0564 - Vulgar

We wish to distinguish among (i) what is vulgar, (ii) what is not to our taste, and (iii) what is offensive to either legality or morality. Few such nice distinctions are needed with the noxious “Fall TV Season”, an event comparable to the arrival of an infestation of plant lice. One program at peak vulgarity is called the “Fear Factor”. When the Securities and Exchange Commission finds anyone guilty of pillaging a mutual fund, say, the miscreant is barred for years from playing with other people’s money. Well, everyone involved with the Fear Factor should be barred from TV (and polite society) for life. What, we say bleakly, is to be said for a program that makes people eat bugs? Siberia for you! Vulgarians!

Other offenses against human dignity abound, not only in TV programs (wife-swapping, anybody? fake reality, anybody?), but in many fields. As faithful Readers know, the OO is something of a specialist in bureaucratic behavior, and has written on the subject. The miserable performances at Abu Ghraib prison were vulgar – anyone can see that – but still more offensive were the bureaucratic defenses of the aptly named (Self-) Defense Department. [Note: two officers of principle have done their duty, and responsibility has been assigned a short way up the line.] True shame lies not in the foul escapades of the simple guards, but in those who are protecting the guys up the line. Guess who. And we’ll give you another example: Rumsfeld’s comments when the National Museum in Baghdad was looted. Oh, he said, there are always some such troubles. A highly verbal man, but a remark insensitive and vulgar.

Hark! Our Ethicist is clamoring to be heard. He wants the phrase “collateral damage” denounced as vulgar. Right you are, Sir E. Damage is only collateral when it is someone else who is killed. Terrorists who blow up kindergartens, buses, and innocent passers-by are rotten to their cores. Perhaps, just perhaps, they really believe that Allah wants them to attack the Americans or the Israelis, or (this week) the Russians, but it is vilely low to kill three year olds.

Turning to U.S. Politics, we can’t say much for the now famous Swift Boat ads attacking Candidate Kerry. The fellows attacking are apparently wrong about the facts of the medal engagements; that’s trivial. They appear furious at young Kerry for saying U.S. troops (and, and, their commanders) committed war crimes in Vietnam. Such is their right and they can say so. But it is cheap and morally wrong to quote Kerry by chopping off his testimony so that he seems to be saying something he did not in fact say. That’s lying, and corrupt. All have a right to speak, and to argue, but not to cheat. We’ll deal more with the campaign and the stupidities on both sides next week.

Now, let’s chat about nudity. A large chunk of Americans seem to think morality lies in not saying four-letter words or showing sensitive body parts (like Janet Jackson’s boob). This is laughable. The whole notorious Jackson performance might have been vulgar – and indeed it was – but a body part, in and of itself can’t be vulgar. Our policy here is not to use four-letter words because some might be offended, but we consider it silly to think that the skies will fall if a four-letter word were to be used. Grow up. When something is BS, and someone on TV says it is, that doesn’t justify pulling the station license. We claim a lot of what’s on TV is BS, and we’re all for good taste, but just don’t carry it too far.

Next time: Blather [OO #565]

| Printer-friendly page | Send this article to a friend |

Home