It seems to me, that people who anally obsess over grammar, coincidentally are never the most seductive of writers. They view writing as a static world of rules and forms that must be abided by at all costs. An English literature student for example once said to me that writing was, quote: "either right or wrong" thus with the use of just four words castrated the notion of creative expression on a page entirely ever more. Ironically, the same person then took a feminist module and decided a few weeks later: "women are imprisoned by a misogynist language structure". Yet according to her own previously stated rule, this is surely right... or wrong... either you are with us or you are with the terrorists?
I can't help but be suspicious, that those who choose to anally fixate themselves on how and where I use my full stops and commas, perhaps themselves cannot write? And therefore in order to compensate for their calligraphy deficit, instead elevate themselves (without election) to positions of custodianship over others grammar.
I've often heard this charge thrown at Boar writers (my university newspaper): "You write for the Boar and can't spell? Hahaha". Or "You write for the Boar and you can't use grammar? Hahaha". Yet these very same people usually contribute nothing, they say nothing, seemingly believe in equally nothing. What do they have to hide? Perhaps nothing.
I often find people with the greatest insecurities devote themselves fully to the very same issues as a form of self-persuasive denial. Closet male homosexuals for example often become uber macho, crusading against the vaguest indications of male femininity... whilst secretly crying inside, longing for the warmth of their own fair sex. Perhaps the grammar Nazi experiences a similar conundrum..."I can't write...nobody cares what I think... perhaps I'll chastise those who dare try, that way people will assume I'm a literary authority of importance".
We all know these people, the smug sanctimonious douche bags that walk around campus and nitpick over the finer details of menial facts and rules. Again it seems, insecure people love certainty, because their worst enemy is a surprise that they may need to improvise and react to. For example, when justifying their opinions, such a figure may be Newt Gingrich, who currently "doesn't take questions", presumably because if he does so, he'll be exposed as an ass hole without legitimate defenses. Instead such psychologically afflicted grammar Nazis cling to their Oxford dictionaries like comfort blankets, in a perfected matrix of linguistics.
So I propose that the Boar, and all publications, put these people to work. As such folk refuse to devote anytime to projects such as our student newspaper, and yet stand on the sidelines like racist football fans, cowardly abusing players with relative anonymity, why not set them to work in a grammar and spelling division? As they are so aggrieved by our substandard work and editing, they can right our wrongs, restore order to the galaxy. It won't take long, every week they will simply need to read through and edit every single entry in to a publication, whilst studying for their degree and trying to have a life. Surely not a problem for those so superior and wise?
No grammar Nazis, you're utterly wrong. Good writing is all about bending the rules and infusing your own creative impulses on to a page, sometimes defying grammatical convention. Because otherwise, god forbid, everything would be like reading a car manual. I don't advocate a world without grammatical structure, an anarchic Orwellian world of inverse vocab. But, I do ask however, that instead such faithful grammar worshipers focus on the content of piceces and the ideas within them, when brewing their cauldrons with scathing critiques based on irrelevant minor misdemeanors. The truth is, writing evolves, much like the world in general, and you lot should try it too.