In defense of harsh words
These days, when it comes to vocabulary, using a word that is not understood by the lowest common denominator of our society is almost seen as politically incorrect or offensive. We are so bombarded by the mantra to “write plain and simple” that to use any word that is not readily known to everyone is to be labeled “elitist” or “pretentious” or “bombastic,” never mind that the word in question may be legitimate. and perfectly suited to the occasion; in fact, that may be the best word for the occasion.
It often seems that when a writer uses a word that not everyone instantly recognizes, it must be an example of bad writing, because (the argument goes) the only good writing is “clear” writing: using a limited vocabulary. understood by all. Just about every time a word used by the writer goes over the reader’s head, he can be sure that someone will complain that he “has to look up a dictionary.” However, people don’t realize how often we are presented with more difficult words, because our natural inclination is to skip over them, rather than look them up in a dictionary. Consider:
A recent editorial in a Pittsburgh newspaper stated: “The fact that [Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Joe] Views of Hoffel [state] sovereignty as a four letter word is absolutely sciolistic. Back to school, Joe. Article I and Google Amendment 10.”
The word “sciolistic” means a claim to scholarship. It was absolutely the perfect choice of words for the occasion. But how many readers of the article knew that word or, more importantly, would stop to look it up? Very few?
The beauty of many hard words is that they are inexpensive because they replace several simpler (read: more mundane) words. “Sciolistic” is an example. Here’s another one: In a recent issue of Newsweek, editorial director Jon Meachem, speaking of the magazine’s financial problems, stated, “We’re not Planglossians on the issues at hand.” Planglossian means blindly or naively optimistic and is based on Dr. Pangloss, Candide’s optimistic tutor in Voltaire’s novel of the same name.
Even in those situations where there may be a word exactly simpler than the one chosen, a hard word can certainly enliven writing. For example, in a recent New York Times article on Facebook, the author wrote that “CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin credits (or blames) the 2008 election for his Brobdingnagian list. [of Facebook friends].
Sure, the author could have been referring to Mr. Toobin’s “really big” or “enormous” list of Facebook friends, but would it hold the reader’s attention that much? Should not.
As William F. Buckley once said: “We tend to believe that a word is unfamiliar to us because it is unfamiliar to us.” However, if we want to avoid a permanent reduction in our collective vocabulary, we need to get rid of the mindset that others’ use of harsh words is simply a poor reflection of the people suing them. The introduction of hard words should give each of us the opportunity to expand our vocabulary.