Please note this is an extract from my book ‘The Alternative Wordbook’ which features my original attempts at new words, tied together within a weird and subtle meta-narrative amongst the definitions (not very important). I’ll be sharing the chapters of the book, including essays on every letter in the alphabet, in consumable chunks or ‘chapters’ throughout the months and weeks that follow this, while I busy myself working on the next book which I definitely won’t be giving away for free eventually one day
In this revision of a lot of the words of the alphabet, it would be remiss of me not to include something that explains the order of all the letters as they are printed in this edition. But before this, a brief history of how letters are ordered in the first place.
Ultimately, there is one order to which we have all grown accustomed, which many refer to – with clear bias – as the “usual” order. This order, as I will not need to re-emphasise, is “ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ”. To scholars who care for such things, this order is more specifically known as the “chrysanthemum” order. This term is used to avoid obvious connotations in there being some sort of “accepted” order that makes other ways of thinking seem less adequate, when in fact this order as a kind of default has its own dangerous limitations. One needs only google the terms “Jennifer Clumpfist Enquiry” to realise the disastrous effects that are not only possible, but seemingly inevitable. The threat of violence attached to this order is worryingly palpable.
Many are surprised to hear that the chrysanthemum method is not the only order that exists. One of the most common alternative examples is the “QWERTY” school of letter ordering. In this method, often employed on keyboards and other interface devices, let- ters are ordered according to position, with letters of the left hand – “QWERTASDFGZXCV” and “B” – most suited to creative writing, where-as letters proximate to the right hand – “YUIOPHJKLN” and “M” – are those considered appropriate for factual purposes. Although the sentiment is admirable, there are a number of limitations within this method. People without hands, for example, don’t have access to the letters and keys in the same way, and so are completely removed from the conversation. Musicians too sometimes have their fingering frustrated by the regimented “QWERTY” system; for them, the flexibility of their fingers is closely associated with specific musical letters – most notably “ABCDEF” and “G” – and confusing two different simultaneously activated systems of letter ordering can lead to e-mails being sent in the wrong key, and improvisational jazz musicians accidentally playing whole Shakespearean sonnets on a piano and so on.
The Christmas Method sees letters organised according to sex, and then again by their morality from the previous year. This method, though very useful for philosophical reasons, is difficult to stick to across temporal analysis. Back in 1977, the letter “b” – a masculine letter – had an incredibly moral year and was given a higher position than is usual for that letter, but that same year the letter “y” – as feminine a letter as one could get in any year – was seen as immoral and made its way to the bottom of the list. But just five years later, in 1982, these two letters swapped places entirely (though not sexes!), meaning that a number of annals became out of date and had to be amended - which had disastrous impacts for the administrative teams trying out the new system for state-run healthcare patient records. Online, this method is gaining traction, but seems to be employed more out of the love of the thing than any useful - or viable - lettering method. Instead it is simply regurgitated through innumerable “favourite letter of the year lists” that treat morality as something purely subjective – a bizarre consequence of the amateurism rife throughout the internet.
Another prominent system that is admired by many is the “PLCFTRSEMOKNIJUHBYGVDXQWAZ” system, which as its name suggests, categorises the letters in this order: “PLCFTRSEMOKNIJUHBYGVDXQWAZ”. Very popular overseas, the “PLCFTRSEMOKNIJUHBYGVDXQWAZ” system has a genuine viability for military research due to an incredibly streamlined aesthetic and sophisticated filtering tools. However, despite many attempts, the “PLCFTRSEMOKNIJUHBYGVDXQWAZ” method (named after its creator Steve PLCFTRSEMOKNIJUHBYGVDXQWAZ) has never really been adopted by the public, as demonstrated by facts I needn’t bore you with right now.
Though many would appreciate a characteristic ordering system similar to the QWERTY system, it is not entirely fruitful for audiences new to my writing and indeed new to letters in general. For convention’s sake I will keep the ordering fairly traditional. By the same token it would be unprofessional of me not to challenge the “chrysanthemum” oligarchy of lettering which, like a militant dictator, does more harm than good if remaining unquestioned. These dictators often look like jokes, nothing more than a melted statue in the emperor’s new clothes of well0threaded shit and badly copied Versace. For this reason, we must not let the emperor’s tailor fashion our letter ordering systems, unless we are careful to keep the receipt.
As such, I have attempted some fundamental changes to demonstrate the importance of challenging this dominance. Initially, I tried to replace the letter “a” from its arbitrary position of strength at the beginning of word lists, and instead give this prominent position to a lesser known letter. However, I couldn’t choose a letter which didn’t have its own significance and which didn’t unfairly dominate that position. Experimenting with new systems, I decided to simply move “a” to the final position in the list so that the list began with “b” - but this appeared to be an equally strong position for the letter “a” to be in, as it would have the final word. So as a kind of buffer, I moved “b” after “a”, to begin with “c” – but even this seemingly precarious position meant that “a” preempted the final letter, becoming the last triumphant skip before the end, the puncture in the narrative structure, the lynchpin of the order. This process was repeated ad nauseum until eventually “a” was returned to its original position as the first letter in the order - back to where we started, the only change being my heavy heart and several bruised eyelids.
So, rather than fight for control over the letters, I have instead asked the publishers to completely randomise the letter order in both physical copies and digital copies – so whatever the order that is read by you, know that it is entirely unique to you!
Thanks for reading!
