Language War or Love of Language

After reading Lakoff's Language War I was immediately struck by the many pertinent, and quite excessive, realities it revealed. I especially found her segment on apologetics interesting. So many times we see how apologies, or the absence of them, can calm or ignite a situation. When she points out how they work according to gender she says that, "Women seem especially prone to this usage, apologizing even when no discernible wrong has been done or the speaker has had no imaginable part in the wrongdoing that has occurred." Though she simply grazed the topic, it felt as though she gave us part of her take on the rhetorical situation. She perhaps feels that we as Americans are too immersed in our "rich" history, along with how we have come to where we are, that we forget what we need to do as citizens. She says that, up until the 90's, politicians didn't offer apologies. However, they may owe it to other countries, as well as their own, for they have stripped Americans of their right to make "meaning" in their lives. She continues by saying that even our culture is created by these people who are able to use and manipulate us through language. She argues that our culture is a "construction of shared meanings." Lakoff continues with this idea when she looks at the very concept of reality. She understands that language is the most "real" yet unreal tool in our lives. Reality is created through language, even though language itself is not concrete. Therefore, we have, and will continue to be, unconsciously manipulated and deprived of some basic human thinking. The keyword in the last sentence was "unconsciously," because if we as Americans simply delight in these highlighted and “Hollywoodized,” if you will, areas of the human experience, than we truly gain no understanding of a meaningful existence.

She also delves into the language of politics and the media and how, in turn, the language is used against and for us. But here lies the question. Is the language of politicians used against us or for us? Even more interesting is the question of whether we as citizens need it. Though we would be quick to say that that is ridiculous, some people would be less inclined to think that way. Today people like and subsequently need this spectacle that creates meaning for them. Since it seems as though meaning (and happiness) today can only be acquired through some type of struggle, people are in search of it. They want empathy with the media, with the government, and with other people like themselves. They simply need this linguistic reality that is placed in front of them because, let's face it, it's simple and dramatic. This is what people love.