WTF?? So,, yes,, use double-commas to drive home your point since you must have had some reason to put them there.
My point is that you would be quite right to reject writing in which someone employed double commas as an affectation. Just because a writer thinks it says something special does not mean readers have to agree.
My point is that you would be quite right to reject writing in which someone employed double commas as an affectation
Personally, I think writing should be judged mostly on content, not presentation. Sometimes the line can be hard to determine on which is which, but to me that we reject things based on presentation (which we all do), is an unfortunate circumstance of our human nature.
to me that we reject things based on presentation (which we all do), is an unfortunate circumstance of our human nature
Not at all. Assuming that the required presentation is well-known (not a secret), and is relatively easy to implement (e.g. doesn't require specialized equipment), what is the reviewer supposed to think of a writer who couldn't follow the instructions?
Among other things, standardized formatting (not commas, but fonts and margins) also makes life easier for the reviewer, for instance letting him/her know at a glance how long a piece will be. And they have to scan many, many pieces, most of them crap.
I'm speaking as a writer who submits stories using standard manuscript format. Writing provides ample opportunity for creativity. I don't need to use my creativity in font or margin or punctuation choice. And it's just not that hard.
If anything, you support my point. That you know you must make the job easier for the reader because otherwise they may not get to the actual thing you are writing about, the content, is exactly what I'm talking about.
In an ideal world, your writing would have just as much chance of being read and appreciated if it were presented in all caps or all lowercase, single spaced or double.
I simply think it's unfortunate, if understandable for multiple reasons, that we don't live in that world.
In an ideal world, your writing would have just as much chance of being read and appreciated if it were presented in all caps
DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT IN AN IDEAL WORLD WE WOULD GIVE AN EQUAL SHARE OF OUR LIMITED TIME AND ATTENTION TO PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T YET FIGURED OUT THAT ALL CAPS IS UGLY, HARD TO READ, AND CONNOTES SHOUTING???
In an ideal world, we wouldn't have limited time, and could make decisions based on the best criteria. Whether someone has figured out the best way to communicate with their audience should have no bearing on whether their ideas have merit. It does matter though, which is obvious. That doesn't keep me from wishing the world was a better place.
Publishers routinely reject things simply based on presentation for the simple fact that most authors are willing to do a significant amount of the work (that would otherwise be done by typesetters and editors) just to ensure they get published, and it's rarely going to hurt the publisher if the author takes their work somewhere else, instead.
My theory for the mass use of the double space is that it was such a common requirement from publishers at one time (and in some areas probably still is) simply because it distributed a massive amount of menial work and most people can simply make a habit of it and never bother to question or complain about it. Another is that, once taught this particular practice, many people confuse it with the requirement that a document is double-spaced.
My point is that you would be quite right to reject writing in which someone employed double commas as an affectation. Just because a writer thinks it says something special does not mean readers have to agree.