The word (and with it, the original notion) bravery has started to go the way of pride : abducted by
the autophiles, trivialized, and rendered unfit for serious use. Examples of the new (ab)use are too numerous, and mostly too stale,
to sample; we mention only a
recent cause célèbre, in which a celebrity gigolo, long a glutton for the
limelight, perpetrated in
public an unhallowed
transmogrification, thereby attracting great gobs of further publicity (a
Vanity Fair cover, a new reality show), along with the ululating adulation of
the chattering classes: for all of
which “she” was commended for
“her” ‘bravery’.
The speech-communities behind these two semantic
etiolations or devolutions, are essentially the same: the partisans of “everyone gets a medal”. (Which means that any medals given to
actual heroes, are meaningless.)
The inflation-infection has spread even to the military, even in combat
zones. A buddy of mine was serving
in Afghanistan, very much in harm’s way, when he and everyone in his group, regardless of work-role, was given a medal in the form of a large
commemorative metal coin.
The inscription thanked them all “for your service”, in …. “Iraq”! (In other words, there were some medals left over from
that conflict -- in which my friend incidentally also served -- and they were
recycled bushel-fashion.) On the
reverse side was inscribed the name of the awarding entity: … Anheuser-Busch.
(Can’t make this up.)
(And no, the coin wasn’t good for anything -- not
even for buying a Bud.)
~
Less widespread as yet, and conceivably a sort of
contre-coup of the above development, are cases in which the flip-side notion,
that of cowardice, is wrenched
awry. The first widely noted
example was the nearly universal tagging of the 9/11 pilots as cowards. Now, condemn their actions
however you please; but to
denominate their plunging into the jaws of certain death, for a cause that they
believed in, as ‘cowardice’, is to have no idea what cowardice and bravery mean, and in particular to misunderstand our adversaries.
More recently, the denunciation has been put to
very odd use. Consider the
bizarre episode of the dentist,
who (following in the tradition of Theodore Roosevelt, a notably
courageous man both physically and morally) tried his hand at big-game hunting,
yet somehow (ananke) displeased the Erinyes, and was suddenly caught up in an
upwelling of populist vitriol for
which one must seek far for an equivalent: the social media increasingly evokes the Beast. The absurdity, even indecency of the spectacle (hordes
of carnivores, the Big Macs still fresh on their breath, calling for this man’s
blood) would beggar comment; but
one detail we do note: that among
the vices attributed to the man, was that of cowardice. Now,
traveling half a world away, to unfamiliar territory, to face a healthy,
fully-grown male lion, armed with nothing but a bow and arrow, scarcely
illustrates the concept.
And, latterly, the epithet has been applied to the
Oath Keepers on the mean streets of Fergustan. Judge their actions wise or foolish, needlessly
provocative or what you will: but
again the epithet pinned to them
is cowards. Whereas objectively what you see is a handful of
middle-aged men, leaving the comfort and safety of their living-rooms, voyaging
into territory where absolutely nobody will have their back, and confronting
mobs which, earlier, have repeatedly shot at police and sandbagged
reporters. The precise term
for their action might be foolhardy; but if so, then the same term must
apply to Admiral Farragut ("Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!").
No comments:
Post a Comment