Words
There’s been a lot of discussion of the BBC’s policy on the use of the t-word. But that’s not the only tendentious word around. I was reading this article earlier today and I noticed another one.
Around this time, he was sent to Pakistan to visit relatives. He also went on the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca, grew a beard and began to wear robes. Despite becoming devoutly religious, he was arrested for shoplifting during 2004.
Can you tell what word I have in mind? I bet you can. I saw it in other articles too – it’s quite popular. ‘Devout.’
Devout. Hmm. That is one word for it, of course, but others come to mind. ‘Devout’ is not a neutral word – it’s a hooray word. It’s one of those words like ‘faith’ and ‘spiritual’ that are meant to convey, ever so subtly and covertly, that being religious is a good and virtuous thing – all by itself, not because of any further transformation in behaviour. Well, is it? No, not necessarily. It seems safe to say, not in this case! So why use words that imply that it is? Granted, I can’t think of any neutral equivalent for the word ‘devout’ – but then why do we need one? It’s a tautology anyway – religiously religious. It functions as an intensifier, but an intensifier with a lot of baggage. Why not just say ‘intensely religious’ or ‘very religious’? No reason, that I can see, other than to show a kind of reflexive ‘respect’ for religion – which is pretty stupid, in this context, frankly. Yeah, he became devoutly religious, and that’s why he blew up fourteen people. Fourteen people, including Gladys Wundowa, who had finished her shift as a cleaner at UCL and was on her way to a college course in Shoreditch – that’s ‘devoutly religious’ for you.
‘Militantly Dim’ ?
I’ve been asking that question for many months now – without getting a whole hell of a lot in the way of answer.
Yeah – militantly dim, shading into dimly militant.
How about the “R” word too? You know the one, Bush and Blair have warehouses and aircraft carriers full of it. It’s supposedly some kind of magical cure-all. The main problem for me is that I can’t make sense of what exactly it’s supposed to do, or if it even exists in anything but the mind. Oh me of little faith.
Resolve, huh.
Bingo. Pretty much the same word, in a way, isn’t it. They all add up to the same thing – intense (obstinate) commitment. Well, whether that’s a good thing or not depends on what it is you’re committed to, doesn’t it! A fact that seems to escape all these devout, resolute, committed, militant people, and their flatterers.
I mean – that guy we saw the picture of yesterday, bowed under the weight of his rucksack full of explosives, was full of resolve – more’s the pity.
The problem with ‘resolve’ is that I’ve seen it used recently by both world leaders as a noun, as an end in itself. It’s as if their ‘resolve’ carries some implicit but oh-so-obvious meaning. I suppose that the general media viewing public knows what they mean. I sure don’t. Call me nit-pickey. It sure sounds powerful though. I am resolved to be indecisive about what I am resolute about, even if it doesn’t end up in resolution.
Sheesh.
Yes, I’ve seen that too, now you mention it. Bush last week, marveling (rather conceitedly, I thought) that Blair’s ‘resolve’ is as strong as his. Resolve to do what? Not burst into tears? Not run home and hide under the bed? Not bring his blanky to the G8 summit and suck his thumb during the meetings? What?
Is devout a ‘hooray word’? Try it in this context; Honey, my cousin’s coming to visit. He’s very devout.’ Surely even church-going folk would blanch at that.
cackle!
But seriously folks. Actually that’s what makes this whole relentless trend so alarming. People who once would have blanched now clap their hands and say oh goody. Religious mania and puritanism are not the turn-off they once were, not for everyone. Unfortunately.