We love, fear and despise the audacious
I've noticed that the word audacious has recently come into vogue. It first caught my attention around July 12th when Israel branded a raid as "audacious", to indicate something unexpected, unpredicable and outside their control and authority. The audacious act challenge received wisdom of what was or wasn't possible. The word has grown in its presence and is started to be used in all sorts of news-y situations. I spotted it again yesterday in relation to the 'foiled' London bombings. (BTW, what a great use of the word foiled. Last time I heard it I think was on the cult cartoon Penelope Pitstop). A quick google news search brought up about 450 links to the word audacious since the beginning of August in news related stories alone.
It's an unusual word to use in newscasting as it carries a great deal of emotion and passion. For the WordNerds amongst you (like me) you can check out its etymology but roughly it means "boldness" based on bravery or daring. It seems to connote a sort of unexpected wildness, with a hidden begrudging admiration.
I'm intrigued by its sudden popularity. Have the loud voices in the world, the imperialists, and propagandistas created a framework which we accept as the status quo, the best and most ideal that no-one should step outside, and then ! when somebody steps outside the accepted norms we loathe, despise and fear it, but something acknowledges the ability to be different, to be daring?
Does an audacious act - whether we despise it, love it or condemn it - represent the only exit from an increasingly contrived and controlled narrative?
It's an unusual word to use in newscasting as it carries a great deal of emotion and passion. For the WordNerds amongst you (like me) you can check out its etymology but roughly it means "boldness" based on bravery or daring. It seems to connote a sort of unexpected wildness, with a hidden begrudging admiration.
I'm intrigued by its sudden popularity. Have the loud voices in the world, the imperialists, and propagandistas created a framework which we accept as the status quo, the best and most ideal that no-one should step outside, and then ! when somebody steps outside the accepted norms we loathe, despise and fear it, but something acknowledges the ability to be different, to be daring?
Does an audacious act - whether we despise it, love it or condemn it - represent the only exit from an increasingly contrived and controlled narrative?
posted by Shelina Zahra Janmohamed at 14:54
2 Comments:
You might want to be more careful when throwing around with phrases like 'the imperialists, and propagandistas'. From where I am stdning these words could just as easily be ascribed to Islamists who are trying to build up a worldwide religious-Muslim-caliphate and those propaganda people who are staging and faking photos right now in Lebanon. As usual you won't believe me but I think it is common knowledge at this point that the attacks in Spain were done (according to their own admission and terrorist manifesto) primarily for a "re-conquest of Andalucia". And if you really want to start jumping down my throat for the staging-faking-photos thing you might want to check out this link here or this German NDR video here
See? Propaganda and imperialism are big words and sadly appliccable to both sides. So you might want to watch out before you criticize indiscriminately, since the British population has been flagellating themselves now for long enough while I still have yet to see a Muslim protest against Muslim imperialism or even terrorism.
It tend to be so...when freedom is bottle necked and when one is forced to changes one previsouly parallel course to one focused to a collective singularity.
Post a Comment
<< Home