That or Who? That Is the Question

Writers worldwide argue about whether we should use that or who when referring to people, animals, and things.

It’s not a new debate. Consider this quote from 1794:

“We hardly consider little children as persons, because that term gives us the idea of reason and reflection, and therefore the application of the personal pronoun who, in this case, seems to be harsh.” ~ Robert Lowth, A Short Introduction to English Grammar with Critical Notes

And what about aliens, zombies, or vampires?

Artificial intelligences?

Sentient bacteria in a sci-fi or horror novel?

Insects?

Talking trees?

If you weren’t befuddled before, maybe you are now. I did my best to complicate the issue.

Nowadays with the increasing dislike of that in narrative, perhaps it’s time to consider substitution with who wherever possible.

As you’ve noticed from the preceding examples, your decision isn’t as simple as choosing who for humans and that for everything else. After consulting with other writers and keeping exceptions in mind, I created the following parameters.

Guidelines for That and Who

AIs: Choose who if you want to make the reader squirm with the realization that the artificial intelligence is autonomous and a danger to humans.

Aliens: If the race and genders are unfamiliar, that would work, as would the pronoun it when referring to a specific individual of the species.

Animals: Try who when referring to a pet; otherwise, that. However, a queen bee or female praying mantis might warrant who.

Dragons: These deserve special consideration. Because of their distinct personalities, writers often prefer who.

Legal entities: Companies and other businesses are generally referred to with that. If the business is a sole proprietorship, who will sometimes be a better fit.

Legal ordinance: Always opt for that.

Monikers: Select the guideline that applies to the being or object to whom or which the moniker applies. For example, if a character refers to a robot vacuum as she, and nicknames the vacuum Matilda, select who — even though Matilda is not a sentient being or object. (My Roomba is “Junior,” a pesky cleaner-upper who complains whenever he gets hung up on an obstacle.)

Owls: Hedwig, Harry Potter’s owl, is portrayed as a female who interacts intelligently with her environment. She’s a definite who.

People: Who is preferred. That includes children — who are people, really they are, no matter how brainless they might seem at times. An exception might be made when the narrator refers to someone in a deprecatory manner.

Sentient bacteria: Who would add to the horror of a piece, although I tend toward that. However, if the sentient bacteria are able to communicate with humans via telepathy, light pulses, music, etc., perhaps who would be a better choice.

Talking trees: Their speech and intelligence qualify them for the who category.

Unicorns: Similar to dragons, unicorns are also slotted into the who category.

Vampires: Who is recommended if the vampire is a beloved character, but that might be the preference if said vampire is portrayed as a demon.

Zombies: Who is favored if a story shows a relationship between the narrator and the zombie but that if the writer wants the zombie to seem more monster and less human.

Scrutinize the Tenor of the Following Examples

Brock’s dog was downright stupid. No matter how many hours he spent training the mutt, it couldn’t distinguish between “sit” and “fetch.” After months of frustration, Brock decided the dog was a mongrel that would never fit into a family environment.

Even though most dog owners love their dogs and attribute human characteristics to them, Brock obviously doesn’t think his dog merits who, and he conveys his opinion by opting for that.

Lassie was a beloved pet who rescued humans and animals from innumerable dangerous situations in a television series that aired from 1954 to 1973. Many people who watched the series turned “Lassie night” into a family viewing event complete with popcorn, sodas, and Jelly Beans.

The public’s affection for Lassie is reinforced by choosing who, whereas the television series warrants that.

Although Bill loved cats, he loved birds even more, rescuing robins who had flown into the kitchen window and fledgling blue jays who had fallen out of their nests.

Although that is the usual choice for unidentified animals, Bill’s love for birds is reinforced by the use of who.

Brock mused as he considered Janice’s question. How could he tell her it wasn’t the jeans that made her butt look big, but her constant midnight trips to the refrigerator? Choosing to sleep in their bed that night instead of on the couch, he pretended he didn’t hear her and answered, “That’s nice, dear.”

Jeans = inanimate object = that. I can’t think of any instance where who would be suitable when referring to jeans.

The women, who met every Thursday afternoon, challenged the country club’s bylaw that denied them access to the swimming pool during Men’s Swim Night. The lousy lawyer that they hired was no help. Hmph! Another man. They should have known better.

People (women) = who; legal ordinance (bylaw) = that.

Now about the lawyer: If the writer who wrote this paragraph is meticulous about choosing who for people, astute readers will notice that when it refers to the lawyer, thereby reinforcing the implication of misogyny.