Ten days ago I was returning to the US from Europe, and the first and main leg of the trip was a flight from Amsterdam to Houston. After passing through customs and immigration in Houston, I was stripping off shoes, belt, wallet, fillings, etc. to walk through the security scanners and re-enter the gate areas for my connecting flight. The scanners were being worked by a few twenty-somethings, and one of them was enthusiastically telling the others, "You know, today's Darwin's 200th birthday! High five for science!"
He was given a slightly bemused high-five by one of his coworkers, and then he turned to another with the same celebratory request, but sadly the other coworker, conforming more to my mental Texan stereotype, wouldn't meet his eyes and wouldn't high five him.
"I'll give you a high five for science!" I called out happily. "That's what I'm talkin' about!" he said, and so after exchanging a high five for science with a perfect, if slightly goofy, stranger, I trotted off to my next five hours of travel feeling all warm and fuzzy. I didn't have the heart to tell him he was off on the birthday by ten days; hopefully he's exchanging high-fives today as well. Maybe he's exchanging high-fives for emancipation today instead.
To give this post some mildly linguistic content, I refer you back to its header, which I assert would be a perfectly grammatical headline in any of its permutations: with or without the -s, and with or without the apostrophe…
High Five for Science
That's what I got/did. It could also be an imperative, a quote from my subject.
High Fives for Science
I witnessed multiple high fives for science, so equally accurate.
High Five's for Science
This one is fine read as (A/The) High Five is for Science; it kind of reifies my high five but plenty of headlines exist on this model.
I only bring it up because I've been interestedly following AZ's apostrophe posts on the LLog of late. The capital city of my home province has an apostrophe -'s at the end, and it's a matter of some import. St. John's, Newfoundland, where I'm from, forms a minimal pair with St. John, New Brunswick, another town in a small province beginning with "New" in Atlantic Canada. That's why I was shocked and appalled to read, in a quote from Michael Quinion in Arnold's second piece:
Words when forming geographic names have lost their connotative aspects; the name is merely a label, and therefore ownership or association is no longer relevant.
Those who oppose losing the apostrophe may argue that the final "s" should then go, too, since you need both to mark possessives.
Enough people accidentally book flights to St. John when intending St. John's as it is, without stripping the latter of its genitive! (I presume the reverse flight-booking is also a problem.) Maybe we could get by without an apostrophe — but that -s has got to stay.