This interview is rife with writing and thinking errors. To avoid writing and speaking like this pretentious stuffed shirt here are a few suggestions:
1. Avoid creating "all purpose" words. FoxNews is famous for stretching, degrading and watering-down the words "liberal", "secular" and "progressive" until they have lost all of their former meanings and have become insults. Here the critic is using "snarky" to mean reveling in past indiscretions, making crude, hate-filled remarks without any basis in fact or cheap insults at someone else's expense. If you don't know what you're talking about, how will your reader?
2. Avoid name calling. If you have an argument that is well supported you don't have to resort to childish names and putdowns. Here the author calls Bill O???Reilly a "blowhard." It does nothing to support his claims, further his ideas or make him look good. It is just silly and tawdry.
3. Avoid foreign words. The word bourgeoisie must be avoided at all costs as it will peg the user as a pretentious, effete snob. It is unpardonable for an American to use this word as its use shows a shocking unfamiliarity with European literature and the word lacks meaning or context in the United States.
No Laughing Matter
A critic for The New Yorker explains how serious public conversation is being ruined by sarcastic, snide remarks.
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Critic David Denby was sick of the insidious, sarcastic discourse that he found online. So he did what any other New Yorker writer might do (see Malcolm Gladwell) and wrote a book with a vague, one-word title. "Snark" (Simon and Schuster), an extended essay that analyzes our conversations and all the insults buried within them, builds a timeline that spans from the Roman poet Juvenal up through the gossip Web site Gawker.com and finds Denby arguing that the need to be seen as funny or clever is ruining our conversation. He sat down with NEWSWEEK's Kurt Soller to discuss his theory. Excerpts:
NEWSWEEK: What drew you to writing about snark?
David Denby: I'm a journalist, and with so many print publications starting to subside, there's this aggression where sarcastic, low, teasing, undermining remarks were driving out more sensible kinds of writing. Snark is becoming the universal, and older people are afraid they're going to be left out of the party.
As a man of a certain age, are you afraid?
I'm not going to be hurt at my age at what anyone says about me. I'm 65. But if you're young and you sleep around or do some cocaine at a party in college, it's going to show up on Google 10 years later. I'm sure these snarky insults have an inhibiting effect on people's behavior.
So the Internet is ruining all the fun.
This book isn't an attack on the Internet. But a lot of people have become snoopy busybodies and the vehicle of that is snark. You don't go on JuicyCampus or other Web sites to solemnly complain, you try to make a joke. Somebody who used to be stuck muttering to himself can now shout out loud.
How does this affect our right to privacy?
Privacy is one of the great triumphs of bourgeoisie, where one can have a space where he can act responsibly, or irresponsibly. If we can't go somewhere without someone taking our pictures, then we're inviting ourselves to be snarked.
That's even worse if you're already in the public eye. Can we talk about Obama?
In the book, I discuss how when people spoke about him during the campaign, I felt like much of the conversation was in coded racist insults. When people said he was Muslim, people were really talking about race. But racial prejudice is not something anyone can openly admit anymore. Snark is the antidote for "We don't want black people here, but we're not going to say that." I was worried he wouldn't win, and it turned out I was wrong. So many people protected our Democratic prince.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Discuss