Seems to me I’ve mainly seen this in literature from the 19th century (though it could go farther back, and I know at least one book from the 20th century that used it): instead of giving the reader a character’s name, they’ll use a long dash instead, or just use the first letter of the name followed by a dash (“Monsieur V--------”). I can’t figure out the purpose of this; certainly it can’t be any kind of defamation issue, since the characters are fictional. Furthermore, they’ll often give other characters’ full names, so it’s not even consistent. I’m sure there must be some logic to it, but I can’t figure it out. Anyone got a clue?
Are you sure they are fictional characters? Instinctively I’d think they were real people the author didn’t feel comfortable naming.
Note they also do it with dates “In the year 187_ …”.
IIRC from my days as an English Lit major, which were a looong time ago so take this with a grain of salt, it was a conceit used by authors/publishers to make a work of fiction seem more real. “We’re protecting the people this really happened to, wink wink.”
I think it’s done to add verisimilitude to the story, by implying that naming the person would be betraying a confidence or besmirching a reputation. I first noticed it in Poe.
ETA: I knew someone would beat me to it while I was dawdling over my answer.
Yes. The idea was that the story was true, but the names were changed to protect the innocent.
Ah, that was one of my theories. Thanks, guys!
Not unlike 555-xxxx telephone numbers.
I knew before I opened this thread what it was going to be about!
I swear I’ve read two versions of Les Mis–one which referred to the “bishop of D–” and the other said “bishop of Digne.”
I don’t get it.
You’ll sometimes see place names and even dates truncated in the same way, and for the same reason.
Me too.
My favorite take on this was from a short Woody Allen piece, supposedly from a period diary:
Should I marry V_______? Not if she w0on’t tell me the rest of the letters in her name.
In" Godel, Escher, Bach" by Douglas Hofstadter there’s a bit talking about translating “Crime and Punishment” into English. In the original, the first sentence refers to “S. Lane” and “K. Bridge” (well, in Russian, of course). But in the context of the geography of St. Petersburg, people figured out that he must have been referring to Stolyarny Lane and Kokushkin Bridge. So is it better to replace “S. Lane” with “Stolyarny Lane” (or even “Carpenter’s Lane”)? It’s up to the translator.
In Anna Sewell’s Black Beauty, when horses are cruelly treated by a countess, she is referred to as the Countess of W__ . But when they’re cruelly treated by a commoner, he’s “Mr. Skinner”, not Mr. S__.
I though it was going to be about casting quotes in the third person, like this:
He asked her, “where would she like to go.”
Always brings me up short.
That may not have been meant as a nobility/commoner distinction so much as an easily identifiable person vs. a not easily identifiable one distinction. If we play along with the whole “protecting a real person’s identity” thing, there could be thousands of men in England with the last name Skinner. There would, however, be only one Countess of Wessex or whatever at any given time, and anyone could look her up in Burke’s Peerage to find out her full name, where she lived, etc.
You may have a point. However, after checking my copy of Black Beauty, I note that the author gives his full name, Nicholas Skinner, his occupation: “Skinner had a low set of cabs and a low set of drivers; he was hard on the men, and the men were hard on the horses”, and it’s clear that he lives in, or very close to, London. That’s plenty of identification, I think.
nm
Yes but there’s nothing unique about that description. There could very well be many people like that and one more fictional one is fine. Bit if you’re referencing a noblewoman, by disguising the name you’re setting up a conceit that this is a real person who could easily be identified and whose identity needs to be protected. The idea is that you could by naming such a person create a risk of harming that person’s reputation or draw a defamation claim. So by using the blank you’re creating a feeling that this fictional character is a real person.
London was, at the time, the biggest city in the world, and had a population of several million. It’s plausible that there could be more than one person with this name and occupation in the London metro area at around the same time, and it would have been difficult for the average reader outside the London area to follow up on this. But only one person can hold a particular noble title at any given time, and information about this person could have been looked up in a book that was pretty widely available.
I don’t know if this would have occurred to Sewell, but we might also be meant to imagine that some of the people have been given pseudonyms to protect their identities. However, the “W” in “Countess of W” would have represented a real geographic area and could not be so easily changed. Using a totally made-up place would have seemed obviously phony, and using the name of a different real place would (if we go along with the conceit that Black Beauty is a true story) falsely suggest that an innocent noblewoman in that area was guilty of animal cruelty.