Tuesday, May 17, 2011

isn't the dictionary in our age, a fucking fine democracy?
you do not elect people to choose the words to put in them -
it is not in the interest of those who rule the book to rule our lives.
instead, they simply document how we consistently use as words;
failing to do so would render the dictionary less useful.
yet, as open it is, at the same time, the dictionary has the authoritative say as to
what words we prefer children to or not to be taught.

i think it is exciting, because in the democracy of our time,
we look down on people who break the law - yet it is the very action
of these people that end up in landmark cases that change the law.

the dictionary, instead, rewards those who dare to challenge the times.
it recognizes them as trend setters.
it recognizes the fact that it is the times,
that must decide for itself what is right, and what is wrong.

but i have only one issue with it.

that the dictionary is necessarily biased towards the society that creates it - to those who do not write their own dictionaries, it is an authoritarian state.

yes, there is Wikitionary, but are we ready to teach our children the words we really use and who we really are?

No comments: