Well, there you go. Something else that I had never heard of that nevertheless ended up being true. This shit is really starting to suck.
I’m not saying that site proves 100% he preferred that spelling, but it does seem to suggest it, or, at the very least, it shows he didn’t have anything against the capitalized version.
The answer to the OP’s question depends entirely on the context and the audience.
If you are writing in a context that has rules and expectations, and one of the rules and expectations is that Chicago Manual of Style rules are to be obeyed, then what you do is to recast the sentence. If that is impossible, then you capitalize. There’s no argument.
If you’re not in such a context, and the Dope isn’t, then you can begin a sentence with a lower case name. No problem.
There is never one overriding "correct’ style. Style always, without exception, depends on context.
Absolutely. That said, I can’t think of a single mainstream style that would allow a sentence to start with a lowercase letter. It’s a pretty universal point of standard English orthography, isn’t it? That said, there’s no reason you can’t make up your own style, as the internet is full of examples where capitalization is completely non-existent. Just be consistent.
Bell Hooks is breaking the “rules” of grammar by not capitalizing her name, claiming that “bell hooks” communicates her message more clearly. By the same reasoning, I can start a sentence by capitalizing her name, if I feel that doing so better communicates my thoughts on the matter.
I was directly answering the OP’s question, which was about lower-case names. I didn’t say a word about things like iPod or eBay, and I happen to agree with you on those.
If you had read my entire post instead of just the little snippet you quoted, you’d have seen that.
I believe all lowercased words should be subject to the same start of sentence capitalization. Thus, at the beginning of a sentence, it’s EBay and IPod.
On the other hand, E. E. Cummings and Bell Hooks. That lowercase proper personal name stuff isn’t worth changing the English language for.
Um, what? I read your post fine. IPod is a proper name, too, that starts with a lowercase letter. I assumed (obviously incorrectly now) that if you would capitalize the initial letter in a proper name like iPod when it heads a sentence, you would also do so for a name like bell hooks. I’d argue that “IPod” and “EBay” look more objectionable, because it’s not usual to see to capital letters in a row like that, while “Bell hooks” looks perfectly fine.
So, lay off the insinuation that I didn’t read your post and try to understand what I’m trying to write as well.
If you want to keep with the bell hooks example, here we go:
What do you do in a situation where you’re quoting someone who says: “Bell hooks is an African-American activist writer” or something like that? You don’t have the luxury of recasting.
I mean “proper noun” where I say “proper name” above.
If Bell Hooks is doing it to not be pretentious, then she sure as hell is being pretentious. If she wants to write her name lowercase on her bookjacket, then that’s fine. I can see how she hates the norm in book printing to put a famous author’s name over half the cover. But to force people to do it in normal writing is exactly the opposite of what she claims she wants accomplished.
Related issue - how about when writing about some case-sensitive technical thing, such as an identifier when discussing computer software - stuff like:
fardle() calls within the context of an OompaLoompaLand container may result in AlternateReality exceptions unless proper initialization has taken place.
Presumably, the method or function being discussed here is named “fardle” and “Fardle” would not be correct. I suspect grammarians might argue that all things like that ought to be quoted, but most technical references would wind up quoting most of the nouns if you did that.
I think most manuals put such things in bold, which is a lot like quoting (ie, pointing out there’s something special about it) and helps make it ok to see this uncapitalized thing at the start of a sentence. You absolutely can’t capitalize it, tho.
Look, the answer is simple:
If you can recast the sentence, and feel like doing so, recast it.
If you can’t, or don’t want to, then don’t. In which case, do one of two things:
Either use the “proper” form of capitalization in all places (see, e.g., Wikipedia: Bell Hooks), or
Use the capital letter to begin the sentence, and desist with it after that (“Bell hooks wrote Ain’t I a Woman.”).
I agree with all of the above.
There are some names that normally begin with uncapitalized letters because they begin with a preposition from some other language: von Neumann, da Vinci, de Camp, terHorst are but a few examples. As far as I know, all these names are capitalized when starting sentences. I see no reason bell hooks should be treated any different.
If you read my post fine, I suppose it didn’t write it very well. I pointed out that when you have a proper name that’s usually written in all lowercase and you only put an initial capital on one of the two words, it looks quite funny, even if it’s “proper.” This, in my opinion, doesn’t apply to words like iPod and eBay at all, because they’re just one word. If I wrote “iPod” at the beginning of a sentence, I’d spell it “IPod.”
I assumed you hadn’t read my post because you took what I wrote about (a two-word name written all lowercase, which is what the OP was asking about) and applied it to something completely different (a single word where the 2nd letter is the only one capitalized). I probably came across as extra snippy because you used the words “cop out” in reference to casting a sentence so that it doesn’t look silly. I’m a writer. My job is to make sure my sentences don’t look silly. “Bell hooks is a writer” looks silly. And even writers sometimes like using the word “silly” four times in one paragraph.
Personally, I’d write “Bell Hooks is…”
I guess I just don’t see the example as “completely different” at all. It was the first example I could think of in which a proper noun–outside of personal names (I was trying to analogize and see where it takes us)–does not being with a capital letter. The fact that the second letter is capitalized makes absolutely no difference to my point. I suppose I should have picked something like the Garmin nüvi, where there are no additional capitals to confuse the issue.
Also, I don’t disagree with any of the post I was responding to. I was simply saying the “recast the sentence” is a bit of a cop-out, and I’ve never been satisfied with that solution, even though that’s what the Chicago Manual of Style advocates. Your post was just the easiest to quote to further expand upon that. It’s not meant as a personal criticism.
In end, I, too, agree that “Bell Hooks” is the style I would settle on after considering all the options.
How about:
Bell Hooks (bell hooks) is a writer.
Not ideal, but it has the advantage of avoiding an initial lowercase, and also mixing the capitalization of the two words. If you like you could qualify the parenthetical with “usually written as” or something.
“Bell hooks is a writer” seems wrong to me, but I think that’s because I expect it to say “Bell hooks are a great place to hang bells for storage.”
That just further muddies things, in my opinion, and makes the sentence needlessly extra wordy. “Bell Hooks is a writer” is, I think, the most sensible solution that doesn’t confuse anyone.
Except that you don’t capitalize both words of something that has a two word name when it starts the sentence, do you? For example, you wouldn’t say: “French Doors are pretty accents to a room.”
“bell hooks” should be treated no differently. If you capitalize both words, you should do so consistently throughout the writing (you are saying you don’t intend to be bound by her attempt at unconventionalism). Otherwise, capitalize the first letter of the sentence and nothing else in the name. 