On Taking Offense

Chain_Ring

^^^^^^^^^ Somebody beat me to it. I guess great minds think alike.

DenDweller

"I ate all da' foodz bc yolo."

Such phrasal grotesquery. I speak of no one in particular; my concern is with the general debasement of language.

It is a mystery why educated people write in such fashion. Surely these phrases are overused, and a cliche cannot be a good means of conveying personality--unless, of course, a good proportion of the population has the same personality, and are as walking cliches. A scary thought.

Right now I imagine some of you are probably having an emotional reaction and will begin typing something hasty in reply. Please read further, so your thoughts may not be ill-conceived, and to appreciate the flow of my ideas.

I can anticipate some replies. Such as, "It's America. I can write what I want!" Or "Cocteau can choke on tripe." You are correct on the former; the latter sentiment is only correct in a hypothetical way as tripe requires careful cooking and I have been known on occasion to indulge--yet only at fine restaurants. But ask yourself this, in the name of free expression: Have U.S. soldiers endured so many wars in the 20th and 21st centuries so you can reduce your coherency to that of Honey Boo Boo? Nobody enlists under such convictions.

Right now it is late and I am drinking wine. In defense of habit, I cite Baudelaire: "So as not to be the martyred slaves of time, be drunk, be continually drunk! On wine, on poetry or on virtue as you wish."

Ahh, virtue. I have heard that morphing an 's' into a 'z' and a 'th' into a 'd' is considered a fun thing to do. Some are too easily amused. They should go see a puppet show, and not write.

Yet truly my concerns extend further than orthographic atrocities. I am talking of philosophy. Let us consider "yolo" for instance. It covers everything, doesn't it? Let us bang, pass, ignore, marry, and observe naked the universe--because "yolo, y'know"?

Here's a thought: If you only live once, why not learn a proper language? Such as English.

Oh, but you say, it is offensive to point out hackneyed prose? Everything is offensive in the USA these days. Not a day passes without some new Internet outrage; or some small slight at Starbucks or the office becoming cause celebre for vengeance.

But what is really offensive? Are thought and language the only things left that we can assail without fear of correction? Rather, I would suggest, in the words of the great American poet Dylan Thomas, to "rage, rage, against the dying of the light." The light of your mind, friends.

There now, I am finished. I stand now ready for faux outrage, snark, copy-and-paste memes, and the usual effluvia to be directed at this essay, intended as a piece de resistance. Google that if you must.

This weekend there will be apple festivals and such. I shall read in the shade of vineyards and groves, for the autumn equinox approaches, and we must dispel the hobgoblins of the mind.

I bid you good night, -G.E Cocteau
"Should you rush to quell my diction, I shall riposte with lucid conviction."

Just finished reading Frankfurt's, "On Bullsh!t"? Fun read.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

HeidiCooksSupper

Just finished reading Frankfurt's, "On Bullsh!t"? Fun read.

Indeed. And a great stocking stuffer.

Ang108

Is that what they call in the newspaper business a " fluff " piece ?

Definition:
any light or trivial matter or talk

Granville_Cocteau

Observations:

Some of you have launched aspersions at my character. But I am not angry, for when one has nothing of real value to say, they attack the messenger rather than the message. And the wine has me somewhat mellow. Me: 1, You: 0.
.
Neither am I surprised some of you walked straight into the pit of logical fallacies I laid out when I announced from the start where they were in my initial post: "I am ready for your faux outrage, snark, and memes." I'm not surprised because reading comprehension and clear thinking are on the decline. Me: 2, You: 0

It is sad, overall, when social interaction involves mimicking some of the worst cable news shows, and with even less comprehension of the argument. You know the score by now--no need to tally further.

To those who have raised substantive issues with what I wrote, I salute you! Some valid arguments and my replies:

As such, I recognize that the way most people write is different based on the context. I'm not going to speak to you using high language and stiff prose on a forum. I also know that language evolves.

Such a "When in Rome" defense ignores the question of the value of a social context--to put it simply, what are the Romans doing? Put another way, the argument could amount to, "But my friends all jumped off a bridge."

Also, I would argue that there is value in resisting debasement and modifying the social context, For example, to the extent I have encouraged others to read or think clearly--I consider this a victory. I do not have to follow along with the sheep just because that's what the social context would have. The sheep may very well be walking into a butchery.

As to language evolving, this is true--Dante was criticized for writing "Inferno" in Italian rather than Latin. There is an opposite risk, however-- that of language devolving, and this risks social dissolution and political chaos. Abuse/misuse of language has led to all kinds of perverse outcomes (e.g. propaganda, wrongful convictions, etc.).

I like tripe as long as it's fried with a little egg, flour and salt.

A good way to enjoy it. I also suggest tripe parmesan (trippa alla parmigiana).

Just finished reading Frankfurt's, "On Bullsh!t"? Fun read.

An excellent book. Well-chosen. Also looking forward to "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life," which another poster mentioned.

Finally--to those who think I am arrogant, pompous, trying too hard, a hipster, and so forth--I care not what you think of me personally. I will say I harbor no negative thoughts of you, personally. My interest is not in who you are, but the substance of what you are saying, if indeed you are up to that challenge.

Victory,
-G.e.C

kathdela

Observations:

Some of you have launched aspersions at my character. But I am not angry, for when one has nothing of real value to say, they attack the messenger rather than the message. And the wine has me somewhat mellow. Me: 1, You: 0.
.
Neither am I surprised some of you walked straight into the pit of logical fallacies I laid out when I announced from the start where they were in my initial post: "I am ready for your faux outrage, snark, and memes." I'm not surprised because reading comprehension and clear thinking are on the decline. Me: 2, You: 0

It is sad, overall, when social interaction involves mimicking some of the worst cable news shows, and with even less comprehension of the argument. You know the score by now--no need to tally further.

To those who have raised substantive issues with what I wrote, I salute you! Some valid arguments and my replies:

As such, I recognize that the way most people write is different based on the context. I'm not going to speak to you using high language and stiff prose on a forum. I also know that language evolves.

Such a "When in Rome" defense ignores the question of the value of a social context--to put it simply, what are the Romans doing? Put another way, the argument could amount to, "But my friends all jumped off a bridge."

Also, I would argue that there is value in resisting debasement and modifying the social context, For example, to the extent I have encouraged others to read or think clearly--I consider this a victory. I do not have to follow along with the sheep just because that's what the social context would have. The sheep may very well be walking into a clothing factory.

As to language evolving, this is true--Dante was criticized for writing "Inferno" in Italian rather than Latin. There is an opposite risk, however-- that of language devolving, and this risks social dissolution and political chaos. Abuse/misuse of language has led to all kinds of perverse outcomes (e.g. propaganda, wrongful convictions, etc.).

I like tripe as long as it's fried with a little egg, flour and salt.

A good way to enjoy it. I also suggest tripe parmesan (trippa alla parmigiana).

Just finished reading Frankfurt's, "On Bullsh!t"? Fun read.

An excellent book. Well-chosen. Also looking forward to "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life," which another poster mentioned.

Finally--to those who think I am arrogant, pompous, trying too hard, a hipster, and so forth--I care not what you think of me personally. I will say I harbor no negative thoughts of you, personally. My interest is not in who you are, but the substance of what you are saying, if indeed you are up to that challenge.

Victory,
-G.e.C

Okay, but, you know that language evolves, right?
Like, the words you are using in this very thread had some pseudo-intellectual just like you probably scoffing at them and lamenting about the downfall of our language.

FURTHER, linguistic perscriptivism is deeply rooted in classism and racism.
You're not so ****ing enlightened, my friend.

And you don't get to write off everyone's valid criticism of your pretentious rant simply because you did the douchiest equivalent of "IN B4..."

Lilly_the_Hillbilly

Stephen Fry makes me feel things. Mostly naughty.

Me too.

hbrittingham

Ah, OP drinks wine and quotes Baudelaire. The difference between a well education person and a pompous individual is how many obscure/ partially well known historical figures they can cite.

Tell me, does all your flannel and ill fitting English prose make you itch?

By any chance did you mean "well educated"?

Uh oh, now you've done it. Her claws are going to come out now!

AglaeaC

Finally--to those who think I am arrogant, pompous, trying too hard, a hipster, and so forth--I care not what you think of me personally. I will say I harbor no negative thoughts of you, personally. My interest is not in who you are, but the substance of what you are saying, if indeed you are up to that challenge.

I don't mind a good discussion as long as words aren't used to demonstrate superiority. Your OP comes across as one of those literary or film reviews written by people with some form of literary education. They write in such a complex way whilst using such specialised language that one would have to have the same degree to grasp what their points are sometimes. Their words feel like a wall between "us" and "them", and inevitably the reader usually falls in the unfavourable "them".

When I discuss my own area of expertise, I use words that aren't specialist vocabulary, but I actually want for my discussion partner to grasp my point rather than alienate them or make them feel stupid even. I don't get that feeling with you, hence the pompous accusation. If I'm mistaken, I apologise. I'm a fairly good people reader and your texts don't feel approachable, so I'm bowing out, since I'm not one of those literary people myself.

kathdela

Finally--to those who think I am arrogant, pompous, trying too hard, a hipster, and so forth--I care not what you think of me personally. I will say I harbor no negative thoughts of you, personally. My interest is not in who you are, but the substance of what you are saying, if indeed you are up to that challenge.

I don't mind a good discussion as long as words aren't used to demonstrate superiority. Your OP comes across as one of those literary or film reviews written by people with some form of literary education. They write in such a complex way whilst using such specialised language that one would have to have the same degree to grasp what their points are sometimes. Their words feel like a wall between "us" and "them", and inevitably the reader usually falls in the unfavourable "them".

When I discuss my own area of expertise, I use words that aren't specialist vocabulary, but I actually want for my discussion partner to grasp my point rather than alienate them or make them feel stupid even. I don't get that feeling with you, hence the pompous accusation. If I'm mistaken, I apologise. I'm a fairly good people reader and your texts don't feel approachable, so I'm bowing out, since I'm not one of those literary people myself.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

KandGRanch

That was a pleasure to read. Proper grammar and seldom-used words are like seeing a double rainbow.

Timshel_

Irony incarnate - a capite ad calcem. lol

UsedToBeHusky

Observations:

Some of you have launched aspersions at my character. But I am not angry, for when one has nothing of real value to say, they attack the messenger rather than the message. And the wine has me somewhat mellow. Me: 1, You: 0.
.
Neither am I surprised some of you walked straight into the pit of logical fallacies I laid out when I announced from the start where they were in my initial post: "I am ready for your faux outrage, snark, and memes." I'm not surprised because reading comprehension and clear thinking are on the decline. Me: 2, You: 0

It is sad, overall, when social interaction involves mimicking some of the worst cable news shows, and with even less comprehension of the argument. You know the score by now--no need to tally further.

To those who have raised substantive issues with what I wrote, I salute you! Some valid arguments and my replies:

As such, I recognize that the way most people write is different based on the context. I'm not going to speak to you using high language and stiff prose on a forum. I also know that language evolves.

Such a "When in Rome" defense ignores the question of the value of a social context--to put it simply, what are the Romans doing? Put another way, the argument could amount to, "But my friends all jumped off a bridge."

Also, I would argue that there is value in resisting debasement and modifying the social context, For example, to the extent I have encouraged others to read or think clearly--I consider this a victory. I do not have to follow along with the sheep just because that's what the social context would have. The sheep may very well be walking into a butchery.

As to language evolving, this is true--Dante was criticized for writing "Inferno" in Italian rather than Latin. There is an opposite risk, however-- that of language devolving, and this risks social dissolution and political chaos. Abuse/misuse of language has led to all kinds of perverse outcomes (e.g. propaganda, wrongful convictions, etc.).

I like tripe as long as it's fried with a little egg, flour and salt.

A good way to enjoy it. I also suggest tripe parmesan (trippa alla parmigiana).

Just finished reading Frankfurt's, "On Bullsh!t"? Fun read.

An excellent book. Well-chosen. Also looking forward to "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life," which another poster mentioned.

Finally--to those who think I am arrogant, pompous, trying too hard, a hipster, and so forth--I care not what you think of me personally. I will say I harbor no negative thoughts of you, personally. My interest is not in who you are, but the substance of what you are saying, if indeed you are up to that challenge.

Victory,
-G.e.C

Communication is only effective when it is clear, concise, and directed towards its intended audience.

Do you honestly feel that your post was effective in expressing the message of prizing language to an audience that you have identified as not prizing it?



“Don't use words too big for the subject. Don't say infinitely when you mean very; otherwise you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite.”
― C.S. Lewis

“Wisdom cannot be imparted. Wisdom that a wise man attempts to impart always sounds like foolishness to someone else ... Knowledge can be communicated, but not wisdom. One can find it, live it, do wonders through it, but one cannot communicate and teach it.”
― Hermann Hesse, Siddhartha

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
― George Bernard Shaw, Leadership Skills for Managers

ren_ascent

"Have U.S. soldiers endured so many wars in the 20th and 21st centuries so you can reduce your coherency to that of Honey Boo Boo?"

This is where I stopped reading. I do not appreciate an indication I resemble, intellectually or otherwise, Honey Boo Boo. I do not care if it is a general statement directed at textings version of shorthand.

PurringMyrrh

Great read and responses.

And that long Fry quote is ace. This is the form I experienced that particular one in first...
Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography - Language: http://youtu.be/J7E-aoXLZGY

Granville_Cocteau

Let there be textural delight, let there be silken words and flinty words and sodden speeches and soaking speeches and crackling utterance and utterance that quivers and wobbles like rennet.

Agreed. But given the elevated discourse of Stephen Fry, particularly its resonance and clarity, it's a poor example to use in defense of textspeak.

Granville_Cocteau

I do like this quote, though, from Fry:
"The free and happy use of words seems to be considered elitist or pretentious."

jennifer_417

Well, now that you have insulted the intelligence of the universe at large, what are you going to do with the rest of your day?

ETA: I guess I should have read past the OP, because I would have seen that he's using the rest of his his day to troll his own troll thread. Superfluous question is superfluous.

AglaeaC

I do like this quote, though, from Fry:
"The free and happy use of words seems to be considered elitist or pretentious."

I'm back, couldn't stay away. Fry is not only intelligent, but wise.

It's not the individual words that people have a problem with, but it is how you've chosen to weave them together. There might be something intelligent here and there in that weave, but there isn't much wisdom, but rather insults. I don't smell much humility in there either.

Granville_Cocteau

I do like this quote, though, from Fry:
"The free and happy use of words seems to be considered elitist or pretentious."

I'm back, couldn't stay away. Fry is not only intelligent, but wise.

It's not the individual words that people have a problem with, but it is how you've chosen to weave them together. There might be something intelligent here and there in that weave, but there isn't much wisdom, but rather insults. I don't smell much humility in there either.

I spoke of the general trend of debasing language through textspeak.

In return, I was personally called a hipster with compromised genitalia; pretentious; arrogant, and so forth.

And I'm the insulting one here? I think not.
-G.e.C

Edit: Also, you persist in wanting to make this about who I am--or rather your perceptions of my character--rather than the argument. This, I don't understand. Especially in a nation that elected a "likeable" guy such as George Bush, whose presidency was considered by historical experts to be a disaster. Bush won because he played the part of the "eiron"--the plain-speaking, non-pretentious guy. This is to be desired?

girlinahat

Are there no Welsh on MFP?

ldrosophila

Dat da truth! Propz 2 u for being so smart!

dis b da gudest ansir

salembambi

this thread reeks of fedora

kathdela

this thread reeks of fedora

Would you say it has a fedaura?

kathdela

I do like this quote, though, from Fry:
"The free and happy use of words seems to be considered elitist or pretentious."

I'm back, couldn't stay away. Fry is not only intelligent, but wise.

It's not the individual words that people have a problem with, but it is how you've chosen to weave them together. There might be something intelligent here and there in that weave, but there isn't much wisdom, but rather insults. I don't smell much humility in there either.

I spoke of the general trend of debasing language through textspeak.

In return, I was personally called a hipster with compromised genitalia; pretentious; arrogant, and so forth.

And I'm the insulting one here? I think not.
-G.e.C

Edit: Also, you persist in wanting to make this about who I am--or rather your perceptions of my character--rather than the argument. This, I don't understand. Especially in a nation that elected a "likeable" guy such as George Bush, whose presidency was considered by historical experts to be a disaster. Bush won because he played the part of the "eiron"--the plain-speaking, non-pretentious guy. This is to be desired?

You're not some gatekeeper of "good language."
No one is praising you because you think you ability to string together large words into some rambling, convoluted rant makes you superior.
And I really can't help but notice you pick which parts of Fry's quote there you like best. Completely missing the point. Completely ignoring THE REST OF THE POST.

Quoting a bunch of beautiful poetry written by other people does not make us ashamed of speaking in the colloquial tongue.

If you're so offended by the "debasement" of our language, get thee off the internet and only speak with those who don't offend you. I'm sure THEY'LL appreciate your essay.

PurringMyrrh

this thread reeks of fedora

Would you say it has a fedaura?

Feodora?

*reaches for coat*

amusedmonkey

As long as it's something I can understand and don't have to decipher, I don't care how anyone writes. Who knows... this may become the standard in the future. Afterall, that's one of the ways language evolves.

PurringMyrrh

Speaking of the evolution of language...

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118562/emoticons-effect-way-we-communicate-linguists-study-effects

kathdela

this thread reeks of fedora

Would you say it has a fedaura?

Feodora?

*reaches for coat*