I.
The other day, I wrote about code that white people sometimes use, and I gave "dirty" as an example.
As an English teacher and writer, I think a lot about the words that I use and the words that other writers use and how the use of those words impacts listeners and readers.
There is what is called denotation, the literal definition of a word.
There is also connotation, which is the understanding and usage of the word which may be similar to the literal definition or may be COMPLETELY different from the literal meaning.
The following words are all synonyms for the walk and describe how someone moves their body to get from one place to another.
roam
advance
sashay
shuffle
Even though these words all have the same denotation, they all connote something different. I would use the word "roam" if I was writing about trying to find my way in a city and not knowing where I'm going. I would not use sashay to describe how I get around an unknown city. Advance suggests military movement and strategy. I would not say I am advancing through the grocery store to get cereal.
When a white person uses the word "dirty" or "thug," they could be using the denotation of these words, or they could be connoting something totally different. Sometimes they do this unintentionally and sometimes they do it with cruel intentions.
Last fall, I used the word "dirty" to describe a certain type of blues music that I like. When I used that word, what I was trying to convey was a sense of rawness and stripped down(ness) to the music; music that had not been over-produced to sound full and "cleaned up."
After the words came out of my mouth, I realized that because I was talking about blue music, a form of music originated by black artists, my use of the word "dirty" could be, understandably, misconstrued from what I had intended.
Add to the fact that I was thinking about the music of The Black Keys, two white musicians, whose influences were Junior Kimbrough and Robert Johnson, two black musicians, and my usage of the word "dirty" became even further complicated.
At the time I said that, I didn't know The Black Keys were influenced by these men, but after I made that statement, I decided I needed to do some work. I began to research who they were influenced by and listen to those musicians.
I needed to internally give props to those musicians who maybe haven't gotten the credit they are due.
However many months later, I am still thinking about my use of the word "dirty," what I thought I meant by using that word, and what someone else might have understood.
II.
One of the dangers of social media is that it isn't a complete conversation and most people don't have the bandwidth to read an entire essay.
(Myself included, especially when there is no punctuation or separated paragraphs.)
Televised media is another example.
Why do people watch so much television?
Is it because the world and your understanding of it will be handed to you in short, digestible snippets?
But can we really understand anything from blurbs and soundbites and a 5-minute discussion?
For me, to understand means to read and read and read and think a lot after that and throw some experience in there, too.
So what social media has us do, myself included, is try to get everything we think into one statement, but one statement doesn't cover it.
III.
In trying to say everything we want to say in snippets, we add buts.
But is a conjunction intended to link two parts of a sentence together.
I like to eat popcorn, but it has an unpleasant effect on my digestive tract.
In the above sentence, I started out with a positive (I like to eat popcorn), but the "but" made it negative.
That is what buts can do.
Buts can also make a positive of a sentence that starts out negative.
I always hated tomatoes, but I have learned how to enjoy them on a salad.
The problem is that a lot of people are starting their comments as follows:
I support the protests, but I disagree with destroying property.
I think the police are too brutal, but I also think people need to follow their authority figures.
The but takes your positive support and turns it into a negative, even if this isn't what you intended. Even if you say it in the spirit of goodwill.
Even if you really agree that things should change.
That but screwed up how your comment was received.
Are there other logical things potentially wrong with those statements above?
Sure, especially since some of the people who think POC should listen to authority figures are the same people who threw duck fits when authority figures instituted measures during the pandemic that impacted their ability to get their hair cut or select furniture at a discount store.
But this is simply about the power of the words we use and choose and the need to think about how our adjectives and conjunctions can impact how we are perceived.
The other day, I wrote about code that white people sometimes use, and I gave "dirty" as an example.
As an English teacher and writer, I think a lot about the words that I use and the words that other writers use and how the use of those words impacts listeners and readers.
There is what is called denotation, the literal definition of a word.
There is also connotation, which is the understanding and usage of the word which may be similar to the literal definition or may be COMPLETELY different from the literal meaning.
The following words are all synonyms for the walk and describe how someone moves their body to get from one place to another.
roam
advance
sashay
shuffle
Even though these words all have the same denotation, they all connote something different. I would use the word "roam" if I was writing about trying to find my way in a city and not knowing where I'm going. I would not use sashay to describe how I get around an unknown city. Advance suggests military movement and strategy. I would not say I am advancing through the grocery store to get cereal.
When a white person uses the word "dirty" or "thug," they could be using the denotation of these words, or they could be connoting something totally different. Sometimes they do this unintentionally and sometimes they do it with cruel intentions.
Last fall, I used the word "dirty" to describe a certain type of blues music that I like. When I used that word, what I was trying to convey was a sense of rawness and stripped down(ness) to the music; music that had not been over-produced to sound full and "cleaned up."
After the words came out of my mouth, I realized that because I was talking about blue music, a form of music originated by black artists, my use of the word "dirty" could be, understandably, misconstrued from what I had intended.
Add to the fact that I was thinking about the music of The Black Keys, two white musicians, whose influences were Junior Kimbrough and Robert Johnson, two black musicians, and my usage of the word "dirty" became even further complicated.
At the time I said that, I didn't know The Black Keys were influenced by these men, but after I made that statement, I decided I needed to do some work. I began to research who they were influenced by and listen to those musicians.
I needed to internally give props to those musicians who maybe haven't gotten the credit they are due.
However many months later, I am still thinking about my use of the word "dirty," what I thought I meant by using that word, and what someone else might have understood.
II.
One of the dangers of social media is that it isn't a complete conversation and most people don't have the bandwidth to read an entire essay.
(Myself included, especially when there is no punctuation or separated paragraphs.)
Televised media is another example.
Why do people watch so much television?
Is it because the world and your understanding of it will be handed to you in short, digestible snippets?
But can we really understand anything from blurbs and soundbites and a 5-minute discussion?
For me, to understand means to read and read and read and think a lot after that and throw some experience in there, too.
So what social media has us do, myself included, is try to get everything we think into one statement, but one statement doesn't cover it.
III.
In trying to say everything we want to say in snippets, we add buts.
But is a conjunction intended to link two parts of a sentence together.
I like to eat popcorn, but it has an unpleasant effect on my digestive tract.
In the above sentence, I started out with a positive (I like to eat popcorn), but the "but" made it negative.
That is what buts can do.
Buts can also make a positive of a sentence that starts out negative.
I always hated tomatoes, but I have learned how to enjoy them on a salad.
The problem is that a lot of people are starting their comments as follows:
I support the protests, but I disagree with destroying property.
I think the police are too brutal, but I also think people need to follow their authority figures.
The but takes your positive support and turns it into a negative, even if this isn't what you intended. Even if you say it in the spirit of goodwill.
Even if you really agree that things should change.
That but screwed up how your comment was received.
Are there other logical things potentially wrong with those statements above?
Sure, especially since some of the people who think POC should listen to authority figures are the same people who threw duck fits when authority figures instituted measures during the pandemic that impacted their ability to get their hair cut or select furniture at a discount store.
But this is simply about the power of the words we use and choose and the need to think about how our adjectives and conjunctions can impact how we are perceived.
No comments:
Post a Comment