Conversations: The reign of the dreadful clichés - 1By Jose A. CarilloOver lunch that week, I told a fellow editor that I’d be writing about clichés in this column and that I’d entitle it “The reign of the dreadful clichés.”
“The word ‘reign’ sounds like a nice touch,” he said, “but I think ‘dreadful clichés’ is a tautology. All clichés are dreadful, aren’t they?”
“Well, not all, and I won’t go as far as to suggest banning them altogether from the language,” I said. “Take the expression ‘to level the playing field,’ for instance. It’s not dreadful when a businessman uses it but once in a statement like this: ‘We certainly need a new tax law
to level the playing field in the manufacturing industry.’ As they say, a cliché that works is better than a new expression that doesn’t.”
IMAGE CREDIT: SIMPLEWRITING.ORG/LEAH MCCLELLAN“Are you saying that it’s OK to use clichés as long as you are selective?”
“No, I don’t mean that. I’m simply aghast over the mindless overuse of clichés in this country these days, particularly ‘at the end of the day’ and ‘at this point in time.’ It has reached epidemic proportions.”
“Well, on that I agree with you 100 percent. For instance, I think one out of every four senators or congressmen overuses ‘at the end of the day’ and ‘at this point in time’ when they talk in session or give media interviews. They seem to think that those two clichés are a mark of wisdom, when in fact they are simply semantic crutches to give them more time to figure out what next to say.”
“I didn’t know the cliché situation in Congress has gotten that bad. You see, I hardly find time to watch ANC’s live coverage of their hearings in aid of legislation. All I get to read are the news reports about the proceedings in the dailies.”
“Yes, the print media actually do the legislators and the reading public a great favor by not quoting those speeches verbatim. But I suppose you have noticed how often they use those same clichés when they guest on TV talk shows or are interviewed live by the networks?”
“Well, yes, but I was thinking that it was probably because some of the talk-show hosts or news anchors are so predisposed to using those same clichés themselves. For instance, there’s this TV talk-show host who habitually prefaces his studio interviews with statements like, ‘Mr. Senator,
at this point in time, would you say that the standoff at the Manila Peninsula is an indicator of the country’s political instability?’ Of course, when you set the language and tone of the interview with a cliché like that, it makes the guest inclined to respond in kind with, say, ‘Well, Dicky,
at the end of the day, we can say that it’s not, because…”
“Mmm… Perhaps it’s high time the TV network owners issued some edict against the use of those clichés by their talk show and news anchors.”
“What a terrific idea! But I think the TV networks can do this country a lot more good by making that edict also applicable to their live talk-show guests, mature and young alike. I think that to give teeth to that edict, the TV networks should perhaps never again invite guests who have used those clichés more twice in a row in a live show.”
“That seems too draconian in a democracy, my friend!”
“Maybe so, but when it comes to live TV broadcasts, it doesn’t really matter who’s spreading the cliché contagion—network anchor, legislator, student or what not. Every cliché user is a deadly carrier. A few weeks ago, in fact, in a student debating competition on one of the TV networks, a debater actually got away with mouthing no less than 23 ‘at the end of the days’ in his five-minute live rebuttal speech. That’s more than enough to start a cliché pandemic.”
(Next:
The reign of the dreadful clichés – 2) October 10, 2018
This essay first appeared in the column “English Plain and Simple” by Jose A. Carillo in the December 15, 2007 issue of The Manila Times
, ©2007 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.
