dystopian

I can't believe I never learned this word

Definition of dystopian:
“Dire; grim: ‘AIDS is one of the dystopian harbingers of the global village’ (Susan Sontag). As bad as can be; characterized by human misery. Antonym: utopian.” (answers.com)

Where I ran across it:
4/28/08 NYT Video Game Review, “Grand Theft Auto Takes On New York” by Beth Schiesel.

“...It was just another night on the streets of Liberty City, the exhilarating, lusciously dystopian rendition of New York City in 2008 that propels Grand Theft Auto IV, the ambitious new video game to be released on Tuesday for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 systems...”

My two cents:
Of course. It’s the opposite of utopian. Well, duh. Hit me with a hot note and watch me bounce, it’s a true (if not embarrassing) revelation. If I am being scrupulously honest I must admit that I don’t recall ever using the word dystopian in my life, despite the fact that I now realize that’s what Orwell’s 1984, Huxley’s Brave New World and Lois Lowery’s The Giver were all about. Wow, better late than never, I guess.

Seems that dystopia will always serve as entertainment. But don’t even get me started on the whole Grand Theft Auto video game debate. I am of the mind that there are far better, healthier ways to pass the time. There’s just way too much glorified graphic violence in video games today, especially this one. Movies and TV run a close second. Granted, there’s plenty of blood and sin in, say, Grimm’s Fairy Tales, Shakespearean plays, and dramatic opera plots. But they don’t petition us to find joy in violent acts, nor do they solicit compassion for bad behavior and a lack of moral conscience. No, they serve as cautionary tales. Grand Theft Auto and others like it, however, provide constant, repeated exposure to graphically violent role play, eventually seducing players into associating with the violence as somehow fun and exhilarating. Frankly, it worries me that people are becoming systematically desensitized; inured to the very things that should horrify them.

The last sentence of this NYT review gives me great pause: “...But like millions of other players I will happily spend untold hours cruising Liberty City’s bridges and byways, hitting the clubs, grooving to the radio and running from the cops. Even when the real New York City is right outside.”

Now that’s not just dystopian. That’s downright dumb.

sesquipedalianism

OK, this is a joke, right?

Definition of sesquipedalianism:
“[fr. L. sesquipedalis, of a foot and a half in length] n. a long word adj. 1) given to the use of long words 2) polysyllabic” (answers.com)

Where I ran across it:
Dick Cavett’s NY Times online blog “Memo to Petraeus and Crocker: More Laughs Please,” dated April 11, 2008.

“…As speakers, both Petraeus and Crocker are guilty of unbearable sesquipedalianism, a word wickedly inflicted on me by my English-teaching mother…”

My two cents:
I want to be clear. This blog is not about praising/endorsing the biggest or most obscure words – or making fun of them – in an attempt to impress. It’s about delighting in discovery, and making choices. I love finding words I don’t know and discovering what they mean. Knowing a word, however, does not obligate a person to use it. Ever. In fact, I believe that artful communicators have a moral obligation to exercise restraint, choosing their words creatively, carefully, wisely. That, my friends, is the challenge. So I’m delighted to discover the word, sesquipedalianism. In the same breath, I can safely predict that I will not use this – or any other 8-syllable behemoth – in any regard other than, say, a blog like this one that marvels at the existence of such a thing and then, blessedly, moves on.

I wish more people thought this way. Regrettably, some folks subscribe to the more-is-more/ bigger-is-better philosophy of writing and speaking. The military, for one. And Dick Cavett takes them on, good and proper: “It’s like listening to someone speaking a language you only partly know. And who’s being paid by the syllable.”

Let me just say that while Cavett is one of my favorite writers, I have mixed feelings about parts of his blog that seem downright mean-spirited. You should read it yourself, and come to your own conclusion. He jumps on Gens. Petraeus and Crocker with both feet – one foot squarely on their tortured delivery, and the other foot on their military ribbons and medals. Even if the highly decorated generals do come across as rather imperious, so does Cavett, who should exercise some restraint of his own and leave the men to their hard-earned honors, while rightly taking aim on their oddball, overbearing “military-speak.” However, if one can forgive and forget long enough to get through the entire article, it’s possible to acknowledge Cavett’s observations on the curious syntax of the military, as well as police and fire personnel. Quoting those who insist on engaging in sesquipedalianism (using “large words when smaller ones will do,”) Cavett romps and stomps over his subjects in a veritable malign-fest of the linguistically misguided. I have to admit it’s pretty spot-on, a handbook of “don’ts” for writers and speakers of every ilk.

As the speaker at my son’s graduation from high school wisely said, “If you can’t be a positive role model, it’s possible to be an effective negative role model, too. You can be of service to people just by allowing them to witness how not to behave.”