Miscellany № 106: pistols, punctuation and print

I came across a post last July on Emojipedia, in which Keith Broni* noted that Twitter, or X, had redesigned its PISTOL emoji. PISTOL had always been controversial: most online platforms started off with PISTOLs drawn as realistic firearms, but, over the course of the mid-2010s, most of them moved to toylike renderings of water pistols instead. Twitter had followed suit.

Last year, though, as Broni reported, Twitter’s water pistol was redrawn to show a realistic, if simplified, handgun. There doesn’t seem to have been a great deal of fanfare from Twitter itself, or any formal justification for why the change was made. Which is, perhaps, not a surprise, since Elon Musk fired Twitter’s PR team soon after he became CEO in 2022. There’s no-one left to announce anything.

Ordinarily, I would have dismissed this news as relatively small beer. Emoji are redesigned all the time, even if usually not in quite such a radical fashion. Moreover, Elon Musk has always been a contrarian, and his increasingly hard-right rhetoric often seemed calculated more to enrage than to persuade — and was, as such, easy to ignore.

Now, though, as I witness the political turmoil gripping the USA, and I bear in mind that Elon Musk is one of its fiercest cheerleaders, I wonder if that small but significant change to a single emoji is more important than I once thought. When it’s published this July, Face With Tears of Joy will talk about how emoji can change appearances and meanings — and indeed, it takes the PISTOL as a case study — but Twitter’s mean-spirited update to ‘🔫’ is almost painfully relevant. The renewed presence of a realistic pistol emoji on an ailing but still relevant social network seems in hindsight to have been a harbinger of something much worse coming down the line.


In an attempt to lighten the mood, may I present a short extract from Yuyn Li’s short story, “Apostrophe’s Dream”, part of a collection called A Cage Went in Search of a Bird:

colon: Ah, yes, friends, let me remind you all: we have been discussing the pressing issue of relevance. We are, unlike letters and numbers, increasingly facing a fate of being misused, abused, and worse, rejected as being superfluous.
 
comma: Tell that to my Oxford cousin—he’s the most unflappable creature but that doesn’t help in his case. Half—no, more than half—of the world don’t even know of his existence these days.

Yes: this is indeed a conversation between punctuation marks, and I am not spoiling it too greatly if I tell you to expect the ellipsis, exclamation mark, period and other marks to weigh in too. Read the full story at The Dial!


Lastly, podcast fans should listen to this recent episode of Grammar Girl, entitled “Cancellation”. Mignon Fogarty, the host, explains why the American spellings of “cancellation” and “canceled” use a double and single l respectively, which is interesting enough in itself, but do hang around for the second part of the show, in which Mignon reads a short essay by Glenn Fleishman on the origins of the term “fine print”. It’s a fact-filled summary of more than four centuries of printing history.

Enjoy!

*
From one Keith to another, 🤜🤛. 
Rhetoric which has caused me and many others to shut down our Twitter accounts either temporarily or permanently. If you’d like to follow Shady Chracters on social media, please see the alternative links in the colophon

Complying with the Online Safety Act

In October 2023, the UK government passed into law the Online Safety Act, a set of regulations intended to make online services more responsible for the content they carry. It is a laudable aim, but unfortunately the distinctions the Act draws between large sites such as Facebook and Google and smaller sites such as this one are insufficiently well defined. The upshot is that complying with the Act places a much larger burden on the owners of sites such as Shady Characters than it does on the owners of those larger sites.

Compounding the problem is that the guidance provided by Ofcom, the UK telecoms regulator, is not entirely clear on exactly which sites must comply with the Act. The good news, inasmuch as I understand the Act and its consequences, is that Shady Characters is already very close to being a site which does not need to comply. Commenters cannot upload images, which removes one vector for potentially offensive or graphic content. Problematic textual comments are generally caught by moderation filters, and the volume of comments is low enough so that I can read and respond to each one individually — and remove or edit them if necessary.

The one feature that does fall foul of the act is the ability for commenters to reply to one another. From the OSA’s perspective, this makes Shady Characters into a “user-to-user” service, which would bring it under the purview of the Act. As such, I will be removing the ability to reply to other users’ comments from today onwards. (Existing comments and replies will be retained.) I’m sorry that this has to be done, but I don’t think I have a great deal of choice.

I’ll be keeping abreast of news about the OSA and how smaller sites must comply with it, and it may be that I can reenable replies at some point in the future. For now, though, thank you for reading (and commenting!), and I hope that this doesn’t affect your enjoyment of the site too greatly.

Shady Characters on AMSEcast: a podcast about calculators

I’ve had nuclear energy on the mind recently — a product of watching Oppenheimer, perhaps, and also the UK government’s newfound interest in nuclear power in the interest of combatting climate change. Apropos of all that, then, I was happy to appear on a recent episode of AMSEcast, the podcast of the American Museum of Science and Energy in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The episode was hosted by the museum’s director, the genial Alan Lowe, who was kind enough to let me rabbit on at length on the subjects of counting, calculators, and computers. I really enjoyed talking to Alan, and I hope you enjoy listening too!

Miscellany № 105: blog questions challenge

There is something interesting happening with blogging. For a long time, blogs like this one were the way to opine, to share, to bloviate. Then social media came along and stole blogging’s thunder, with the average blogger gravitating towards long threads on Twitter (RIP; † ⚰; 💀; etc., etc.) or photo-heavy Instagram posts. Next came newsletters — blogs delivered by email, essentially — which finally broke the social media hegemony.

And yet, neither social media nor newsletters have ever had quite the same vibe as blogging. If you rely on social media, your posts live or die by how well they attract outrage or sympathy. If you rely on newsletters, you may be inadvertently rubbing shoulders with Nazis. In either case, the continued existence of your “platform” — your social media posts, your newsletters — depends on the whims of a company with its interests at heart, not yours.

All this is to say that I am very happy to see that blogging is having a bit of a moment, as exemplified by the so-called Blog Questions Challenge. This is a kind of internet chain letter, started by Scott Boms* on his own blog, “Documenting”, and to which I am rudely attaching myself without having been invited. The idea is that bloggers answer a few questions about where their blogs came from, how they work, and where they’re going. As such, I present to you the Shady Characters edition of the Blog Questions Challenge.


Why did you start blogging in the first place?

I wanted to write. I’m not entirely sure why, but I read a lot as a kid and books seemed to be important in some slightly mysterious way.

I eventually had an idea that there might be something interesting about the more unusual typographical marks I sometimes came across — ¶ @, *, † § and others — which led me to write what I hoped might become the constituent chapters of a book on the subject.

Having written those “chapters”, though, I didn’t really know what to do with them. Email a literary agent? A publisher? That seemed very forward, so I started Shady Characters instead and have been writing here ever since. (The agent and the publisher came along later, so it all turned out alright in the end.)

What platform are you using to manage your blog and why did you choose it?

I’ve used WordPress all this time — almost exactly thirteen years now. It seemed like the best option at the time, with endless scope for customisation and a robust network of supporters from whom to get help and inspiration.

WordPress comes in open source and commercial flavours. The first, where you have to install and administer WordPress yourself, is what I use. The second, where a commercial company such as WordPress.com or WPEngine handles all of that for you, always seemed like a very expensive way to go about things.

Now, though, WordPress’s open source and commercial faces are coming into conflict. Matt Mullenweg, who co-founded WordPress in 2003 and has maintained the air of a benevolent dictator since then, seems to be suffering from early-onset tech leader derangement. (Perhaps it’s catching.) Mullenweg has argued that for-profit companies (his own aside, of course) which benefit from WordPress’s freely available source code should be contributing more to that same source code, despite there being no legal compulsion to do so. The resulting ructions in the WordPress world have not been reassuring.

Have you blogged on other platforms before?

I used Google’s Blogspot for a personal diary a long, long time ago.

When do you feel most inspired to write?

I am not, it is fair to say, a natural writer. I have to treat it more like a job: set up a schedule and stick to is as closely as I can, family and other obligations notwithstanding. To fuel my miscellany posts, I keep a list of interesting websites, news stories and other articles as inspiration. Occasionally, though, something will pop up that I need to write about. A recent post on generative AI was one instance of that; an exploration on statistical frequency of punctuation marks was another.

Do you publish immediately after writing, or do you let it simmer a bit as a draft?

Occasionally, I’ll still be trying to figure out what a post is actually about as I’m in the middle of writing it. In those cases, there will be an extended period of writing and rewriting. Most other posts I publish as soon as I’ve finished them.

What are you generally interested in writing about?

I thought about this recently. For a long time, the header on the Shady Characters home page told readers to expect “un­usual marks of punc­tu­ation, books and book his­tory, and everything in between”. Now, though, with the publication of Empire of the Sum behind me and Face with Tears of Joy coming up this summer, things aren’t so clear-cut. For the moment, I’ve settled on this: “unorthodox information technologies”. I’m not sure it conveys exactly what I want it to, but it’s close enough.

Who are you writing for?

Hmm. Hmm. I would like to say that I’m writing for posterity — to help collate and collect stories, facts and other bits of information that deserve to be shown to a wider audience. But if I’m honest with myself, I’m writing for me — I’m writing because I enjoy the craft and the habit of it, and because each word written by a human being is another blow struck against the entropy of the universe. (I’m a lapsed physicist, in case it isn’t obvious.)

What’s your favorite post on your blog?

I honestly don’t know! Have a look at the Contents page and let me know what your favourite post is in the comments.

Any future plans for your blog? Maybe a redesign, a move to another platform, or adding a new feature?

In writing terms, I’d like to get back to a more regular cadence, which will be easier once the kids are a little older.

In design terms, I’ll be sticking with this design for a while longer. You can see the original one on archive.org; it lasted for around six years, and the current design is now pushing eight. Even so, I’m quite proud of it and I have no plans to change it any time soon.

The one thing I would like to change is the WordPress software that underpins the blog. It’s written in a programming language called PHP that I don’t especially enjoy using, and the shenanigans at the top of the WordPress community do not inspire confidence in WordPress itself. Grupetto.cc, my (very) occasional cycling blog, uses a system called Eleventy. It’s simpler and more flexible than WordPress, and I’ve been plotting a move to it for Shady Characters for a while. Time will tell when that happens.

Next?

Might I tag in Glenn Fleishman or Doug Wilson to give us their answers to these questions?

Thanks for reading!

*
Here are a few more examples from Jon Hicks, Rachel Andrew, Jasper Tandy and Aegir Hallmundur

Miscellany № 104: new year, new miscellany

Hello, and welcome to 2025. Is it that time already?


The possessive apostrophe (or rather, the abuse of the possessive apostrophe) is a recurrent guest star here at Shady Characters, but usually in the English language. Recently, though, the Guardian reported that unneeded apostrophes are infecting German, too. The so-called Deppenapostroph, or “idiot’s apostrophe”, appears when a German-language expression uses it to indicate a possessive — despite the fact that it is more correct to add an “s” on its own rather than “’s”.

Compare and contrast with the summer kerfuffle chronicled at Language Log, in which Mark Libermann summarises a spat over how to add the possessive to the surnames of those on the Democratic party’s erstwhile presidential ticket. Is it “Harris’” or “Harris’s”? “Walz’” or “Walz’s”? All happy languages are alike, one might say; each unhappy language is unhappy in its own way.

Head to Language Log to get Libermann’s professional (and sensible) take on the matter.


In Face With Tears of Joy, (available now to preorder at Amazon and Bookshop.org!), I write a little about the mysterious, blank-faced Unicode characters (□, � and others) that sometimes pop up when a computer or smartphone doesn’t support the latest emoji. I was happy to see an in-depth treatment of those same characters pop up at the website of Thomas Phinney, a typographer and font expert.

If Thomas’s name is familiar, it’s because he has in the past helped detect fraud by means of minute inspections of printed text and the application of a detailed knowledge of different fonts’ features and quirks. There’s lots to read on that subject and others at his website!


Although it didn’t start life as an emoji, the fact that the peace sign (☮️) has been inducted into Unicode’s hallowed emoji halls is an indication of how potent a symbol it is. Or perhaps, how potent a symbol it was. At the New York Times, Michael Rock isn’t sure that ☮️ carries the same weight it once did. What’s your take? Are we in danger of losing this once-contentious, once-ubiquitous symbol?


That’s all for this week! Happy new year, and may your 2025 be filled with information technologies of the most unorthodox sort.