Quote:
|
Well, Mark, you can see how well I am turning my limited attention to other things, as I so sanctimoniously proclaimed a few posts ago.
|
Indeed, Julie. Ditto. What the hell are we doing here?
Something you said earlier made me think.
Quote:
|
Of all the terrible things going on in the world right now, the "censorship" of a few of Dr. Seuss's minor books doesn't crack my personal top ten. If it cracks John McWhorter's, he has every right to feel that way, and to say so. But I also have the right to think his priorities might be a little out of whack.
|
This argument about "priorities" is used a lot in the so-called "cancel culture" debate to dismiss or frame a different view in a negative light. But it's used by people on both sides of the debate so really it's self-defeating: "why is bemoaning the loss of some 70 year old books your priority when there is so much real injustice in the world?" versus "why is defending the withdrawal of some 70 year old books your priority when there is so much real injustice in the world?"
Really, the "why is this your priority?" argument could be used about literally anything in any circumstances. Why are you learning to juggle? Don't you know there are people starving in the world? Why are you writing an article about medieval poetry? Don't you know that malaria is killing thousands of people every day? Why are you practicing for an amateur production of the Pirates of Penzance? Don't you know... etc etc
Basically, people are allowed their interests and opinions and very few of us are saints. As someone whose areas of expertise are linguistics, semiotics and race this seems fairly well within McWhorter's remit.
I've probably used this rhetorical gambit myself, Julie, so I'm not having a go at you. It just occurred to me and struck me as interesting.