Apologies if this has been asked and answered before, but…
Why do certain authors (it seems to be predominantly 17-19 Century authors) do this annoying thing where they only include the first letter of a character’s name, lining the rest out? For an example from E.A. Poe:
"Dr. D— resolved at once to remain with the patient all night, while Dr. F— took leave with a promise to return at day-break. Mr. L–l and the nurses remained."
The Case of M. Valdemar
I find this EXTREMELY annoying and nonsensical.
What is the point of not writing out the names of your fictional characters? It is jarring, unnatural, and makes the story sometimes hard to follow. I’ve even seen dates and locations with this same ‘feature’ (such as: “in the summer of 18-- I and my family retired to the Castle ----”…) Does anyone know what practical reason an author would have for obscuring his narrative thusly? I’ve even seen Neal Stephenson do this in his ‘new classic’ Baroque Cycle. HELP!
It was done to make the fiction seem ‘real.’ The names were ‘omitted’ as if it were a true story, and the individuals in question desired to remain anonymous.
I guess that is a fair criticism… but I still feel that anything that obscures a narrative is an impediment to understanding - and rather overshadows any benefit that one would gain through the similitude of ‘reality’. I mean, they knew it was fiction… right? So what is the point of ‘protecting’ the identities of fictional persons? It did not occur to me that this was the aim, so why would it naturally occur to a contemporary reader?
I guess that many of the readers also liked it, because it gave a feeling of verisimilitude – this is true and slightly expurgated to protect the guilty.
This convention was in common use in newspapers and published letters and non-fiction works of the time. Like nowadays they use “senior administration official” in newspapers. A fictional work today might use that term for versimilitude, even though there wouldn’t be any problem with making up a fictional assistant cabinet member.
Let’s just say that it was a widely accepted and understood convention of the times. There are plenty of narrative techniques and conventions in use by fiction writers today that are now well accepted but will seem odd and jarring 100 years from now.
