When I first started blogging, I used the first initial to offer some small shred of anonymity. Everyone was referred to by one initial, and sometimes I had to assign people ones that were not how their first name–or their common name–started. This limited me to a cast of 26 characters.

As more people got written about, I added both initials. There still hasn’t been overlap yet–thankfully–but I look to the future knowing someday I may have to. S, an old friend, readily became SS when the switch occurred. He may become SWS. Some people remain intact, not because their names are unique, but because something about them makes me want to not share how I refer to them. I know more than one D, but D is still D. My brother, while I haven’t referred to him by name yet, maintains a right to P without any modification. W is W, even though he shares a name with G and our only interactions are on Twitter. G does not have to share the standalone G because of who he is.

People I’ve written about pre-switch are still referred to, in earlier posts, by a single letter. I haven’t gone back and made these changes yet. However, as I draft a new post, I found it necessary for the first time to go back and strip someone of their single letter status.

In one sense, this was my acknowledging that they are not, and may never be, important enough to me that I retire their letter–that I take this one thing that represents them and make it “special.” (As though I could only have twenty-six special people in my life.) But I wanted to make a note of it, I wanted to record the day for myself and the action for transparency.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s