Literary Hub " On That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
Literary Hub
Craft and Criticism Literary Criticism
Craft and Advice
In Conversation
On Translation
Fiction and Poetry Short Story
From the Novel
Poem
News and Culture History
Science
Politics
Biography
Memoir
Food
Technology
Bookstores and Libraries
Film and TV
Travel
Music
Art and Photography
The Hub
Style
Design
Sports
Become A Member
Lit Hub Radio The Lit Hub Podcast
Awakeners
Fiction/Non/Fiction
The Critic and Her Publics
Windham-Campbell Prizes Podcast
Memoir Nation
Beyond the Page
First Draft: A Dialogue on Writing
Thresholds
The Cosmic Library
Culture Schlock
Reading Lists
Reading Challenge
Book Marks Best Reviewed Books
CrimeReads True Crime
The Daily Thrill
Log In
Craft and Criticism
Fiction and Poetry
News and Culture
Lit Hub Radio
Reading Lists
Reading Challenge
Book Marks
CrimeReads
Log In
On That Disgraceful, Disreputable, (Wonderful) Form of Punctuation: The Parenthesis
Florence Hazrat on the Contentious History of a (Perfect) Literary Tool
Via Basic Books
Florence Hazrat
August 18, 2026
Shakespeare and friends would call punctuation “distinctions,” according to the Latin tradition, or “pointing,” because of the medieval practice of placing dots or points at different levels of the line. The first occurrence of the word “punctuation” happens in the French dialogue book Orthoepia Gallica from 1593 by translator and language teacher John Eliot, whose funny and colloquial conversations in facing columns on the page influenced Shakespeare’s witty repartee. Eliot challenges London French teachers to “find fault” with his “pricks, nicks, and tricks,” referring to his punctuation and rhetoric.<br>Article continues after advertisement
He was certainly a flamboyantly creative writer and inspired teacher; yet one can take him seriously here: “Pricks” performed “tricks” as punctuation became a vehicle to think about the technological revolutions of the time, gender relationships, and literary genres reflecting social and historical concerns like kingship or geographical exploration.
Punctuation was also a channel for exploring interior worlds: the mind, memory, emotions. Particularly when something wasn’t working quite right: In a society that prized eloquence above all else, writers became more interested in depicting the delay, interruption, or even failure of speech rather than its glorious fullfilment. Perhaps the sons (and some daughters) of the humanists hesitated to put their faith in language quite as much as previous generations had.
Yet, considering how his own life was cut short so tragically at the height of his social and literary success, it’s hard not to entertain interpretations of the interrupted sentence as an eerie omen.
And perhaps it was precisely the opposite: Writing had become so powerful at expression that it could now subvert itself without losing any of its magic. One such master of consciously suspended speech was the uncontested king of brackets: Sir Philip Sidney.
On October 16, 1586, a young man writes a desperate letter to his friend: “My dear Weyer: Come. Come. My life is in danger and I long to see you.” Weak from the festering wound in his thigh, he scribbles those few lines in a shaky, hardly legible hand. Will the famous doctor be able to save him? When Weyer arrives the next day, the letter writer is already dead. Sir Philip Sidney, courtier, poet, and fervent Protestant soldier under Queen Elizabeth I, had been fighting Catholic Spain in the Netherlands when a bullet struck him, burying itself deep in the flesh of his thigh. The life of the dazzling superstar of Tudor high society was cut short, at the age of thirty-one, in a way eerily mirrored by his own writing: Just before leaving for his holy war, Sidney interrupted the epic story about erring knights, which he had been working on for years, in the middle of an exciting battle, leaving the action hanging mid-sentence. On a parenthesis.
Anaxius lept away. Whereat ashamed (as having never done so much before in his life)
Readers, like the sentence and the plot, are on tenterhooks about what comes next. The work, of course, remains unfinished, although the parenthesis’s open-endedness functioned like a magnet for countless later writers, inviting them to graft their versions of how the book should continue. Sidney was merely following a common composition practice of pausing mid-sentence or mid-matter, only to use the parenthesis as memory springboard when it was time to pick up the pen again (or quill rather).
Yet, considering how his own life was cut short so tragically at the height of his social and literary success, it’s hard not to entertain interpretations of the interrupted sentence as an eerie omen.
Irrespective of his death in parentheses, Philip Sidney wielded the two typographical boomerangs with aplomb in his brilliantly stylish and...