A few years ago, I read an article decrying the use of the word "love" by today's generation, and its consequent decline in emotional power. It didn't make much of an impression on me; I shrugged it off and went right back to using the word as I had before: I love pizza, I love the Macintosh, I love the Twin Cities. Apparently, though, the article had deposited some kernel in my mind which finally germinated, leading me to write this esay.
I don't mind using the word "love" as a stronger form of "like"; it seems to me natural, and the OED dates this usage back to the tenth century. But it can still be overused, not because its meaning is diluted, but because it conveys very little information.
There are a lot of words which fall into this category, including most of those used by children to describe something they like or dislike: "neat", "nice", "cool", and "great" are examples. They are generally used to mean good or bad, whether describing an emotion, an attribute of an object, or an action.
What's the problem with using these words? It leads to speech (or writing) which is bland and undescriptive. It provides the listener with little information other than what the speaker felt. While a small child may feel that the most important thing to communicate is his or her feelings, adults (or even older children) should be expected to communicate more clearly. Clear phrasing not only improves communication, but it's more graceful as well.
Professional critics are careful to avoid bland words, because their job is to help their audience evaluate an object or event, not simply to evaluate it themselves. They explicitly describe the facts which lead to their opinions (or they should). Why should we leave this job to professionals, though? It may be more work to describe in detail, but with practice, any of us can learn to do it.
Consider the following account of a CD. "I liked it. I thought the lyrics were pretty cool." Is that enough to make a decision about whether you should buy it? Of course not, unless you know in advance that your tastes are extremely similar to those of the speaker. The second sentence might seem at first glance to convey some specific information (it's about "lyrics"), but the bland word "cool" destroys the possibility.
Now consider this one. "I liked it. The lyrics were love poems, full of passion and longing." While this may not be enough information for your decision, it's a start, communicating a bit about the lyrics, and providing a base to work from, implying questions that could be asked to discover more about the speaker's opinions. Importantly for today's busy lifestyles (which deserves its own essay), it needn't take much longer to communicate more information than it took to give one's own opinion.
Feel free to elaborate, and even go to extremes once in a while. Your listeners will stop you if they've heard enough. Even giving more detail about your opinions helps avoid blandness, if objective facts aren't to be found. "I liked it. The lyrics were love poems, and the instrumentation sounded like an ocean, separating the lovers who were calling out to each other over the distance, perhaps only imagining the replies." That's less bland than "pretty cool," and might start an interesting conversation, too.
Lest you think this only applies to reviews, consider the following two statements which might be made in the context of a political or business decision. "The economic justification is poor." "The economic justification is poor, assuming that all current customers will continue to attend despite higher ticket prices and less attractive seating." Which one conveys more information? Which sounds more convincing?
Blandness should be avoided in all of our speech and writing. While we may not want to use the flowery speech found in Victorian novels (then again, why not once in a while?), we should take care to communicate in detail, not fall back on generalities in words or trite phrases. Better communications leads to better understanding, which leads to stronger relationships. Better living through communication!
Copyright © 1998 by Anton Rang.