9.15.2012

MITTIYUCK ROMNEY

You've all heard by now about the Republican so-called War Against Women,  an allusion to, among other things, the Republican Party Platform which would forbid abortion even when incest, rape or the health of the mother is involved.  Have you also heard about  another conflict, Romney's War Against Words? Read on.

When Romney isn't reciting what his speech writers have written for him, his English is very poor indeed.  It is a double indemnity since he tends to say the wrong things--that is, wrong according to Repulican policy--which he also expresses in the wrong way, that is, clumsily.  I give you an example of his English, chosen at random, thus indicative of Romney neither at this best nor at his worst.  It is taken from his response to the notorious ant-Muslim video:

"It think it's dispiriting sometimes to see some of the awful things people say.  And the idea of using something that some people consider sacred and then parading that out a negative way is inappropriate and wrong..."

He goes on to say:

"I think the whole film is a terrible idea, I think him making it, promoting it showing it is disrespectful to people of other faiths.  I don't think that should happen, I think people should have the common courtesy and judgment--the good judgment--not to be--not to offend other peoples' faiths.  It's a very bad thing."

The English is, at best, clumsy, which makes the thoughts expressed appear rather fuzzy.  These excerpts would make a good assignment for a ninth-grade class; the students would be instructed to convert Romney's into acceptable English.  I will only make a few corrections; I leave it up to the reader to come up with her own version.

"I think it's dispiriting sometimes"--implying that at other times it's not dispiritng at all; to see some of the awful things people say--implying that other awful things that people say are just fine.  A film  is not an idea, and why does he qualify that noun with the adjective "whole?"  The inept video, "The Innocence of Muslims," languished on the internet for nearly a year before it was translted into Arabic--does this amount to "promoting it showing it" and "parading that out a negative way?"  It was posted on the internet, not shown in theaters.  He writes that the film was disrespectul to people "of other faiths"--does this mean that a Buddhist would be more offended than an agnostic?

The English-speaking world has produced many eloquent politicians--Jefferson, Lincoln, Churchill, etc.   Is it too much to demand that politicians on lower rungs of the ladder of eloquence to at least be able to organize their thoughts and speak simply, clearly, and correctly?  As a writer, Obama is not a Lincoln; but he is a Lincoln comparted to Romney, who, I fear, will prove, if elected, to be another Bush in regards to both language skills and policy.  A dreadful combination!

I understand Spanish, German and French and have listened to speeches of politicians from these countries.  They tend to speak well.  Georges Pompidou, by the way--oh, those lovely French vowels-- sounded as eloquent as an actor from the Comédie Française. (In the title of this essay I call Mitt Mittiyuck--this is a reference to Chidiock Tichborne, executed in 1586 at the age of 23, for his political activity.  On the eve of his execution he wrote an eloquent poem, "Written on the Eve of His Execution."   I shudder to think of the poem Romney would write on November 7th -it is of course exceedingly doubtful that he would write a poem on this or any occasion--entitled, perhaps,  "Written On The Morning  of His Loss."  I do hope, though, that the results of the election  will give him the opportunity to write such a poem.

I've read that in Britain glaring grammatical errors and poorly expressed thoughts indicate a lack of education.  Not here--Romney and Bush received Ivy League educations.  Although Obama's command of English is vastly superior to Romney's,  poor language skills, despite a so-called good education, has become, to be fair, commonplace.

I conclude with a poem I wrote in response to a judge's egregious assault on the English language.  (He has since had to recuse himself as the trial judge in the murder case against George Zimmerman, accused of murdering Travon Martin.)  The poem opens with a reference to Zimmerman's wife, who lied to the court. The judge did not not recuse himself, I might add, for his poor use of English:


LAST MONTH HE ACCUSED HER OF

“lying like a potted plant
while leading the court
down the primrose path.”

Today he said, “By any definition,
the defendant has flaunted
the system.” What would Dickens do?

Send him to gaol, goal, gaol,
send him to the English-language gaol!
Let Mrs. Grundy set the bail

at a billion proper darning needles!
Poke out his I’s after prepositions!
Make his home merely a house.

Let him learn some respect
for his tongue which is ours
until he opens his mouth.



Romney's poor language skills are consistent with someone who pays attention while reading only to the what and never to the how.  I doubt if he ever reads for the delight of reading.  (His lack of a sense of aesthetics was also demonstrated by the way he sang America The Beautiful--how can you sing a song like that with absolutely no phrasing, coupled with a very apparent inablilty ot carry a tune?  Ask Romney.)

Pundits tell us that Romney's recent foreign policy gaffe will not influence the election, since the electorate is more concerned with domestic issues.  The governor's atrocious English will be, of course, considerably less decisive.  But I do believe that poeple who can't think, speak or write well also tend not to act well--if you don't believe me, try reading Mein Kampf.


No comments:

Post a Comment