Eric
17-Jan-2010, 01:02
Twenty-odd years ago I sat on a tiny committee dealing with the political manipulation of language. It examined the way that sometimes a word or phrase could be used in a propagandistic way.
If Gordon Brown is to win the next election, he (or his speech-writers) might think about eliminating the surfeit of metaphors and rhetoric from his speeches. Patrick Wintour, Political Editor of the Guardian, helpfully quotes a few metaphorico-rhetorical soundbites from Brown's speech in his article in Saturday's Guardian. Here are those, and a few more:
"polar opposites" - tautology
"age of aspiration" - clich?
"biggest wave of social mobility" - metaphor, involving the sea
"core vote" - metaphor, as apples have cores
"And I want to see an expanded middle class, not a squeezed middle class" - emotive metaphor involving tightening your belt versus the bloated middle class splurging out of their trousers
"genuine meritocracy" - what is a false meritocracy?
"... we will not only raise the glass ceiling, but break it" - another lovely rhetorical metaphor, a bit revolutionary this time, to appear to the revolting class of smashing people
"incentivise" - horrible word
"The Conservative plan is to squeeze the middle class hard..." - another bout of the metaphorical squeezing of waists, bear hugs all round
*
And so on. Give us a squeeze, Gordon! I'm not saying that metaphors should be entirely eliminated, or that Dave and Osbo are any better at crossing out the rhetoric and metaphors in their speech-writers' efforts, but when speeches contain too many metaphors and bland rhetoric, people begin to wonder what, in boiled down terms (metaphor), is actually being said.
If a novelist wrote like Gordon's speechwriters, he'd either be out of a job or win the Booker.
If Gordon Brown is to win the next election, he (or his speech-writers) might think about eliminating the surfeit of metaphors and rhetoric from his speeches. Patrick Wintour, Political Editor of the Guardian, helpfully quotes a few metaphorico-rhetorical soundbites from Brown's speech in his article in Saturday's Guardian. Here are those, and a few more:
"polar opposites" - tautology
"age of aspiration" - clich?
"biggest wave of social mobility" - metaphor, involving the sea
"core vote" - metaphor, as apples have cores
"And I want to see an expanded middle class, not a squeezed middle class" - emotive metaphor involving tightening your belt versus the bloated middle class splurging out of their trousers
"genuine meritocracy" - what is a false meritocracy?
"... we will not only raise the glass ceiling, but break it" - another lovely rhetorical metaphor, a bit revolutionary this time, to appear to the revolting class of smashing people
"incentivise" - horrible word
"The Conservative plan is to squeeze the middle class hard..." - another bout of the metaphorical squeezing of waists, bear hugs all round
*
And so on. Give us a squeeze, Gordon! I'm not saying that metaphors should be entirely eliminated, or that Dave and Osbo are any better at crossing out the rhetoric and metaphors in their speech-writers' efforts, but when speeches contain too many metaphors and bland rhetoric, people begin to wonder what, in boiled down terms (metaphor), is actually being said.
If a novelist wrote like Gordon's speechwriters, he'd either be out of a job or win the Booker.