Re: style (was stylus)

Ronald Connelly (ronconn@u.washington.edu)
Sat, 31 May 1997 18:18:27 -0700 (PDT)

As someone who is basically a lurker, I feel like I have much less place
to participate in this digression from alt-photo processes than people
like Luis, Judy, and Terry, people who make this list live. I feel driven
to though, because it is a subject that is so near to my heart and to the
reason I'm currently practicing alt-photo. Much of my work deals directly
with issues of gender and how we men and women adopt the behaviors we
think of as male or female. The blue of cyanotype for me connotes the
blue of "blue movies," the descriptive lines of blue print cyanotypes, and
the unnatural blue of a television glowing in a dark room.

So, while I'm printing, I log on and find a debate raging on the alt-photo
list about gender pronouns. I give into my knee-jerk reaction and post a
joking threat to laugh derisively at anyone who uses the male pronoun to
refer to a group of men and women. In my small corner of the United
States, using "he" as the normative would be considered either a
pretentious adherence to archaic grammar or an overtly anti-feminist
political statement. I do recognize that this is not the case everywhere,
and I would be the first to argue that one of great things about English
is that it is a world language capable of amazing color and diversity. I'm
really not so arrogant that I make a habit of laughing at other people's
grammar.

Still, using "he" when I mean "he and she" seems downright silly to me,
and it's such an easy practice to avoid, even without resorting to "s/he".
I'm really not sure why this debate has gone on so long, since I can't
think of one regular contributor to this list who habitually uses male
pronouns to refer to groups. Otherwise reasonable people seem to have dug
in to defend a point of grammar that they themselves ignore daily. To me,
they rightfully avoid it. Why retain a practice that is absurd on its face
and also offends so many people?

As Judy has pointed out, the original poster asked whether anyone would
mind if he used male pronouns generically. That argument is over. Judy
minds. I mind. There clearly is no consensus. We can be fairly certain,
though, that no one will be offended by a writer avoiding the use of
generic "he", but using it will raise questions in many reader's minds
about the writer's motives for doing so. Furthermore, no one is trying to
dictate the use of "s/he". This discussion is about avoiding one form, not
imposing another. To imply otherwise is sophistry, as is hiding behind
cultural prerogative. In my culture, the generic "he" is offensive. By
imposing it on me, who would be culturally insensitive? And, I know
several Canadians and one or two people from the British Isles who would
take issue with the assertion that "he" is an immutable or central part of
their cultural heritage.

In any case, I doubt that anyone on this list would be so strident as to
jump on any grammatical transgression, one way or the other. I can't
remember seeing such a case.

In closing, I have to wonder why this list has only one regular female
contributor. Is photography really such a male domain? Is there some
mystical connection between the phallus and alt-photo? Or, could it have
something to do with the way that lone woman is treated every time some
issue like this comes up? Just something to think about.

Next time, I promise to try my best to post an alt-photo question, or
better yet, a contribution. Thanks for your time.

Ron Connelly