A friend sent me your website, which I consider a great resource. Why use the language (bastards, f-word, etc.)? I think it undermines your credibility.
N****
Maybe it does. Funny, I have refrained from using anything that could be considered a profanity since I started doing this. Not so much because I think it undermines credibility, but to avoid subjecting it to whatever filters would affect it if it had those words.
I found myself frequently restraining myself from saying a word like "bastards" and the situation just kept getting more and more obscene. It seemed more and more insane to observe such genteel formalities when you are dealing with such barbarians.
Look at the people and institutions who consider themselves ... not "liberal" -- what are they, non-fascist? It seems there is almost no one left in the mainstream of communications of America who considers himself or herself -- or would admit to being -- "liberal", let alone "leftist". Whatever is left of this "left" or this "opposition" is so tied up with all sorts of restraints -- including the formal restraints of language, the "rules of the game" as they perceive them, their politeness -- that their hands are tied. Their minds are paralyzed. And they are getting walked over by these animals who have no kind of strength except ruthlessness, and lack of ethical restraint. They lack the most basic capacity for human pity.
So about a month ago when the Shock & Awe obscenity started to play itself out on the world's center stage, I put a little warning on the site saying I felt I may have to break my rule of using no profanity. And I still didn't do it for a long time. Finally I let something go through. I'm not sure if this was the first time, or it was another. And then I get your letter. You might be right, I'm not sure.
I do know that I have no aspiration to join the dialogue as it is carried out by the major media. I don't know if "journalism" is relevant at a time like this or not, but certainly not journalism of that kind. The kind of journalism that would be relevant today is acutely needed, but it would be far, far less polite than the New York Times, which is too polite to mention the true obscenities being carried out by the US government under a president that was not elected (though the Times is too polite to deal honestly and openly about that either).
Some of my favorite voices, who have been most persuasive in my life, whom I have learned the most from, have not observed the boundary against what is called profanity. So I'm not really sure about this issue. I'm not really sure where I stand on it. On one hand I agree with you that it is too often an excuse for not taking the trouble to find the right word. But some times it is the right word.
So there's a long answer to a short question. I'll probably try to tone it down that way again. I don't want to alienate people unnecessarily.
Thanks for writing.
David
``Some people will say that words like scum and rotten are wrong for Objective Journalism -- which is true, but they miss the point. It was the built-in blind spots of the Objective rules and dogma that allowed Nixon to slither into the White House in the first place.'' --Hunter S. Thompson, ``He was a crook,'' Rolling Stone, June 16, '94
The use of expletives is a valid use of our language and can be a powerful form of communication. Many authors have used slang, vernacular and expletives to great effect. For example, I don't think Salinger's Catcher in the Rye could be as influential and great a piece of literature without the crude language. When I first read it as a teenager it had a profoundly liberating effect because I identified thoroughly with the main character. The use of cuss words was what made the story eloquent.
Your web page is the first one I visit daily because your opinions have proven themselves to be mature, thoughtful, and even a few steps ahead of others. Again and again I have read things on your site that say something in a thought-provoking way. In other words, what you say makes me think and want to respond. I want to converse and have an exchange of ideas when I read your stuff. I follow your links because of the way you lead up to them, and I'm never disappointed.
And when you use foul language I feel as satisfied by the words you use as I do about any and all the other words you use. The reason I like your site is because it is yours. Because I know that what you write is your opinion, which I find to be an educated and informed one. I know I can believe you because you tell your truth and especially when you express particularly strong feeling by cussing.
Though expletives can be used as a substitute for more adequate language, and profanity is used by the mentally lazy, I find that in your case it is used to excellent effect. It's up to you whether you use it again, but I not only don't find it offensive, I find it gratifying and I feel it mirrors my anger and frustration very well.
J
David:
Please continue expressing yourself as you feel fit. People who cringe at 'bad' words have a little conservative fascist squirming inside them causing them to criticize what they don't like, to get others in step with their 'morality'. Most of your readers, I would wager, feel enough like you do that we understand when EMPHASIS is needed to get across a point, or to express feelings of despair and futility at this 'administration from hell'. Remember free speech! Keep on telling it like it is, express yourself the way you feel, not the way others tell you you should. Express your freedom to call a spade a spade while you still have that freedom. That's what's wrong with this country these days, too many Ari Fleischers telling us we'd better watch what we say and how we say it. If anyone criticizes you, tell them to just go on reading their Bill Bennett book.
You are doing okay. I enjoy your site.
Thanks for being there,
PT