WTF

by Sean at Hiding in the Backwaters  

In a recent column in the Opinion Journal, Daniel Henninger talks at some length about the prevalence of vulgar language in the blogosphere and wonders at the trend of “disinhibited language” in society.¹ I am hardly innocent of waxing vulgar in my own blog, and I really don’t have any problems with vulgarity judiciously applied. I do think there comes a point, however, when vulgarity only shows you don’t have anything more intelligent to say and the frequent use of, shall we say, colorful metaphors just makes me want to tune the speaker, or writer, out.

Case in point: Mr. Henninger talks about “The Sopranos” (indeed pretty much any of HBO’s serials) as a prime example of the “disinhibited volcabulary” acceptable in society today. I don’t have HBO, so I couldn’t watch their shows if I wanted to, but from the one or two episodes of “The Sopranos” and “Deadwood” I’ve seen, I wouldn’t want to watch them if I could. I find the language overbearing and don’t care to wade through the vulgarity to find whatever story might be hidden behind it.

While Mr. Henninger and I probably have broadly similar concerns about a society’s descent into the vulgar, what really caught my attention was the following statement.

The human species has spent several hundred thousand years sorting through which emotions and marginal neuroses to keep under control and which to release. Now, with a keyboard, people overnight are “free” to unburden and unhinge themselves continuously and exponentially.

It never ceases to amaze me how the conservative male conflates his class with humanity at large. Who really defined appropriate language in our society? The landed and the educated, in other words, the wealthy elite. Language was one badge of the aristocracy and a key indicator of social class. In fact, it still is. How often do you hear someone with a thick accent and your first impulse is to assume they’re uneducated if not outright dumb? The assumption is an education would have weaned them from their vulgar² language. You can dress up someone from the lower classes in fine clothing, but their language will betray them every time. Even in societies where personal restraint is paramount, such as Asia, I suspect there are still class differences in personal expression. The point is, it has hardly been humanity who has made these determinations, but the ruling classes, a rather small percentage of “the human species.”

I have to wonder if the root of many conservative causes wasn’t (and isn’t) so much any kind of true morality as it is a concern that the aristocracy is losing its power to exert its will on society at large. The aristocracy in the U.S. may not be as blatantly oppressive as it was in feudal days of yore, but it still exists. Think on this: Only one in four Americans have a college degree. The Internet has certainly given people from all walks of life a public outlet for self-expression, something once regulated by society via editors and review boards of all different stripes.

I’m not convinced that’s a bad thing. I’m certainly not in favor of dumbing down society, but I’m not sure what else people to expect to happen. Not only do educational opportunities remain out of reach of the lower classes, but they are often actively discouraged from pursuing them.

¹Henninger, Daniel, “Disinhibition Nation”, Opinion Journal, April 12, 2006, opinionjournal.com.²webster.com