Maybe it's because I'm new--uninitiated, green, no0bish, however you want to describe my ignorance of how things work around here--but I don't completely understand this publication's tagline: "Crisp, clean, an hard-hitting since 2005". The "crisp" and "hard hitting" I understand: I've only ever read two editions of this fine publication, and even I can see that very few people beat around the bush with their opinions in these articles. Personally I love knowing this is a forum for candid, and sometimes brutal, honesty.
What I don't get is the "clean" part.
I imagine it's an adjective applied to the direct, frank commentary contained within these eighteen-or-so pages. I know for a fact, though, it's not used to describe some of its article's language.
Look, I understand people have the right to use whatever language they wish to make their point. Others are entitled to that right as much as I am. That said, I've noticed that some of my peers--not just the other authors within martini, all over--have the tendency to use expletives when talking about a particularly strong opinion or passionate argument, with the intention of emphasizing that passion.
Personally, big fan of the passion.
Not so much of the expletives.
Call me nerdy or old-fashioned (or both), but there are certainly better words than oft-used modifiers than, say, one that starts with f and rhymes with "ducking" or another that starts with "sh" and sounds like "fit". That's why there are unfathomable volumes of words in this English language: to express thoughts concisely and exactly, and especially in writing for a publication show that the writer put at least a little thought into the words on the page. It also shows creativity to use verbiage that's equally strong as, perhaps even stronger than, words that are censored from network prime-time.
I don't know about other people, but I for one appreciate a solid, well-composed, passionate argument. Somebody may present their opinion on a subject, and I may agree with the person on every point, but if it's presented with every couple of words scooped out of the gutter, to me it's a much less credible argument. However, if someone else presents an opinion with which I disagree completely and wholeheartedly--perhaps even find offensive--but it's devoid of foul language, that strikes me as the stronger argument.
Yes, the crux of any argument or opinion is its content, how well it's backed up. Equally important, though, is its word choice, how it's presented. If nothing else it show that you, as the author, respect your readers enough not to inundate them with filth. I couldn't care less if you, the reader, completely disagree with me on this topic; you're entitled to your opinion as much as I am to mine. I do respect you enough not to swear every three lines.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Original appearance:
g-squared. "Will Minus Intellect", Martini. 29 September 2010: 16. Print.
