| June 7, 2003 The cover story in the June 9 edition of Newsweek, titled "Should a Fetus Have Rights" and is a thoughtful and fairly bias-free presentation of both sides of the abortion debate. Putting off discussion of the politics for a minute, let's consider the linguistic implications of this issue. If you read the Newsweek article (or any print consideration of abortion) you are driven to the conclusion that "life" is the opposite of "choice". We who play at professions that rely on words should be sensitive to this politicizing, this charging of these terms. We have in essence lost custody of a small piece of our language. Actually, politics does this to us frequently. Can you think of other words that have been driven from their original meanings? Can you hear "Conservative" today without thinking "Christian"? "Green" once had only environmental implications. I know there are others. Technology also alters words, usually by displacing old actions. For example: When you use the word "mail", are you thinking of envelopes and stamps? Or do you modify with "snail" when the US Postal Service is part of the plan? Then there are words and phrases that lose their context and disappear or are reduced in meaning. Here I'm recalling Bill Walton discussing the simultaneous court presence of David Robinson and Tim Duncan during the current NBA Finals. He called it San Antonio's "Twin Towers" lineup. How long do you think it will be before those words conjure up no picture other than basketball players? Each generation has enough trouble communicating with the next. We should do what little we can to at least keep our languages the same. Be aware of this the next time you select a word to define yourself, or your argument, or your future. What word will become your opposite? David Vincenti Advisor, Center for the Performing Arts at DeBaun Auditorium www.debaun.org; www.davidvincenti.com
|