Latrinalia
"words fit for a bathrom wall" Grandiloquent Dictionary
People use latrinalia in speech all the time. As an exercise, repeat the word "people" fifteen times in your head. For me, around the tenth time, it seems no longer clear to me that word means and it really no longer makes sense. Instead of a word - one entity, complete with definition and pronunciation, and not to mention all those letters - I start getting a string of sounds that is no longer meaningful noise. It's not quite the same with profanity, but it seems that sensitivity to that kind of latrinalia gets dulled in today's society.
That's why I won't write about it.
Instead, I've decided to tackle, most vigorously, a word that I absolutely hate. It's a word so heinous that Rumpelstiltskin himself would stamp madly, shouting "the devil made it up, the devil made it up!". It's a word that represents the zeitgeist of the very lowest scum of the earth. It's a word that used as a most uncaring and disgusting excuse, when trying to explain away some terrible thing. It depletes momentous events into tiny incidences. It is atrocious, abominable and certainly fit for the virtual bathroom with all the rest of the unwanted feces of society.
"Relative" is the thing, wherein I'll catch the king.
"Relative" is a word that's used to cheapen merit. Recall the characters Tommy and Jillian from the lethologica article.
Example the First:
Jillian: Tommy, quit celebrating, you've only biked 10 kilometers.
Tommy: Well, actually, it's all relative. You see, our friend Jim bikes 20 kilometers a day and those guys in the Tour de France biked over 200 kilometers during one leg of the race. But, Jim and those racers in the Tour de France are actually good at biking and they're trained and stuff. It's nothing for them to bike 200 k, but it's a monumental feat for me to bike 10k. So, for a habitual couch-potato like me to bike that far … it's incredible, it's great! I'm incredible, I'm great, I win the Tour de France!
Example the Second:
Jillian: I got 90% on all of my exams!
Tommy: Ah, but relative to your previous record of 95%, I'd say you're slipping.
"Relative" is a word that's used to reduce morality and ethics into squalor.
Example the First:
Jillian: Tommy, this is terrible. You're cheating on your take-home exam by copying from your unsuspecting roommate.
Tommy: Well, relatively, in comparison to, um, professional con artists, this is merely child's play. It's completely alright, applause-worthy, even, that I'm only copying a few answers.
Example the Second:
Tommy: Jillian, you're being a bad person, the way you've been rude and mean to everyone lately.
Jillian: That's ridiculous, Tommy! You see, good and bad are relative. How do you know what's bad and what's good? There's no such thing as good and bad when you think about it, so I'm a perfectly ok person.
In short, I absolutely loathe the word "relative" and it's usage in phrases to the effect of "it's all relative". It's not all relative. All hyperbole aside, sure, we have to make allowance for different people. But, just because someone is good at something, doesn't mean that they should get less credit for doing it. Just because there are worse things in the world, doesn't make a bad thing any less bad. Relativity and putting things in proper prospect is all good and fine, but there comes a time when you just have to face the facts and face the definitions. But, of all latrinalia, "relative" is the one that is not taboo. Thus, woe befell the land of weltschmerz.

2 Comments:
Love reading your work. It is always thought provoking. And although I may disagree with some points, I value reading your thoughts because they are expressed so uniquely -- I feel like your keyboard is your paintbush :)
On this post, I hope you do not take offense to my rather blunt disagreement:
It IS all relative!
To offer some reasoning, I will indulge in a quick example, as I see you are fond of those :P
Think of mail delivery. We do not send runners out to deliver messages as some countries I believe still do..
Do that here in Canada, and that postal service will rightfully receive much less credit than the ones that use trucks.
I guess it's all about expectations. If you expect the message to take 25 days to reach Thunder Bay, you will not complain when it does take that long. But if you were thinking more along the lines of 3 days, you would definately not be giving out any congratulations for them making it in under a month.
But expectations are rooted in perspective. We shop around, see what's out there... get an idea of what to expect. So we see again, that it is all relative!!! We cannot simply ignore measures around us and praise ourselves on mediorcre results.
Although... this practice is extremely helpful when we are need of a little confidence booster! We all do it from time to time.. it keeps us sane, it keeps us human. Of course we can't overdo it or we will be seen as conceited and arrogant. See -- everything IS relative. What an awesome word to have in our language :)
***
Again, I was not hoping to bash your arguments, but merely support the other side of them :)
Good luck on the CO midterm.. see you then :D
Thanks for reading my blog!
You're right, some things are relative, but what I'm trying to say is that you can't use the idea of relativity to change the value of thing?
For example, failing an assignment worth 5% of your mark is going to cost marks and it isn't going to matter what your mark in the class is currently. It's still loosing marks. I just hate it when people tell me to chill out because relative to the percentage earned, 5% isn't a lot.
The same, though more controversial thing is like people saying that it's ok for a monetarily rich person to loose $100 dollars but so much less ok for a impecuniously poor person to loose $100 dollars (through taxes or fines or purchases, etc.), because, relatively, the rich person shouldn't even care. But the problem is that $100 is currency, and it doesn't matter who has earned this currency. Its worth is the same. That's what currency means. If the rich person wanted to get his $100 dollar back by working for several days at a fast-food chain, it would take just as long as the poor person. So, it's not fair to argue that it's ok take from the rich and give to the poor. Now, if one were arguing that the rich people of society should pay higher taxes because of something called "noblesse oblige", that's different.
Thanks for your comment!
Good luck at CO exam today
Post a Comment
<< Home