So, you can imagine my annoyance and indignation when, during
yesterday’s edition of the “Diane Rehm Show,” the highly respected Washington
Post columnist E.J. Dionne used the word gentleman
while referring to Dylann Roof. “Unforgivably
thoughtless of Dionne, considering his vast experience as a guest on NPR and
other radio programs,” I immediately remarked to myself. When it comes to more
appropriate words, Dionne had a choice of numerous alternatives—man, person, individual, fellow, killer, shooter…I could
go on.
[E.J. Dionne’s exact words--“…it became very clear as the
weekend unfolded that this gentleman was motivated by a deep racism...”--were
in response to Rehm’s opening question and can be seen at the 10:08:25 mark in the
transcript: https://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2015-06-22/gun-homicides-mass-violence-and-racism-in-the-u-s]
Of course, E.J. Dionne’s solecism is not the first time I’ve
heard a radio or TV guest apply the word gentleman
for the perpetrator of something heinous. Time and again, I hear law
enforcement officers commit the same “crime,” i.e., “murder” the word gentleman by using it when referring to,
say, a terrorist, a rapist, or an armed burglar.
Bottom line--The thing to ponder for my
blog readers is: Has society become so reflexive, so robotic, in its use of gentleman that the word has lost its complimentary sense
and is now no more than a synonym for “a male adult”? In other words, using the word gentleman for a criminal is no longer an impropriety?
© Copyright 2015
V. J. Singal
No comments:
Post a Comment