Letters, E-Prime, and Matters of Identity

E-Prime, or the English language devoid of any form of the word “to be,” is considered both a method to improve writing and a tool to avoid unprovable, overgeneralized claims about identity. On the first point, eliminating “to be” also eliminates many cases of self-critical language and passive voice. On the second point, Ruth S. Ralph explained the harm that can be done by the essentialism of “to be” or the “ises-of-identity,” writing:

> Clearly, in this case, Reginald, the innocent victim, may have done nothing to earn himself the bad label he got stuck with. Equally obvious, anyone who hears the statement "Reginald is stupid" tends to believe that he has less intelligence than the average; and more important, that next month or next year, Reginald will remain just as dumb as today. (Ralph 8)
>
>

Here, she demonstrates how reducing someone to a single label affects both presentation and perception of a person. The use of E-Prime only worsens this impact, as “is” can be understood as an absolute qualifier. The use of a "to be" verb makes a person's name, their linguistic representation, and any adjective or trait resolutely linked. In Reginald’s case, he has been linked to stupidity in the minds of all who heard this taunt, including himself, and has to reckon with having this title thrust upon him. Once this equivalence has been stated, no amount of proof can undo this linguistic equals sign.

Because they are understood as written by the characters, letters allow us even a degree of insight into the thoughts and beliefs of a novel’s *characters* rather than its narrator. And these demarcate the “ises-of-identity” as a part of the narrative and its world instead of a function of its telling. By this, I simply mean that when the use of E-Prime comes from a character instead of a narrator, the generalization and assumptions E-Prime causes are introduced to the fictional world as well as the reader. Additionally complicating this presence of “to be,” the assumed privacy and direct individual communication of a letter means these generalizations are not being introduced to a group. Instead, *especially* when used about one of the correspondents, the use of E-Prime can pointedly reinforce the character’s place in social and racial hierarchies.

This individual reinforcement of social hierarchies can be seen in Rena/Rowena’s letter in *The House Behind the Cedars* rejecting George’s attempts to meet after discovering her passing. She writes: “You are white, and you have given me to understand that I am black. I accept the classification, however unfair, and the consequences, however unjust” (Chesnutt 179). In this statement, she brandishes the “ises-of-identity” against George as well as herself, a decision which is made more poignant as she discloses her classification as Black has been thrust upon her by George. By clarifying that George has forced her to understand herself as Black without trying to shed herself of this title, she shows how his construction of race has affected her perception of herself without exempting him from any blame. Utilizing E-Prime reinforces her acceptance of this identity. But, it also reinforces that this is a role that, once it was thrust upon her, defines her. Rena/Rowena demonstrates the distance between her and her former lover as an act of his own doing when undercutting the statement of her race. But, by maintaining the use of E-Prime in reference to herself, Rena/Rowena also shows this gap as completely unbridgeable. George’s act of reducing her to be equivalent to her race, no nuance outside of her role as “Black woman,” permanently sacrificed their relationship.

Rena/Rowena’s relationship with the “ises-of-identity” continues to be complicated as the letter continues. She continues to walk the line of critiquing and internalizing this essentialism, writing: “No, Mr. Tyron, our romance is ended, and better so. We could never have been happy.” (Chesnutt 180). Here, her pointed tone seems to give way. This may be an admission that George’s rejection convinced her that they could never be happy is because of the inherent differences in their identities. However, it also may be further criticism of George’s essentialism--mocking the belief that something as simple as their race could prevent them from finding happiness together. Either way, though, the use of E-Prime in this direct communication demonstrates the costs of reductionist, simplistic approaches to identity. Rena/Rowena’s use of E-Prime reflects George’s equivocal approach to identity, and, in its inclusion in this private letter between them, exposes how harmful this reductionism can be.

-BH