Well, I made it through January with its annual bombardry of commericals and ads telling me to diet, exercise, lose weight. I stood firm; I didn't do a single exercise nor eliminate a single fat food.
I'm tired of what became a linguistic switcheroo a couple of decades or so in our country. Public officials and public signs used to be strict and firm---e.g., "Do not smoke," "Defense de crachez" ("Do not spit"), do this, do that, etc., no nonsense, no ambiguity, and with clear penalties involved. Rules were rules; anything else clearly was a suggestion. Commercials and ads just invited or suggested that you do or buy this or that.
Then came the chaos. Somewhere in the recent past, "guidelines" came to mean "rules"; but, of course, not always---such that one sometimes had to guess what was ordered and what was merely recommended. So "No smoking" or "Do not smoke" gave way to "Thanks for not smoking." Well, thanks your butt, but are you implying that I still may (permission) smoke, but that you simply will not thank me if I do? Other public-social rules became merely recommendory in their language. "Penalties" somehow became "consequences," even when the two words are not objectively identical in meaning. Damn confusion. And while public-social language became fuzzy, the language of commercials and ads became downright mandatory in tone: "Buy this TODAY!" or "Call NOW!" or "You will NOT find this deal anywhere, stupid, so come right this minute to our store." I'm still waiting for traffic signs to catch up with this trend by saying, "Please consider not driving in this direction which, after all, does run only one way"; or "Do you happen to remember the international meaning of the color red at the intersection sign you are now approaching?"
And here I sit wondering what will be the "consequence" (i.e., penalty) of my not subscribing to any of those weight-loss programs of all of January. Gotta go now. The carpenter I called is at my door. I'm going to have him cut a small semi-circle into my dining-room table so that I can more comfortably be seated at it to reach for the little woman's cooked servings.
-Old Gargoyle
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Seated in the semi-circle at table, you will be in good company while infusing large proportions of comfort food: Thomas Aquinas was rumored to do the same.
Post a Comment