I agree that it looks like shit (and so maybe removing the indent became an unwritten rule). But setting it this way – how’s the reader supposed to understand that a new paragraph just started? 
2 Likes
It does indeed create a semantic ambiguity between new paragraph and continued paragraph. So you might just consider it a case where design takes precedence.
On the other hand, isn’t that precedence of design over semantics already in operation in related cases? The principle in question is a natural extension of a for-real principle (Bringhurst does back me up on this) which is: when there is a visual break between paragraphs do not indent the first line of the follow paragraph — because the “break” has already been made. Call this the only-one-visual-breaker rule. That is why we have no indent after the common single-empty-line scene break.
But notice that the principle also applies when the text block is interrupted by a block-wide image or figure. A paragraph that follows such an interruption should not be indented — because the break has already been made. So, there you have it; the semantic ambiguity is already there, since a continued paragraph in the same position would look identical. (Unless, of course, I made up this application, too?)
This is why the principle I had in mind still makes sense to me. The page break / page turn has already made a visual “break” between the paragraphs in a big way. So, it seems only fitting — and of course makes aesthetic sense — to apply the only-one-visual-breaker rule in my case too!
I get where you’re coming from, and I don’t say you’re wrong, but I think this example is the visual equivalent of a “false friend”:
The scene break itself signals a rather drastic change (as would e.g. a sub-heading, which also asks for a following no-indent paragraph — depending on the typesetting conventions of your target language). Of course a new paragraph follows after that. There’s no ambiguity in this case.
But… If this empty-line scene break also happens to collide with a page break. Oh boy. Next level ambiguity!
So maybe the ideal solution is not sacrificing function to maintain form, but rather to avoid such conflicts to begin with. Much like orphans and widows. Usually there’s wiggle room (leading, white space, strategic placement of figures, etc.).
Scrivener has an option to put a further indicator in such cases, for instance ‘***.’
1 Like
I see that a lot in novels. It is indeed confusing. And reminds me each time not to do such a lousy mistake.
The three ways to go about it that I know of so far are
- what @kewms just proposed
- in case you need *** for stronger chapter subdivisions and want to use an empty line to mark that time has past - location has changed, is to make that empty space a three line jump, so that when it meets a page change, there will be at least 2 empty lines on one of those two pages (either at the bottom of the first or at the top of the second), making it obvious, no matter what.
- Use *** for strong divisions, and * for the case stated above.
P.S. You might be thinking “Well, I’ll just make sure to format the book properly, making sure page changes don’t happen in the “wrong” places afterwards”, but with an Ebook you just can’t know.
1 Like
Exactly. That’s one way to prevent such ambiguities (I’m a Dinkus connoisseur, not only for this reason).
Yes. Or an asterism or Aldus leaf / other fleurons. Whatever fits the mood.
Hell no. As section seperators, e.g. scene breaks. Instead of empty lines.
Recently, seeing how people’s ability to read and make sense of written content has declined, I started inserting (and with great results – should I say) those little cues at the end and at the beginning of my paragraphs :
1 Like
I actually like that idea. But shouldn’t the arrows point in the opposite direction?
1 Like
Darn. Thanks @November_Sierra.
You might be right about that.
I also make sure to underline the word “underline” whenever I use it.
And here is the page setup of my compile format:
1 Like
1 Like
Long story short: I prefer function (clarity) over form. Usually there’s a way to get both, or you invent one (although @Vincent_Vincent wasn’t serious, I’d consider that a smart way to avoid ambiguity and unwanted white space at the same time, but only in our “new page case” discussed above!). If I can’t have both, function wins. Others may have other preferences.
I was serious about the three empty lines section break, if that is what you refer to…
Nope. The arrows. That’s actually an accidentially clever idea to avoid this “paragraphs / page breaks / to indent or not to indent, that’s the question” dilemma.
Now we need to find a name for it (and then you get it patented ASAP). It’s like a hyphen for a paragraph. A… parahyphen?
1 Like
Ah OK.
Now I see why you say the arrows should be the other way around…
I guess yes, you could use those ; but then again, that is so book size dependent…
And nothing to be done for an Ebook edition.
1 Like
Of course. Purely print (or PDF).
But (correct me if I am wrong), you would have to use those everywhere BUT where the issue actually happens ??
Otherwise, …, what does it achieve that *** or * doesn’t ?
1 Like
I love Ebooks (just like I like real physical books (see how I said “real” ?) for different reasons) ; we just have to make up for the formatting challenges they pose.
Most editors don’t even bother to try. And they get away with it. (Not with me, but obviously with the general public. Nobody seems to complain much.)
1 Like
Yeah. I can see why. But I didn’t make those terms up. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterism_(typography) / Dinkus - Wikipedia – or just “section break symbols” if you prefer.
Hey, I didn’t say it’s flawless! The alternative is to just indent the damn new paragraph on the next page.