kyronae: (I Write I Live)
[personal profile] kyronae
There's something intriguing about offensive language. Maybe it's the giddy thrill that goes with 'forbidden' fruits, like middle-schoolers snickering behind their hands at a "dirty" word. Maybe it's the catharsis of someone saying those words that circle in the back of your head but, for any number of reasons, never escape your lips.

There are songs in my iPod that I like more because of that edge. Radio edit version? No thanks.
There are jokes that are only as funny as they are risque.
There are speakers who are questionable at best and yet, even as I cringe, I admire them all the more.

I understand the power and appeal of the offensive.

What I don't understand is why people don't seem to understand the difference between a well-timed shock and carelessness.

In my writing class today, I found myself speaking up about questionable language that had been used in a couple of the pieces. Both times, I wasn't upset at the words they'd used or the assumptions they'd made. I was worried, though, at how readers would see them. Neither of the authors seemed to be trying to offend and I wanted to offer an alternative view, cautioning them that people with different backgrounds or experiences might read things in a way they weren't expecting.

Both times, I was immediately corrected by classmates who thought I was trying to get the authors to change their pieces. "Don't take that out." "You shouldn't care if people are offended." "It didn't bother me." So quick to jump in, I'm not sure they actually understood that I didn't have a problem with the word choice. I just thought others might.

I get it. I really do. We like offensive language and, honestly?, this world is already way too PC. But I wasn't advocating for Disney. I was asking for some consideration.

Words are such powerful things. You can inspire nations, incite riots, or soothe spirits with little more than well-chosen words. We communicate whole ideologies in songs, essays, blogs, and facebook statuses. We can, in essence, move mountains.

With that realization, it seems like asking for some thought about language isn't out of line. Shocking language comes at a cost. You will offend. And if you have something important to say (or even not so important), driving away half your audience is going to sort of spoil the show.

It's not about political correctness or worrying about offended sensibilities, though personally that's something I can't help but do. Rather, it's about intention. The true thrill of the shocking is that ability to say something powerful and edgy and make it stick. Make it mean something. If someone offends on accident, it's all well and good to blame the one who took it too seriously, but it doesn't change the fact that the message was lost.

I'm not saying I want to see prettified communication.
I'm not a fan of being PC.
What I am saying is, if someone is offended by your writing when you didn't intend for them to be, take it into consideration. Don't just brush it off. Maybe you seriously need to be more thoughtful with your word choice. It's impossible to anticipate all of the ways your words could be taken and you certainly don't need to bend to every wilting flower's whim...but it doesn't hurt to realize they're out there, either, whether that changes what you say or not.

And if you're going to offend, do it on purpose, with a merry "fuck off" to anyone who minds.

Because if you're going to piss someone off, you might as well do it with flair.

Edited for moar irony... this is the point where I wonder how many people I managed to offend. Lol.

Date: Oct. 13th, 2010 07:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] attaining.livejournal.com
I feel like I would need to know the context to really comment, because there are instances where I would agree and others where I wouldn't.

Date: Oct. 13th, 2010 07:25 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kyronae.livejournal.com
It's definitely a context heavy situation. And there's no avoiding accidentally offending some people. But I was just amazed at how defensive the class got when it was pointed out that things could be taken more than one way.

Date: Oct. 13th, 2010 11:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] attaining.livejournal.com
That IS unfortunate; what ages? I tend to think author or creator intent becomes somewhat irrelevant when something is released into the mass media, whether it's written, filmed, or otherwise, because audience interpretation will always win out in the end. Satire, I think, is the best example - you can point out as many stereotypes as you want, but it's only successful when people realize it's a joke. And at times they don't; take Dave Chapelle's The Chapelle Show.

I'm more prone to critical of bad language when it's directed at or in reference to a marginalized group.

Date: Oct. 13th, 2010 06:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kyronae.livejournal.com
It's a graduate level, nonfic class. And audience is a huge part of the issue.

With both pieces, it hadn't really been decided, and neither was meant as satire or controversy. One was a profile piece on a professor where the author had called a marginalized group "questionable" without realizing that a large number of her audience might identify with that "questionable" group and take offense. The other was a personal essay about a study abroad trip to England, where the author called someone a "racist bastard" without giving any evidence for the judgment, so it reflected badly on her. In both cases, that was not the intended effect.

Profile

kyronae: (Default)
Kyra

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags