Movement 102

\rt
.,: ...)
' l:,f ,l
. '1. l
The modern day media is obsessed by celebrities and sound-bites.
Appearing educated is taboo; 'high-brow' is a minority taste. lf public
debate is broader than it once was, it is also shallower. So then...
Does bein{, inclusive mean dumbin$, down?
Dear Colin,
Your e-mail is offensive on so
many different levels that I can only assume
you shared a dorm with Glenn Hoddle at
prep school. Discerning the heart of your
argument was, in itself, no easy task - |
gather that you are unhappy about the way
in which you feel our media has lowered the
quality of pubic debate and thought in our
nation. However, I am not sure whether your
argument is with populism or inclusive
language or just everyone who isn't
fiendishly clever?
'lncluding' people in what you do is not
a new idea. lt is simply good politics and
good manners. For example, I would no
sooner use words like 'he' or'man'to refer
to females in a newspaper article than I
would use them to a female's face. Using
language sensitively, with respect for the
identity and feelings of others, is surely part
of the kindergarten curriculum. lhave
always imagined 'exclusive' language is only
used by people who enjoy ignoring and
offending people in their daily lives as a
matter of course. ln other words,
provocateurs, blinkered trad itionalists a nd
the sort of rude people who make you feel
invisible at parties. lf you are happy to
exclude people living in our society in the
writing, talking, thinking you do then you
are, by definition, being not only
unpleasantly elitist but also
fundamentally ill-mannered.
I agree that some parts of the media
are crass and some media-products are
low in quality. Personally, I never object
to a TV programme because it is "trying
to include too many people". ln fact, the
opposite is nearly always the case. Highbrow
TV, jargonised-expert program mes,
top-down, mono-cultural panel debates -
now they are annoying. Why? Because
they exclude too many people and talk
down to too many people. lt is exclusivity
in our media that is killing the quality of
debate and it will be greater inclusivity
that will save it.
lf I were you, I'd be more worried
about being blind than bland.
Yours,
Mo4 L
Dear Martin,
Your e-mail looks like it may
indeed be useful in the kindergarten
curriculum but not much else. I don't quite
know how the issue of personal pronouns
appeared. I was more focussed on the use
of an inferior debate to include more
people. lf the bees in your bonnet hadn't
been buzzing so loudly perhaps
you would have noticed this?
There is little pleasure to be
gained in being rude to people
but equally little to be gained
by discussing a problem
inadequately. I reiterate that if
people are unprepared to make
the necessary struggle to come
to grips with a problem (which
may involve learning technical
terms and listening to people
from one culture), then it is
acceptable to exclude them from a debate
(or party).
Strenuous efforts may be made to
simplify; I am saying that this simplification
eventually terminates. There is a lowest
level beyond which the exercise is worthless.
Here for example.
Iol ^
Dear Colin,
I'm concerned about who decides
what is "inferior debate" and who decides
whether it is "acceptable to exclude [people]
from a debate". Presumably these are
decisions made by people lucky enough to
take part in superior debate. What you term
"inferior debate" may well be another
Your e-maiI is so
offensive that I can on[y
assume you shared a
dorm with Gtenn Hoddte
at prep schoot.
person's life-changing conversation. Many
of the most crucial encounters in my life
have been conducted in clumsy,
undeveloped language with little or no
knowledge of "technical terms". Show a bit
of respect. Just because we operate, think,
talk in different ways there is no need to
attach the self-congratulatory label of
'superior' to your own personal preference.
Simplicity is beautiful but I can see how
it might be scary to those whose power-base
is complexity and intellectualism. I think
true intelligence is simple. As Keats said,
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty - that is all."
Pronouns are simply the tip of the iceberg -
an active, daily symbol of whether someone
can be bothered to include. I hope this
message does not fall below your threshold
of worthiness.
l"{od'
Martin Davies is an English teacher based
in Manchester. He was the editor of
Movement from issues 8$97: during this
time it became the accessible magazine it
is today.
Colin Mason is doing a Ph.D. in Maths at
Kings', London. He is frighteningly
intelligent and endearingly snobby.
movement 13