What goes into naming names?

By that I mean the names for books, the characters that populate them and settings where stories unfold.

William Shakespeare asked in a play: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet.” Of course, Shakespeare was writing about Romeo and Juliet and the family names that shouldn’t preclude their love affair. That names don’t alter the nature of a thing.

True enough. But it’s impossible to deny the connections that develop between the names of characters and readers. Romeo and Juliet, for example, have become synonymous with young love. Just like Ebenezer Scrooge has become the personification of greed

I’ve always believed Harper Lee invented some of the best character names in literature in her novel “To Kill a Mocking Bird.” I mean, who wouldn’t want to read about Atticus Finch, Boo Radley and Scout?

Ken Kesey ranks right up there with Nurse Ratched in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.”

And that makes me wonder if there’s some sort of inverse relationship between character names and the way readers react to them. Like the slogan for the popular brand of jams. “With a name like Smuckers, it’s got to be good.” Consider the J.K. Rowling villain Voldemort — a wizard so fearsome he’s referred to as he who must not be named. Apparently, with a name like Voldemort, he’s got to be evil.

As for my novels, I put a lot of thought into the name of the small town newspaper editor who’s the protagonist of my mysteries. I settled on Tucker Preston, although his full name is Daniel Tucker Preston.

Here’s a secret: I based his name in part on the automotive entrepreneur Preston Tucker. Then switched the first and last names. Tucker started using his middle name as his first after his childhood classmates teased him by calling him old Dan Tucker.

I came up with Stanley Evans, the bombastic county commissioner who’s Tucker’s nemesis, to take advantage of the rhyming scheme between Stan and Ham. Most people dismiss Evans — at least behind his back — as Stan the Ham.

Still other character names are inspired by real life. I heard about an avid fisherman nicknamed Fish Head Fred while fishing myself for salmon on the Olympic Peninsula of Washington. Yeah. There was no way I was going to miss that opportunity.

So what goes into naming names?

A lot, I suppose. Especially if you expect rosy results.

As a newspaper editor and mystery novelist, I’m by necessity also a student of language. I’m fascinated by the information I come across about words and the ways they’re used.

Did you know, for example, nikhedonia describes the emotion you experience when you’re playing a game or watching your favorite sports team compete and realize you or your team is about to win. Unfortunately for me and my fellow Denver Broncos fans, we seldom anticipate success. Especially come the fourth quarter.

How about crapulence? The word sounds every bit as dreadful as its definition for the sickness or indisposition that results from excess drinking or eating.

I suspect a lack of nikhedonia leads to crapulence. Particularly on Monday mornings.

I also found on the internet a list of slang terms from the 1930s. In the event you’re wondering what happens when some kaylied up nogoodnik blows your wig at the juke, it means a troublesome drunk infuriates you at a nightclub.

I’m determined, by the way, to perpetuate some of the other slang terms on the list through their more frequent use, including gobsmacked and cockamamie. Those are good words.

What really caught my attention, though, was a news release I received about a book written by Jo Anne Preston titled “Lead the Way in Five Minutes a Day: Sparking High Performance in Yourself and Your Team.” A workforce and organizational development manager, Preston believes business executives and other leaders should pay more attention to what they say and how they say it. It’s difficult to argue with that. The news release went on to enumerate the common words and phrases leaders use that turn people off. The list made me wince. Which, I guess, was the point.

Consider, for example, subordinate. That applies to anyone who works for or reports to someone else. But the word sounds about as appealing as minion or flunky. How many people want to put one of those titles on their business cards? As the sole member of the editorial staff at the newspaper where I work, I could be subordinate-in-chief.

Here’s a phrase from the list. “I’m a perfectionist.” Oh really? Or does that actually mean you hold others to unrealistically high expectations you wouldn’t impose upon yourself? Rather than strive for perfection, shouldn’t we all strive for excellence? That leaves room for recognition for jobs well done, even when they aren’t perfect.

I’m fortunate to communicate most often in writing. That enables me to choose more carefully the words I use. Or is it assess or select? There are a lot from which to choose. By one estimate, there are more than 750,000 words in the English lexicon. Many are versatile. Few are interchangeable. The American writer and humorist Mark Twain supposedly equated the difference between the almost right word and the right word to the difference between a lightning bug and lightning.

As a newspaper editor and mystery novelist, I advocate for clear and compelling communication. I admit, though, I’m seduced by obscure words even though I know I should avoid the huckmuck that results from ackamarackus or nitwittery.

Go ahead. Look it up. If you’re as much a student of language as I am, I bet you want to.

Who’s your favorite writer?

It’s something of a dubious question. Isn’t it?

It’s like asking who’s your favorite rock ’n’ roll guitarist. Is it Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton or Mark Knopfler? What about Eddie Van Halen? Or Chuck Berry for heaven’s sake? How about your all-time favorite situation comedy on TV?  “The Honeymooners?” “Friends?” “Seinfeld?” What about “The Simpsons?”

Here’s the problem: There are too many good ones from which to choose to make any kind of intelligent judgment.

I can think of dozens of favorite writers off the top of my head. Edgar Allan Poe, Mark Twain, E.B. White, Ray Bradbury and Robert McCammon to name a few. Harper Lee created some of the best characters — not to mention character names — in American literature in Scout and Atticus Finch. Of course, Stephen King ranks for many readers as the greatest writer of all time. I wouldn’t dare argue based on the quality or prodigious quantity of his work.

For that matter, the eclectic group of writers with whom I’m privileged to meet once a week have become favorites as well. Although I’m envious of their flagrant talents.

As if choosing a favorite writer wasn’t difficult enough, I recently came across a list that takes the debate to another level: Who’s your favorite fictional writer? By fictional, I mean writers who appear in literature, movies and television. Think Jo March in “Little Women,” Jessica Fletcher in “Murder She Wrote” and George McFly in “Back to the Future.”

Emily Temple compiled a list of no less than 50 fictional writers for the Literary Hub website. As Temple points out, writers love to write about writers.

Some of Stephen King’s most popular novels feature writers as prominent characters — Jack Torrance in “The Shining” and Paul Sheldon in “Misery.” King even turns a killer for hire into a writer in “Billy Summers.” Torrance ranks 34th on Temple’s list, by the way. And Sheldon 12th.

As for the top-ranked writer on Temple’s list, it’s Benno von Archimboldi from the novel “2666” by Roberto Bolaño.

I realized as I was writing this blog I’m no less in love with writing about writers in my mystery novels. To wit: Tucker Preston, editor of the White Mountain Mail.

I’m reluctant to believe I’ll ever become someone’s favorite writer. Or Tucker will ever make the list of the top fictional writers. But it’s something to which to aspire. Something to keep me herding words on nights and weekends.

So tell me. Who’s your favorite writer?

My day job as editor of a business journal makes me by necessity a student of language. I deploy language — words on newsprint and a website — to report on businesses and business issues. Nights and weekends I herd still more words into mystery novels. And, I’d like to believe, at least a few well-turned phrases. Consequently, I remain vigilant for the best ways in which to convey information in the most compelling fashion.

As a student of language, I’m also a fan of a William Shakespeare and the remarkable ways in which he conveyed information. There’s an undeniable beauty in Shakespeare’s writing, but even more so the fundamental truths he revealed about the human condition.

Were I but half as clever, I’d try to imitate the Bard of Avon. Although I’m uncertain of how that’d work in a business newspaper. A story, perhaps, about an entrepreneur contemplating a new location for a growing venture? To build, or not to build? That is the question. It would be far easier to emulate Shakespeare in writing mysteries. Imagine the murderer frantic to wash blood-stained hands. Not unlike Lady Macbeth. Out damned spot! Out I say!

At the same time, it’s tempting to make fun of Shakespeare’s Elizabethan English. Bill Watterson did so ingeniously in one of my favorite Calvin and Hobbes comic strips. Calvin’s mom catches him as he’s running out the door and inquires: “Wither goest thou young rogue? Can there yet remain some villainy thou has not committed?” Calvin answers: “Thou dost wrong me! Faith, I know not where I wander. Methinks the most capricious zephyr hath more design than I.” The exchange became something of a standing joke whenever I asked my two teen-aged sons where they were headed on a Saturday night.

But here’s the thing — and, at long last, my point. Many common descriptions and phrases come from Shakespeare plays. People imitate Shakespeare every day whether they realize it or not.

A post that appeared on the Mental Floss online magazine enumerated some of them, including fair play, lie low, kill with kindness and good riddance. The Sherlock Holmes catchphrase “the game is afoot” originated with “King Henry V,” not Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

But wait, there’s more. If you complain about a wild goose chase or that something confusing is Greek to you, you’re reciting Shakespeare. Even knock, knock jokes originated with the bard.

As envious as I am of Shakespeare’s unmatched abilities, I doubt I’ll try to imitate them as editor of a business journal. Or, for that matter, a mystery novelist.

But as a student of language, I’m no less appreciative. The live long day.

Part of my day job as a newspaper editor is to, well, edit. To review copy for spelling, style and content. And sometimes make long stories short. The same holds true for my other job as a mystery novelist.

It’s a mostly rewarding task. More so when I need only a polishing cloth to make language shine. Less so when a wrecking ball is required to demolish huge chunks of text and rebuild them word by word like brick walls.

The process has turned me into something of a fussbudget, though. Actually, make that curmudgeon aggravated by the least transgression. WHAT? You used further instead of farther? Are you out of your mind? Criminy. What a dolt.

At the beginning of my journalistic career, I expressed my frustrations using the pencil with which I edited typewritten copy. My weapon of choice was a Mirado Black Warrior loaded with No. 2 lead. Not to brag, but I was a young gun who wielded it with deadly proficiency. These days, I pound away at my keyboard to correct mistakes. And grumble loudly enough the nice woman who works next door to the newspaper office probably wonders about my emotional stability. I don’t blame her.

Let me be honest. I appreciate technology and the efficiency it’s brought to newspaper journalism and book publishing. I don’t want to go back to writing with a typewriter and editing with a pencil any more than I’d want to dip a quill into an inkwell. The good old days were anything but.

I remain exasperated, however, by what I contend is another consequence of technology. Despite the very software intended to prevent them, mistakes appear more frequently in the written word. The need for speed has supplanted respect for the language of Shakespeare. Does somebody, anybody, know the differences among their, there and they’re? How about its and it’s? Capitalization has become a popularity contest. If a word looks or sounds important, by all means go ahead and capitalize it.

The problem is nearly ubiquitous in informal communications, especially text messages, but has spread like a virus to infect more formal channels.

Although I’m confident enough to lament the mistakes I detect in spelling and style, I’m less assured about punctuation marks. That’s because even experts must agree to disagree about punctuation marks.

Take the Oxford comma, for example. No. Really. Take it. Please. There are those who love the Oxford comma. I loathe it.

I feel the same way about semicolons. Abraham Lincoln considered the semicolon a “useful little chap.” I side with Kurt Vonnegut and his lesson on writing: “Do not use semicolons. … All they do is show you’ve been to college.”

Don’t even get me started on exclamation points. Perhaps F. Scott Fitzgerald put it best: “An exclamation point is like laughing at your own joke.”

The risk, of course, of writing about editing is a mistake will appear in the very blog I’ve edited. That’s not to mention the sentences I tend to leave incomplete. Entirely on purpose. For all those eagle-eyed readers out there, I welcome you to swoop right in and let me know what you spotted.

In the meantime, I’ll just keep on editing. That’s part of my jobs.