Are we really the offended by swearing?

[Parson]

Brilliant...



Wonderful. Can't recall where I heard it, but Stephen Fry pointed out the ridiculousness that most swear words are to do with sexual function, as a pleasurable experience. He suggested we use the words 'torturer' or 'rapist' if we really want to insult someone, because there is no possible connotation attached to those words, that is in any way anything other than horrible.

Anecdotally, and I'd probably laugh if I saw this in a book, a friend of mine and I were walking back from a game of football our team had won (Brighton and Hove Albion beat Crystal Palace, but I can't recall the score, since it was in the 80s..) and a Palace 'fan' threw a stone, which my quick-thinking friend plucked from the air, and deposited it over a bridge onto the railway bank. The palace yob, frustrated, yelled from across the safety of the road "You w**ker!", to which my friend put an exagerrated hand to his chin, thought deeply, and called back: "And your point is?" The Palace fan opened his mouth to reply, but couldn't think of a suitable insult to hurl back, so just repeated his previous words. "You've been watching me, haven't you?" called my friend, which sent the palace man incandescent with rage, so he stepped into the road, and got clouted by a police car, that fortunately was only doing about ten miles an hour, but he got up and kicked it in rage, was arrested and bundled into the back of the car. We made it worse by laughing so much we had to support each other, and my friend eventually recovered enough to say "Ah, the perils of imprecation."

This is an hilarious story!!

You have also set me to thinking about why some things are considered foul language, and other probably more horrific things are not considered to be a foul imprecation. Haven't come up with any live insights yet.

 

[Kissmequick]

When it comes to reading, I am not offended. I have read GRRM, Scott Lynch, Joe Abercrombie, Francis Knight, and Stephen King without being offended by any of the language.

Tell me I corrupted you, just a little bit?

As for why some words and not others? Taboos. Sex and poop are taboo (ish) which is why they are rude/funny. In other cultures, other things are taboo, so they have different rude words. Then you have your basic blasphemy stuff, which is obviously different depending on which religion (if any) you belong to, and what that religion finds taboo, or occasionally what they find noble (and call someone the opposite, frex calling someone a coward if bravery is seen as a religious/otherwise virtue might be seen as at the least Not Nice). And of course "cursing" comes from your actual curse -- may all your wobbly bits get warts and fall off!

 

[Parson]

As for why some words and not others? Taboos. Sex and poop are taboo (ish) which is why they are rude/funny. In other cultures, other things are taboo, so they have different rude words. Then you have your basic blasphemy stuff, which is obviously different depending on which religion (if any) you belong to, and what that religion finds taboo, or occasionally what they find noble (and call someone the opposite, frex calling someone a coward if bravery is seen as a religious/otherwise virtue might be seen as at the least Not Nice). And of course "cursing" comes from your actual curse -- may all your wobbly bits get warts and fall off!

Can you give an example of another cultures "rude words" that would not be considered rude in our Western/English culture?

 

[mosaix]

Hope this doesn't stray too far off-topic but offence is a strange thing. I think the key to it is the word 'really' in the title of the thread.

What really offends people? Maybe people have been taught to be offended by things or think they should be without really thinking about it.

I can't think of a single thing spoken or written* that would offend me personally. I can think of only one book - American Psycho - that I wish I'd never read but I wasn't really offended by it, I just have images in my head that I wish weren't there.

If someone close to me was offended by something then I think I may react in a protective way towards them.

I can, however, think of images that would disgust me - is that the same thing?


*Come to think of it I may be referring just to fiction. I can think of non-fiction writing - attempting to justify racism for instance - that I would find offensive.

 

[Kissmequick]

Sure - these may not all be actual "swears", because that is different depending on how you look at it* but are certainly offensive or name-calling, certainly profanity. Also ofc having been translated into English, it's very possible that English words are substituted to what they actually mean (they may not be literal) so I didn; use the ones that used English swears in the translation. Also these are mostly insults (which I find much more interesting), but the point still stands I think

Kisama - Lord of the Donkeys (Japanese)
Espurio (SP?) - Person of impure/illegitimate birth, Spanish (or is it Catalan?), seriously offensive, whereas the UK equivalent (*******) is often used as a term of endearment...
Noshech kariot - Pillow biter (Hebrew)
Khange khodah - Screw up of God (Persian)
An damagh - Bogie (also Persian)
Smerige kankerhoer - Dirty cancer-suffering ho - Dutch. Cancer/illness/disability is used a lot in Dutch insults/swears. Frex klere (cholera) can be used as an expletive, adverb or adjective. Versatile, no?
bú yàoliǎn - Shameless (Mandarin). Complicated and seems harmless til you realise that face (and loss of it, shame) is a big thing. This literally means "doesn't want face" "discards his face". Mandarin uses a lot about ancestors, and there's one (perhaps not Mandarin?**) about being so worthless no one will bother to bury you after you are dead, so you'll be left in the street but I can't recall where I read that



You can tell a lot about a culture from its insults


*There are certain words that I don't think are swears for instance that many others do, due to religious differences. I still may think they are offensive or have the potential to be. Also it can depend on legislation -- what is considered vulgar/offensive here may not be in the US and vice versa.

**Cantonese I think. There's an insult about falling into the street, and while not maybe profanity, it does has euphemisms to avoid saying it in full.

 

[hopewrites]

There are interesting examples even in and amongst ourselves.
I think DOE had a thread up somewhere, or we just tangented in someone's thread about it, where he checks in with different people to see how some word play worked out between two of his characters.

Pants in the states are trousers, in the UK I believe they are some kind of undergarment. And its become an edgy word.
Poke in the states is something your forefinger does to get someones attention. Elsewhere its an innuendo...
So even amongst ourselves different words have different levels of "vulgarity" which show how different values have shaped our use of language.
As far as censorship goes, Americans are much more lenient towards violence and much stricter on nudity. I remember what a scandal it was when Titanic came out and despite the art scene it was only given a PG-13 ratting. Parents across the country were up in arms...
So it's all a mater of perspectives, I personally believe that words have power. If one thinks about it, there is no reason a collection of sounds or arrangement of squiggles should have any barring on the world at all. And yet people will die for them. Words have power because we give them power. We assign meaning to them, and it is for those meanings we are willing to go to war or make peace. To share or condemn. Physical acts have not the power we have given words. Its much harder to take a punch the wrong way than it is a sentence. To misunderstand a slap in the face than a sly bit of wordplay. And yet, verbal abuse is rated right up there with physical abuse. Why? because it has the exact same emotional impact. In some cases a greater one.
The person who beat me could never convince me of my inferiority. Yet the person who regularly abused my emotions with subtle slights and indifferent affections had me convinced beyond a doubt that I was the least worthy subhuman to ever dare parasitic action against the human race. He did with words what others could not do with actions.

Thankfully I have recovered from both abuses. At least enough to view them for what they were and recognize that I need not let them define who I am today.

 

[mosaix]

I personally believe that words have power. If one thinks about it, there is no reason a collection of sounds or arrangement of squiggles should have any barring on the world at all. And yet people will die for them. Words have power because we give them power. We assign meaning to them, and it is for those meanings we are willing to go to war or make peace. To share or condemn.

Good post, Hope.

Referring to the bit I have selected above, I agree with you but only as far as non-fiction is concerned. Of course, words written in fiction can have power as well but I think there is a distinction to be drawn.

 

[hopewrites]

I dont know.
Perhaps it is because I retreated from my reality into fiction... but fictional works have regularly been able to move me in ways that non-fictional works could not. Perhaps it is the exaggerated and fantastical scope they function under, but I learned from fiction how do deal with reality.
Which, I guess, goes a long way towards explaining some of my personality quirks

 

[Lilmizflashythang]

Okay, I do have a problem with vulgarity in books. My defense, I read out loud, and I don't use vulgarity. See my problem. You wouldn't believe how many other euphemisms, ones that don't seem so vulgar, I will say instead. It's also one reason I don't like to read sex scenes.

 

[Parson]

Kisama - Lord of the Donkeys (Japanese)
Espurio (SP?) - Person of impure/illegitimate birth, Spanish (or is it Catalan?), seriously offensive, whereas the UK equivalent (*******) is often used as a term of endearment...
Noshech kariot - Pillow biter (Hebrew)
Khange khodah - Screw up of God (Persian)
An damagh - Bogie (also Persian)
Smerige kankerhoer - Dirty cancer-suffering ho - Dutch. Cancer/illness/disability is used a lot in Dutch insults/swears. Frex klere (cholera) can be used as an expletive, adverb or adjective. Versatile, no?
bú yàoliǎn - Shameless (Mandarin). Complicated and seems harmless til you realise that face (and loss of it, shame) is a big thing. This literally means "doesn't want face" "discards his face". Mandarin uses a lot about ancestors, and there's one (perhaps not Mandarin?**) about being so worthless no one will bother to bury you after you are dead, so you'll be left in the street but I can't recall where I read that



You can tell a lot about a culture from its insults

Thanks for this. I think you've proved your point very well. It is especially true for the "shameless" which in modern day America is almost complimentary.

 

[Extollager]

--- I was pleased to hear that a couple of you grew up in a house without swearing. Gives me a bit of pleasure, that. ---

Yes, it does me too, and I did too. I was once gently corrected (I'm not writing ironically) by my mom when, as a boy, I said "You fool!" We didn't go in much for abusive language at home. I'm grateful for that as my "baseline" in growing up. Gentleness and consideration start with the verbal dimension.

 

[Kissmequick]

Yes, it does me too, and I did too. I was once gently corrected (I'm not writing ironically) by my mom when, as a boy, I said "You fool!" We didn't go in much for abusive language at home. I'm grateful for that as my "baseline" in growing up. Gentleness and consideration start with the verbal dimension.

See, now that's really strange to me. Could you not say anything non-complimentary at all? What do you call someone who always does something foolish (or just has)? I mean there's not always time in a dodgy situation to go into the ins and outs of it gently....

It's a complete cultural shift from where I was brought up (not just at home, school and work etc too). If you didn't/don't want to be called a fool, you didn't do anything foolish. If you did something foolish and someone called you a fool, than you put your hands up, said "Yup" and learned from it (mainly not to do it again). I'm not sure I'd say that's abusive rather than a lesson in personal responsibility and not doing something stupid so as to get yourself or someone else killed.... (ETA: I mean if I've just stuck my fingers in an electrical socket, "you fool" seems less abusive and more an accurate assessment)

But obviously that differs across cultures too!

 

[ratsy]

Tell me I corrupted you, just a little bit?

I wish I could say you did

If I grew up without seeing the light of day and had the Top of the World dripping down on me then I would swear like a banshee too!

In Rojans case it would seem strange if he didnt drop the f-bomb every now and then.

(side note, just finished your last book and I really liked the ending. Well done.)

 

[Grunkins]

I can't imagine a life without vulgarity. Restricting my language to just those words not considered vulgar would restrict my ability to express myself. There are instances where nothing but an F-bomb will suffice.

 

[Parson]

See, now that's really strange to me. Could you not say anything non-complimentary at all? What do you call someone who always does something foolish (or just has)? I mean there's not always time in a dodgy situation to go into the ins and outs of it gently....

It's a complete cultural shift from where I was brought up (not just at home, school and work etc too). If you didn't/don't want to be called a fool, you didn't do anything foolish. If you did something foolish and someone called you a fool, than you put your hands up, said "Yup" and learned from it (mainly not to do it again). I'm not sure I'd say that's abusive rather than a lesson in personal responsibility and not doing something stupid so as to get yourself or someone else killed.... (ETA: I mean if I've just stuck my fingers in an electrical socket, "you fool" seems less abusive and more an accurate assessment)

But obviously that differs across cultures too!

I can't speak for Extollager, but in my house you could say that someone did something foolish, but not that someone was a "fool." After a lot of education and some of it in counseling I now believe that it was a folksy way of saying that in an argument you criticized the behavior not the person.

 

[ralphkern]

I don't have a problem with swearing. In real life my colleagues and I would probably be considered as suffering from borderline tourettes, so in many ways it does add legitimacy to stories.

I have only ever found it jarring in one book, Richard Morgans 'Black Man' (Thirteen in the US) where the narrative and the descriptions had a lot of swearing. I don't have a copy to hand, but it was full of descriptions not dissimilar to 'Bob walked through the f##king big door' I suspect he was trying to make it book noirish, but as it was written in the third person it didn't really work. That was less a problem with swear words, more a problem with where they were applied.

 

[Toby Frost]

While I'm not terribly worried by swearing in novels, I think it is something of a special effect, and that the choice is entirely up to the author. I also don't think that a book (for adults) becomes inherently more realistic or effective with or without swearing. All Quiet on the Western Front or the film Fires Were Started remain powerful without it, and might not gain anything from swearing.

It's worth pointing out that an author, especially in dialogue, is not literally duplicating reality, but impersonating it. Real speech is jumbled; many sentences run on, don't finish properly and the like. Similarly, every swear word isn't needed to convey realism, and the effect can be numbing rather than striking after a while.

There's an old film called Went the Day Well?, about the Nazi occupation of an English village. The lack of swearing and gore in the film actually makes it more powerful. The brutality of the Nazis is shocking because it is so casual and frequent, and because the film makes so little of it (shooting civilians, after all, is what Nazis do). Characters are simply wiped from the film with little comment or sentimentality. The very lack of histrionics is unsettling.

I would be very wary of a third-person narrator swearing ("The factory was f***ing huge") because it looks lazy and crass unless it's clearly the thought of a character ("Bill soon realised that it was hopeless to look for Mabel here. He sat down and wept: the factory was f***ing huge").

 

[Stephen Palmer]

That Richard Morgan book sounds dire...

 

[Fishbowl Helmet]

While I'm not terribly worried by swearing in novels, I think it is something of a special effect, and that the choice is entirely up to the author. I also don't think that a book (for adults) becomes inherently more realistic or effective with or without swearing. All Quiet on the Western Front or the film Fires Were Started remain powerful without it, and might not gain anything from swearing.

All Quiet has swearing in it. The author uses **** once and **** several times. You must not remember those instances or have only read the Bowlderized edition. This books has been challenged in libraries because of the violence and the profanity. As a book that intends to realistically depict soldiers at war, the limited use of profanity is rather unrealistic.

 

[Hex]

I'm not a soldier and I have never been to war (though I expect most people on this site have never been a WWI soldier either) but it's not hugely helpful, surely, to criticize books like All Quiet on the Western front for not "realistically depicting" soldiers at war.

I would bet money that soldiers spent a large proportion of their time cold, bored and waiting for something to happen, with occasional flashes of fear and adrenaline and possibly even sometimes philosophical conversation.

If you depicted that in a book -- however realistic it would actually be -- it would be boring as hell and no one would want to read it. Same with swearing -- it might be that some people use it every second word (I've even known some of them) but it's pointless and it's filler -- it doesn't add anything, it doesn't exchange information and as such it's like writing long passages on nothing in particular happening, or filling your dialogue with "uh... well, see when I... no..."

Surely All Quiet on the Western Front was anti-war propaganda, not an effort at journalistic representation of WWI soldiering?

The association of swearing with realism makes little sense to me. Sure, use swearing to suggest how someone speaks or to add emphasis, but not pointlessly because that's how some people speak. People say stupid and pointless things as well, that doesn't mean it's worthwhile to include them in fiction.

(also, I wanted to say, I grew up in a house where there was no swearing -- or very occasional swearing when my dad hit his thumb with a hammer or whatever. I got my mouth washed out with soap once for accidentally saying f---. What can I say? I was rhyming... University soon cured me of the habit of never swearing. I think it's good, though, to have words that disgust, alarm or horrify us. How pointless when everything is flat and dull and boring).