Indulge me in a little bit of arcane geekery here. When writing emails, I used to interleave my responses with the original email, like this (this is made up and not a privacy breach of any existing email conversation, FYI) (this is also a rather pathetically lame example; I hope my real emails aren’t this boring):
> Do you really, honestly think that? It seems so…close-minded. Yes and no. I mean, I can see how it would appear that way, and to a degree I agree with you, but on the other hand I just don’t think it’s an objective view of the facts. > Anyway, how’s the weather down there? Cold, icy, and a bit blustery. But it’s supposed to be back up to the high 40s and low 50s within two weeks, which is nice.
The advantage? Context. The disadvantage? You have to keep switching back and forth between responses, and it can get a little confusing or mentally tiresome at times.
So sometime in the last year or so I switched to the “normal” letter-writing response format:
As for the close-mindedness, I can see how it would appear that way, and to a degree I agree with you, but on the other hand I just don’t think it’s an objective view of the facts. The weather here is cold, icy, and a bit blustery. But it’s supposed to be back up to the high 40s and low 50s within two weeks, which is nice. > Do you really, honestly think that? It seems so…close-minded. > Anyway, how’s the weather down there?
You do have to do a little more explaining as to what you’re talking about, but it’s really not that bad, and it’s kind of nice having it all be contiguous.
Anyway, I haven’t done any research to verify this, but I think the interleaving thing is primarily a geek thing; in fact, I’ve talked with a few non-geeks who’d never even seen an interleaved email response before. That fascinates me. I’d gotten used to it as a way of life and thought everyone did things that way. Nope. Is one better than the other? Not really. Most people seem to prefer the latter of the two, but every once in a while I do miss the context of interleaving.
(I also used to spell “email” as “e-mail,” incidentally, but I switched over a couple months ago.)
Comments
I, too, switched from “e-mail” to “email” within the past, oh, few years, since it’s evidently considered more “standard” – though I like the hyphenated version better.
The interleaving also has its place. It seems more practical, but since it takes more (mental) energy, and our culture tends to prefer what it views as brevity over practicality (at least in casual contexts), interleaving is a no-go. (Thanks for the term, by the way – I hadn’t hear it before.)
Judging from my comments, I probably qualify for “language geek” status to most folks. I don’t mind.
You and Sean…
Just a quick opinion: I think the interleaving allows for *less* mental energy, actually, at least in *writing* the reply. It allows for the replier to not think about how to write paragraphs in a way that the reader will remember the original question or topic. Instead, the question is immediately followed by the answer.
Easy peasy.
Scott: I’m not sure if it’s actually the technical term for it, but what the heck — if it’s not, it should be. :P
Zillah: What can I say? :)
Alyssa: It turns a volleying of monologues back and forth into what becomes a dialogue, almost like reading a play. And I agree, it does take a little less mental energy that way.