He was also attentive to provide a liberal education for the sons of their chieftains, preferring the natural genius of the Britons to the attainments of the Gauls; and his attempts were attended with such success, that they who lately disdained to make use of the Roman language, were now ambitious of becoming eloquent. Hence the Roman habit began to be held in honor, and the toga was frequently worn. At length they gradually deviated into a taste for those luxuries which stimulate to vice; porticos, and baths, and the elegancies of the table; and this, from their inexperience, they termed politeness, whilst, in reality, it constituted a part of their slavery.
Tacitus – Agricola (c. AD 98)
Britons were captured by language, luxury and status perhaps, but language was the first step and the cement which held its captives. It hasn’t changed much – Agricola’s approach evolved into global politics and the willingly captured petty chieftains are Sunak, Starmer and Co.
They revelled in the strongest language, bringing all kinds of abominable accusations against him, and so grossly exaggerating such stories which had a foundation of truth that they became mere lies.
Emile Zola - His Excellency Eugène Rougon (1876)
Another way by which people are captured by language is exaggeration as we recently experienced during and after the pandemic debacle. The hounding of Trump and Boris Johnson are examples too, but exaggerated language captures the unwary in many areas. Climate change and sustainability are two more major examples. Ironically, exaggeration does appear to be sustainable.
She thought of what she would say to-night at this revel, faintly prestiged already by the sounds of high and low laughter and slippered footsteps, and movements of couples up and down the stairs. She would talk the language she had talked for many years — her line — made up of the current expressions, bits of journalese and college slang strung together into an intrinsic whole, careless, faintly provocative, delicately sentimental.
F. Scott Fitzgerald - Tales of the Jazz Age (1922)
Yet another form of captivity is as Fitzgerald describes it, a careless adoption of verbal fashions, expressions and assertive sentiment. A casual avoidance of analysis and the lazy evasion of sceptical effort.
Britons were captured by language, luxury and status perhaps, but language was the first step and the cement which held its captives. It hasn’t changed much – Agricola’s approach evolved into global politics and the willingly captured petty chieftains are Sunak, Starmer and Co.
They revelled in the strongest language, bringing all kinds of abominable accusations against him, and so grossly exaggerating such stories which had a foundation of truth that they became mere lies.
Emile Zola - His Excellency Eugène Rougon (1876)
Another way by which people are captured by language is exaggeration as we recently experienced during and after the pandemic debacle. The hounding of Trump and Boris Johnson are examples too, but exaggerated language captures the unwary in many areas. Climate change and sustainability are two more major examples. Ironically, exaggeration does appear to be sustainable.
She thought of what she would say to-night at this revel, faintly prestiged already by the sounds of high and low laughter and slippered footsteps, and movements of couples up and down the stairs. She would talk the language she had talked for many years — her line — made up of the current expressions, bits of journalese and college slang strung together into an intrinsic whole, careless, faintly provocative, delicately sentimental.
F. Scott Fitzgerald - Tales of the Jazz Age (1922)
Yet another form of captivity is as Fitzgerald describes it, a careless adoption of verbal fashions, expressions and assertive sentiment. A casual avoidance of analysis and the lazy evasion of sceptical effort.
3 comments:
"a careless adoption of verbal fashions, expressions and assertive sentiment"
Ah, the adoption of Amerish due to endless indoctrination by American TV, films, etc. English is a centuries old amalgam of languages but it seems to me that the irritation of Amerish is the colonies' revenge on old ears.
All good finds, AKH, and remarkable in that all three can be clearly seen in the BBC's output. It's pretty obvious that they want to produce a generation of right-thinking and right-speaking people who can be easily manipulated and controlled. But you won't find anyone actually saying those things, and there are no incriminating memos or emails which put it in those terms; which is why it is easy to dismiss the whole thing as a conspiracy theory.
But that's because the terms "right-thinking", "right-speaking", "manipulation" and "control" and the like are too coarse and they don't see themselves as doing it. Their first action has been to convince themselves, and after that it just flows naturally. It needs an outsider to do this, or (as is suggested in the Fitzgerald excerpt, which is superb) there might be occasional flashes of insight when a person can step outside of themselves and catch themselves doing it.
Jannie - and the spelling. Drive-thru indeed.
Sam - thanks and yes, they don't see themselves as doing it. It comes across as strongly social where "right-thinking" does take precedence over boring restrictions such as accuracy. As if BBC folk feel themselves to be above such restrictions - feel that quite genuinely but not explicitly.
Post a Comment