Mindreading

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Oct 27, 2003 7:22 pm

Roy Peter Clark, in another of his puzzling pointers at Poynter, likes this opening to a story about people who jump off a bridge: ST. PETERSBURG - The lonely young blond left church on a windy afternoon and drove to the top of the Sunshine Skyway bridge.
Wearing black pumps and a shiny black dress, she climbed onto the ledge and looked at the chilly blue waters 197 feet below. The wind seemed to nudge her. It's time, she thought.
She raised her arms skyward and pushed off the edge. Two boaters watched as she began a swan dive into Tampa Bay.
Halfway down, Dawn Paquin wanted to turn back. "I don't want to die," she thought.
A second later, she slammed into the water. It swallowed her, and then let her go. She broke through the surface, screaming. ***There's a lot more wrong with that than the mindreading, but that alone was enough for someone to have said: "No. Try again."***[ October 27, 2003: Message edited by: blanp ]

ShiningPath · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:29 am

It's not mindreading if the plunging Miss Paquin survived her splash and then later told a reporter that halfway down she thought, "I don't want to die." She may not have actually thought such a thing at the time, but if she says she did, it's fair material for a reporter. It's not mindreading, it's ... mind-quoting.[ October 28, 2003: Message edited by: ShiningPath ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 3:56 am

We cannot say what someone thought. We can report what someone said they thought. If that spoils the five-paragraph "narrative," too bad.[ October 28, 2003: Message edited by: blanp ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 4:06 am

An aside:
The story says: She said she flapped her arms like a chicken and righted herself, ensuring that her feet hit the water first. ***A question for our science adviser: Is that even possible?***[ October 28, 2003: Message edited by: blanp ]

ToddJBehme · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 6:43 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
We cannot say what someone thought. <hr></blockquote>I disagree, as you know.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:35 am

And, just to remind folks, blonds refer to men and blondes refer to women. So, if the diver was female, than the opening line is incorrect.

SusanV · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:46 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
And, just to remind folks, blonds refer to men and blondes refer to women. So, if the diver was female, than the opening line is incorrect.<hr></blockquote> Not by our stylebook (and no doubt others). It's another distinction that has gone by the wayside.

Rio · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 1:59 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by SusanV:
Not by our stylebook (and no doubt others). It's another distinction that has gone by the wayside.<hr></blockquote>But not according to the stylebook most of us use. :>Not that I wouldn't mind seeing "blonde" disappear from the AP Stylebook. I personally fail to see the point of saying we must refer to a female as a "blonde" when "blond" refers to both genders, at least according to Webster's.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 2:47 pm

Blond or blonde, it's not an appropriate first reference except maybe to a "beauty pageant" contestant or a character in a badly written detective novel.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Tue Oct 28, 2003 10:15 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
Blond or blonde, it's not an appropriate first reference except maybe to a "beauty pageant" contestant or a character in a badly written detective novel.<hr></blockquote> Quite right. A matter that should be included in every style book but sadly isn't.[ October 28, 2003: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]

majorbabs · **Posted:** Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:02 pm

Yet another logical reason to occasionally vary from the AP Stylebook.

pzicari · **Posted:** Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:17 am

Give Clark his due; he's making a point about building up drama in a story, letting it go -- presumably to get at the details of how we know what the woman was thinking -- and building it up again. I don't know about you, I read lots of 60-inchers that are mind-numbing. I'm not sure how one would justify insisting that "blond" in the only spelling and still permit a writer to describe someone solely as a "blond(e)". Maybe describing the jumper in one word was more important than pissing people off. I'm not sure the decision was the right one, though.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:38 am

On the subject of reporting suicide http://www.mindframe-media.info/ offers substantial food for thought.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:41 am

Another of the many problems with the faux narrative approach is that the story isn't "about" the woman, it's about the bridge.

ShiningPath · **Posted:** Thu Oct 30, 2003 12:03 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
Another of the many problems with the faux narrative approach is that the story isn't "about" the woman, it's about the bridge.<hr></blockquote>Yes, but the bridge declined to be interviewed.

Testy Copy Editors

Mindreading

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links