When a person is engaged in creative writing, one of the innumerable points he has to consider is how his characters would convey their disapproval of people. Are the characters high-society types or mere mortals? Are they conservative or colloquial in their speech? Do they express their opinions carefully or forcefully? And so on.<\/p>\n
My mental meanderings on the subject started with \u201cbastard\u201d. The word is (or used to be) a legal term applied to children whose biological parents weren\u2019t married. Definitions vary (varied) slightly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction as to the timing of the labelling \u2013 i.e. as to whether or not the parents were married at the date of conception vs. birth \u2013 but for the sake of simplicity, let\u2019s say that a \u201cbastard\u201d was a child born out of wedlock.<\/p>\n
Life could be made awkward for bastards. Inheritance of estate was difficult if not impossible, and hereditary titles could not pass to bastards. Worst of all (horror!), a bastard could not become a bishop in the church.<\/p>\n
In most jurisdictions, illegitimacy is no longer a legal disability. And birth-outside-marriage rates have increased drastically in the last fifty years, so in large sections of society there\u2019s no longer any stigma associated with illegitimacy. Therefore, outside of period pieces, an author would be unlikely to have one character insult another by doubting their parentage.<\/p>\n
By and large, \u201cbastard\u201d is now only a term for \u201can unpleasant or despicable person\u201d, and additionally in the UK, \u201ca person of a specified kind\u201d, such as a \u201cjammy bastard\u201d or an \u201cugly bastard\u201d (gotta love those Brits!). Monty Python\u2019s Life of Brian uses the term in a number of places, including here<\/a> (at 00:34), here<\/a> and here<\/a> (at 03:57).<\/p>\n But as a pejorative, it\u2019s lost its sting, so I\u2019d like to suggest the adoption of the word \u201cdastard\u201d in its place. It\u2019s almost as old a word, its origins are intermingled with \u201cbastard\u201d, and it can be said with almost as much gusto (although the \u201cd\u201d isn\u2019t quite as dramatic as the \u201cb\u201d plosive!)<\/p>\n According to the online Oxford Dictionary, \u201cdastard\u201d means almost the same as \u201cbastard\u201d, but without that whole illegitimacy complication, which helps in the ongoing PC wars:<\/p>\n Other dictionaries\u2019 definitions aren\u2019t quite so neatly and conveniently aligned, so I won\u2019t weaken my argument by citing them here!<\/p>\n If Wacky Races can use the word in the name of one of its characters (Dick Dastardly), then I\u2019m sure we can get the word back into mainstream use. (What\u2019s that, you say? \u201cWacky Races is getting on for fifty years old!\u201d? Okay \u2013 we may have to work a little harder at reviving the word!)<\/p>\n Why \u201cdastard\u201d is specific to males, I don\u2019t know, but if my next word topic can apply to both sexes, then I\u2019m sure \u201cdastard\u201d can be too.<\/p>\n For some reason, the word \u201cbitch\u201d seems to be a much bigger deal in the US than it is in the UK. And as in many matters, Canada is somewhere in between.<\/p>\n With the exception of some sub-cultures (such as those that surround certain musical genres and biking) and when referring to females of canine species, this epithet has never actually been benign. It\u2019s the degree of reaction that the word elicits, however, that highlights the trans-Atlantic difference.<\/p>\n Apparently, in the 1939 movie The Women<\/em>, Joan Crawford could only allude to the word: \u201cAnd by the way, there’s a name for you ladies, but it isn’t used in high society – outside of a kennel.\u201d<\/p>\n Elton John had a huge hit in 1974 with \u201cThe Bitch is Back\u201d \u2013 the word appears at least eighteen times (excluding the repeated last line). Some radio stations in the US and elsewhere refused to play it. Even today, at least one of the song lyrics websites (metrolyrics) advises that there is \u201cexplicit language\u201d in the lyrics \u2013 the only word that that advisory could refer to is \u201cbitch\u201d.<\/p>\n The interesting thing is that Elton John is referring to himself in the lyrics. (\u201cI\u2019m a bitch, I\u2019m a bitch, oh the bitch is back\u201d). He is, undeniably, male, so it seems that the word has become androgynous. This adds weight to my argument for the adoption of \u201cdastard\u201d above.<\/p>\n The word has become as general-purpose as \u201cbastard\u201d though, and like that word, has lost much of its shock value. As for retiring it as an offensive word in favour of some other term \u2013 I don\u2019t know. I like the word for its utility, but my OCD demands that its acceptable meanings be separated from the ones that genuinely do give offence (for example, if a person is using the word as a synonym for prostitute or whoreson.) Unfortunately, I haven\u2019t found a suitable alternative, and following the \u201cbastard\/dastard\u201d model isn\u2019t an option; \u201cditch\u201d just doesn\u2019t say what you want to say like the \u201cb\u201d word does!<\/p>\n This is one word that still shocks me so much that I can\u2019t write it here. When we left the UK in 1994, it still shocked a lot of people, but judging from the limited amount of British TV that Mrs. H. and I watch these days (via Netflix and iTunes, mostly), the word has crept into slightly more general use.<\/p>\n As a youth in the east end of London, I suspect I used the word (shame on me!) Lots of people unwittingly use the word by proxy when they call someone a \u201cberk\u201d \u2013 cockney rhyming slang for \u201cthat word\u201d (the full reference being \u201cBerkley Hunt\u201d or \u201cBerkshire Hunt\u201d). This, despite the fact that both Berkley and Berkshire are pronounced as if spelt \u201cbark\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n If I had my way, the word would continue to be completely taboo, and writing-wise, I\u2019d satisfy myself with the occasional \u201cberk\u201d uttered from the mouth of a character with British origins.<\/p>\n At the other end of the spectrum there are derogatory terms that never really caught on. One that I used at high school was \u201cyou mollusc!\u201d I have no idea where I picked it up, but I haven\u2019t heard it used as an insult for decades \u2013 probably since shortly after I left school. But there are more famous examples.<\/p>\n Take \u201cYou Prince of Wales!\u201d for example. I\u2019ve seen it quoted in books of insults, and have heard one or two people use it to show off their knowledge of Shakespeare, but never have I heard it used \u201cin anger\u201d. I have to confess to being in the \u201cI hate Shakespeare!\u201d camp, and have only ever studied two of his plays (mandatory texts at high school), so I\u2019ve had to rely on notes in the interweb to help me decipher Falstaff\u2019s rant at Henry, Prince of Wales. One site put a comma between \u201cyou\u201d and \u201cPrince\u201d, and interpreted it in modern English as, \u201cYou \u2013 Prince of Wales? What a joke!\u201d My copy of Shakespeare\u2019s works (printed in or before 1935) doesn\u2019t have that comma, and therefore maintains the likelihood that \u201cPrince of Wales\u201d was indeed meant as an insult.<\/p>\n While I freely admit to being a monarchist, I have to say that based on a good deal of the evidence of the last couple of hundred years, perhaps Shakespeare was on to something.<\/p>\n Prince George<\/strong> (much satirized in Blackadder III), who later became George IV, was, apparently, selfish, unreliable and irresponsible, and had such a poor relationship with his wife (it was a marriage greatly encouraged by his father) that they were formally separated within a year or so. He had a string of mistresses and, some believe, sired at least five illegitimate children.<\/p>\n The future Edward VII<\/strong> was Prince of Wales for over 59 years. He was very much the playboy, and his infamous \u201csiege d\u2019amour\u201d speaks volumes about his lifestyle \u2013 he also had mistresses throughout his marriage. Paradoxically, it was he that was credited with modernizing the public image of the Royal Family.<\/p>\n The Duke of Windsor<\/strong> was Prince of Wales from June 1911 to January 1936, at which time he acceded to the throne as Edward VIII. Although a popular royal, his womanising and reckless behaviour worried both his father and the Prime Minister. He abdicated in order to marry a twice-divorced American. Although I personally think he acted honourably in that matter, many have judged him harshly.<\/p>\n And so to our current Prince of Wales<\/strong>. Until his marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles, I was ambivalent about his being heir to the throne. Now, I count myself among those who hope that he cedes his place as first in line to his elder son, William. I\u2019m no puritan (or maybe I am), but I might find it difficult to respect him as His Majesty Charles the Third (or George the Seventh), by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.<\/p>\n Perhaps we\u2019ve been spoiled by QEII (the lady, not the ship or highway or bridge, or\u2026), the only monarch most of her subjects have ever known. Her reputation is, as far as I know, totally unblemished. Admittedly, she wasn\u2019t heir to the throne for decades like the above PoWs were, but I like to believe that she would have led an unblemished life anyway.<\/p>\n Perhaps my favourite insult is the word \u201cnatural\u201d, because many people don\u2019t realize that it can be used as one \u2013 in fact, it\u2019s more often than not used as a compliment.<\/p>\n Although the meanings are now archaic, \u201cnatural\u201d can mean \u201cillegitimate\u201d (aka \u201cbastard\u201d) or \u201cmentally deficient from birth\u201d. It\u2019s politically incorrect to use any reference to mental deficiency as a form of insult, but then it\u2019s politically incorrect to use any reference to social disadvantage as a form of insult, so \u201cnatural\u201d should be as acceptable (or unacceptable) as \u201cbastard\u201d, in my opinion.<\/p>\n Good question!<\/p>\n In everyday conversation, probably very little. People will continue using their pejoratives of choice until either the weight of social opinion forces them to change or a more apropos or catchy alternative comes along.<\/p>\n In creative writing though, the author or playwright must continue to be tuned in to the nuances of the various words, and use them appropriately, according to the traits that they\u2019re writing into their characters. And if tastes change, they must make a decision to either revise their work or realize that it will be shunned.<\/p>\n And frankly, that\u2019s a bastard of a prospect.<\/p>\n What’s your take on derogatory terms? Which ones do you use in conversation? Do you as a writer pay close attention to the match between the term and the character who uses it? Let me know by leaving a comment.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" When a person is engaged in creative writing, one of the innumerable points he has to consider is how his characters would convey their disapproval of people. Are the characters high-society types or mere mortals? Are they conservative or colloquial in their speech? Do they express their opinions carefully or forcefully? And so on. You Barsteward… My mental meanderings on… Read more »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[490],"tags":[667],"class_list":["post-112","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-commentaries","tag-words"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=112"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1576,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112\/revisions\/1576"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=112"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=112"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/reggothard.com\/kelvin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=112"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
Life’s a…<\/h3>\n
The “C” Word<\/h3>\n
Prince of Wales<\/h3>\n
You’re a Natural!<\/h3>\n
What Does All This Mean?<\/h3>\n
Your Turn<\/h3>\n