At heart, this essay is about politicians and those who make their living from political commentary. Politicians and those who comment about political events are quick to seize upon a new comment which becomes the comment du jour for several days. The favorite word that is the fad these days is “transparent” or “transparencies.” When one politician or one political commentator uses the phrase du jour, other politicians and political commentators are quick to follow suit. It is as though they are afraid of being out of touch. When politicians and political commentators seize upon the latest word, such as “transparent,” they appear to me to be much like lemmings. I am not an expert on lemmings. I have never seen one, nor have I held one. But legend has it that they follow their leader even if he falls off a cliff. They will continue to follow their leader even if he walks into the sea. Lemmings, I am told, do not swim; hence they will drown by following their leader into the sea. But you may be assured that when a new word comes into vogue, politicians and political commentators will embrace it enthusiastically.
When they start to use the new term, it is not a matter of original thought but merely copying what someone else has said. Rush Limbaugh, who has a radio program of three hours per day, calls his followers “ditto heads.” As an independent observer, I would consider that term a bit of an epithet. On the other hand, a classy essayist would probably have used the Italian word “coda” in the title rather than dittos. A “coda” means to repeat. But I make no claim to being a classy essayist. I much prefer a blue-collar peasant food like polenta to foie gras.
But before this essay is finished, I would not be surprised to find the author quoting a song from a wonderful musical that captivated audiences on Broadway for several years. It was called Chicago, which reflected the earthiness of that city eloquently. I liked the Broadway presentation, just as I liked Chicago itself. So I guess that proves that I am not necessarily a classy essayist.
That is enough about the unusual title of this piece. If we were to recall the utterances of the political figures in the past eight years, we would find that there are many cases of copying one comment du jour after another. Consider, for example, “war on terror.” The so-called war was a fraud from beginning to end. There is no force on this earth, nor is there one from Heaven, that would remove terror from the lives of men. Yet political figures blithely used the phrase “war on terror” repeatedly. They are like the lemmings marching over the cliff and into the sea.
In that same period, the politicians in the Bush administration told us that their policies were “forward leaning.” It would take a strong man to assert that his policies were backward leaning. On the other hand, the Obama administration uses the term “looking forward.” We hope that looking forward has a better fate than forward leaning as far as this great country is concerned.
Then there is the case of “Washington speak.” Hillary Clinton was a good example of Washington speak when she said that her subordinates were being “tasked” to do something on behalf of the government. That is a tortured use of the English language. But even now we find that subordinates are being “tasked” to complete an action.
There are other catch phrases, such as “this point in time” and “freedom fighters.” Do you suppose that there are such fighters who fight for “unfreedom?” I am asking this question as an essayist in the hope of finding a new word for my vocabulary.
Another phrase we find in great use among our politicians is “pushing the envelope.” I have listened to this phrase for several years and find it as incomprehensible now as when I first started my search. But it has considerable currency among politicians and political commentators.
The current word being used by both Democrats and Republicans is “transparent.” The Republicans have claimed that Obama’s budget is not sufficiently transparent. Obama says that it is fully transparent. They further contend that Obama’s effort to stimulate the economy was not properly transparent. Obviously, Obama disagrees with that. If you listen to a discourse coming from Washington, I believe that in short order you will get a full dose of the word transparent or transparencies.
Now that brings me to a song from the musical production of Chicago that encapsulated my idea of transparency. Those of you who saw that show may recall a lonely figure standing in a spotlight singing the song “Cellophane.” When transparency is mentioned, I always think of Cellophane. You may also recall that the chorus to that song is:
“Cellophane,
Mr. Cellophane,
Should have been my name.
Mr. Cellophane
‘Cause you can look right through me,
Walk right by me,
And never know I’m there.”
What it all boils down to is that every time I hear a politician or a political commentator use the word “transparent,” his thought, however well-intentioned, goes floating out the window. When “transparent” is used, automatically I think of Mr. Cellophane. Politicians are used to rough treatment, so apparently my lack of attention would not be noticed. It may be that when the term “transparent” is used on your radio or television set, you may also let your thoughts wander to the performance of Joel Gray in Chicago. When a politician or political commentator uses that term, the chances are that he will have virtually nothing to say of consequence. When that happens, as it inevitably will, I will move to protect you. Just start humming “Mr. Cellophane.”
My heart feels stronger now that I have warned you about lemmings, dittos, and the mindless quoting of catch phrases that have very little meaning. Finally, if one of Ezra’s Essays’ readers can tell me why lemmings march off a cliff and into the sea, I will add that to my limited store of knowledge. But as I leave you, I will be humming:
“Cellophane,
Mr. Cellophane,
Should have been my name.
Mr. Cellophane
‘Cause you can look right through me,
Walk right by me,
And never know I’m there.”
E. E. CARR
March 30, 2009
Essay 375
~~~
Kevin’s commentary: Turns out lemming suicide isn’t actually a thing that happens in nature! The legend is mainly based on this old 1958 Disney documentary, “White Wilderness,” here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMZlr5Gf9yY
It was debunked in many places, the easiest to reference of course being Snopes, here: http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.asp
The gist is that when lemmings do mass migrations along coast lines, sometimes they accidentally crowd too quickly and push each other over cliffs. Some people saw this happen and decided that they were committing suicide. So then when Disney was trying to do a nature documentary they couldn’t just show lemmings scurrying around, they had to be doing what everyone expected! So they threw them off cliffs and the legend was cemented.
In other news, I think that soundbites are increasingly necessary in a world where most media is delivered in tiny bursts. Interviews are short, quotes are short, and every idea needs to be done in seven and a half minutes so that we can have time for commercials. So yeah, it’s an irritating way to communicate, but if I was a politician who could think up a three-word phrase that effectively represents a more complicated issue, I’d damn well use it and I bet my opponents would copy it.
I think that semantical issues are the least of our political systems’ problems. That said if they communicated more clearly and got better at not needing to rely on soundbites, I’d be all for it.