them to read their work ALOUD and they were NOT to stop and breath until they reached a full stop. Trust me, they pretty quickly learned where to put one after being blue in the face in no time flat!!!

      • mikewaller

        The other test is to take the “you and” out whereupon “me” becomes the obvious choice.

  • Jackthesmilingblack

    Confusion between adjective and adverb.
    “The beat him up real good. The guy was hurt real bad.”

    • vieuxceps2

      Jacky.not for the first time,your post is at best ambiguous.What are you trying to tell us?

  • mikewaller

    Dot Wordsworth’s piece this week on “progressive” was pathetically inadequate and should have been turned back by the editor. Unfortunately my wish to explain why I believe this to be so has been frustrated by her not seeming to appear in electronic form. Am I missing something?