Excursus

TV Spot 2 - Where Will You Be?

Following Daringfireball’s link to Apostrphe Atrophy (whose site seems to be down, hopefully termporarily), there was a flurry of comments on MetaFilter militating in favor of straight quotes:

I always turn off “smart quotes” in Word. I think it looks pretentious.

I agree! Up with the “dumb quotes” backlash!

“i hate smart quotes”

Yeah, smart quotes are ugly. I’d rather people target usage (groce’rs quotes, I’m looking at you) before aesthetics.

This is perplexing, but an article Quote, Unquote over at the Ministry of Type offers an explanation for the “dumb quotes” backlash:

So why the problem? Why do some people prefer straight quotes? Perhaps it has something to do with how the symbols are perceived. If you type something and the program you’re using changes it, then your first reaction may well be one of resentment, “How dare this program claim to know better than me!?” If what it changed it to is better, for example, a spelling correction, then you will accept it and move on. However, if it made what appears to be a superficial change, a stylistic correction, then it is more likely your resentment will remain, and you’ll go looking for that know-it-all option in the program preferences and self-righteously turn it off.

The rationale is plausible, but turns on a conflation. “Smart quotes” does not refer to a kind of character—the typographic quotes. It is rather the automatic replacement of straight quotes with the correct typographic quotes. Invented by David Dunham smart quotes first appeared in miniWRITER and then in Acta, the venerable Mac outliner. Dunham describes the history of smart quotes here. So please, hate the algorithm, not the character!

Another aspect of the controversy that I take issue with is the assimilation of typography with aesthetics. Typography can be beautiful—often breathtakingly so. But beauty is not the sole or even the most important aim of good typography—comprehension is. Typography has cognitive utility. The assimilation of typography to aesthetics encourages another conflation (alas, operative, as well, in the otherwise excellent Ministry of Type article)—straight and typographic quotes are not stylistic variant of the same character, they are different characters, as different as “5” and “k”. A single quote semantically differs from the prime symbol. And there is genuine cognitive utility in being able to explicitly mark this difference in your typography.

What is aggravating about the “dumb quotes” backlash is the way that it is a hangover from the limitations of a dead technology—the typewriter. The undead continue to walk the earth. Then again, maybe this is just a promotional stunt for Romero’s Diary of the Dead.