Despite being a huge proponent of technology in education, I’m sometimes fearful that the Internet will do for classical literature what pop has done for classical music. Will we soon see a time when that “stuff” just isn’t read anymore? I think we’re well on the way there already.
On the other hand, if we can use the net to get kids reading again, maybe they will eventually yearn for something more absorbing than the expedient fluff they are barraged with online.
Whadayathink??
When I later mentioned to the person who compiled our school’s word of the day list that even though the terms deduce and infer are commonly (and often improperly) used interchangeably, they do have their own specific meanings and really don’t describe exactly the same thing. The response I expected from a colleague was, at the very least, a mild interest in getting it right. What she did instead was abruptly pull out a tattered copy of the nth edition of the Joe Whatsizname Thesaurus, and stated authoritatively, “According to this they’re synonyms”. Seeing where this exchange was going, I dropped the subject and moved on.
More recently, I happened across an article on language usage by the late Professor R. L. Trask in which he offers that the “correct form” of English is whatever form English-speakers are using, and states furthermore that “there is no higher court of appeal.”
Well, needless to say, as one who considered it blasphemy when they started putting the word ‘ain’t’ in the dictionary, I was aghast. Have we reached a point in cultural evolution where the intricacies of our admittedly complex language are to be trashed in the interest of simplification and expediency?
From a historical perspective, it’s easy to see how many of the compromises or dialects of a language came into being. Before television, radio, telephone, rapid forms of conveyance, or even the printing press, the concept of global communication did not exist. It was difficult to communicate effectively with the next village, much less beyond. But in today’s technological environment, one cannot blame one’s linguistic shortcomings on lack of good example. One has only to turn on the TV to hear the best (and worst) of the Queen’s English. That, combined with the guarantee of a free education for all, would create the expectation that we should now be at the very pinnacle of semantic art.
But in reality, our modern culture seems to be rushing toward a language in which our vocabulary is losing its nuance. Instead of striving to select just the right wording to impart the intended hypostasis to a phrase, now days it's: any old synonym will do. Is this a product of poor education? Just plain laziness? Can we do anything about it? Should we?
Once upon a time there was a great orchestra. One day, due to a tight economy and orchestra administrators who were mediocre musicians at best and would rather spend orchestra revenues on pet projects that would get them re-elected in the next orchestra administrators election, there came a time when the salaries offered for playing in the orchestra weren’t high enough to attract the kind of musicians needed to maintain the traditionally high quality of the group. When the musicians would complain, the administrators would just tell them things like “if you’re in it for the money you should be doing something else” or “you should be doing it because you love music” and the orchestra started getting worse and worse.
Eventually, even the inept administrators realized that there was a problem with the sound of the orchestra. The problem was that there were a few players in the group who just didn’t have certain talents that are taken for granted in competent professional musicians. And as anyone who knows will tell you, it only takes one or two “tin ears” to make the whole ensemble sour. The conductor tried and tried in vain to find good replacements, but unfortunately all of the really talented people were being scooped up by higher paying orchestras or had gotten out of the orchestra business all together and were doing studio work and such. So finally the administrators came to the orchestra and said, “Since you can’t seem to shape up, we’re going to solve this problem for you.”
So the orchestra administration, as part of their new “Louisiana Orchestra Accountability Program” (LOAP), started using a standardized survey to rate the effectiveness of each performance. Needless to say, the LOAP scores were not good, so the administrators started requiring workshops on things like how to play with good pitch and rhythm. Now to say that these workshops didn’t help would be a gross understatement. Being that things like pitch and rhythm are intuitive aspects of musical talent that should be refined and developed long long before someone gets to be a professional, the competent musicians of the orchestra were bored and impatient at the prospect of being drilled on such basics. As for the less competent players, it was like explaining color to a blind man.
Over and over the musicians tried to tell the administrators that their approach to orchestra improvement was not only counter productive, but was actually part of the growing problem. Unfortunately their response only demonstrated their unwillingness to confront the real issues. They would say things like “What can it possibly hurt for the musicians to review their basics?” or “Aren’t they interested in improving themselves?” Well lo and behold; when the next concert rolled around, the LOAP scores were lower than ever. The administrators stormed into the conductor’s office and demanded an explanation. “Very simple” said the wise old conductor, “We’ve been using too much of our valuable rehearsal time to hold these useless workshops.”
As a result, the administration fired the conductor for having such a negative attitude. But the good news is that even though the new conductor isn’t such a great musician, he’s a real “team player” when it comes to implementing the administration’s accountability program. And since his phone wasn’t exactly ringing off the hook with job offers, he was more than happy to take the low salary that the position paid.
And they all lived happily ever after because as time went on, eventually almost no one even remembered how great the orchestra used to be.
