Kids' stuff
What a beautiful day - for all of 30 minutes - before I opened the letters' page of yesterday's Daily Telegraph. The newspaper had sneaked itself in to the car so I hadn't read it on the day of issue. That must have been why I felt on top form yesterday. There was none of the miserable, small-minded niggling of Telegraph readers to sap the spirit.
Enjoying the freedom of their letters' page, they were chewing over language usage, a favourite topic in the Home Counties whose residents think they own the English language when we all know that it belongs to the Queen.
While I agreed with some of the points I found myself taking issue with the views of Harold Carter of Pocklington, North Yorkshire (part of the rich farming belt from Harrogate across to the Yorkshire Wolds that I think of as the "Surrey of the North").
Mr Carter revealed that "the word that always grates on my ear is kids. It was used by Tony Blair and is commonly used on the radio.
Billy goat
"I am of the opinion that a kid is the product of a nanny and a billy goat. Its usage in my youth for "child" conjured up a picture a complete urchin.
"When was the term first used to describe a child?" A letter in today's paper says that Rudyard Kipling was using the term a hundred years ago. That's far too recent for Telegraph readers who think would feel more comfortable with Chaucer.
I had used the word in my FT column on creativity only this week, when referring to my own kids. I looked at it once or twice, thought of using "children" instead, but settled on kids because I think this best describes them.
The thing is they are no longer little children. Of the two discussed in the piece, George is 16 next month and Robert, for goodness sake, is 21, a young adult. Yet they are both kids really and some of what I was discussing - see the previous blog - was kids' stuff, except that, as I explained in the column, much of it wasn't.
Viral marketing
Note the way that the letter had to drag in Tony Blair for good measure. I wonder what Mr Carter would make of mash-ups, play lists and viral marketing? My kids understand this stuff, even though they are kids.
I use language that I consider most appropriate, that readers will easily understand and, yes, I do weigh the possibility that something might grate with a reader against the attraction of colloquial usage.
Use of language is a sensitive subject. All writers must respect that. But you can never please everyone. The most important point is this: did readers get the message? Possibly not in Pocklington.
Meanwhile the boys (kids? Young men?) are enjoying the success they're having with their video. It has been interesting to watch the increase in viewing numbers - (Sunday - 80, Monday - 280, Tuesday - 1,000+, Wednesday 2,000 to 4,000 in the day, and this morning(Thursday) the figure was over 6,000. There was a big viewing boost when Rugbydump.com, one of Rob's favourite sites, chose to feature it (at Rob's urging) in its "midweek madness" section on the front page. It's been a great lesson for them - for me too.
Enjoying the freedom of their letters' page, they were chewing over language usage, a favourite topic in the Home Counties whose residents think they own the English language when we all know that it belongs to the Queen.
While I agreed with some of the points I found myself taking issue with the views of Harold Carter of Pocklington, North Yorkshire (part of the rich farming belt from Harrogate across to the Yorkshire Wolds that I think of as the "Surrey of the North").
Mr Carter revealed that "the word that always grates on my ear is kids. It was used by Tony Blair and is commonly used on the radio.
Billy goat
"I am of the opinion that a kid is the product of a nanny and a billy goat. Its usage in my youth for "child" conjured up a picture a complete urchin.
"When was the term first used to describe a child?" A letter in today's paper says that Rudyard Kipling was using the term a hundred years ago. That's far too recent for Telegraph readers who think would feel more comfortable with Chaucer.
I had used the word in my FT column on creativity only this week, when referring to my own kids. I looked at it once or twice, thought of using "children" instead, but settled on kids because I think this best describes them.
The thing is they are no longer little children. Of the two discussed in the piece, George is 16 next month and Robert, for goodness sake, is 21, a young adult. Yet they are both kids really and some of what I was discussing - see the previous blog - was kids' stuff, except that, as I explained in the column, much of it wasn't.
Viral marketing
Note the way that the letter had to drag in Tony Blair for good measure. I wonder what Mr Carter would make of mash-ups, play lists and viral marketing? My kids understand this stuff, even though they are kids.
I use language that I consider most appropriate, that readers will easily understand and, yes, I do weigh the possibility that something might grate with a reader against the attraction of colloquial usage.
Use of language is a sensitive subject. All writers must respect that. But you can never please everyone. The most important point is this: did readers get the message? Possibly not in Pocklington.
Meanwhile the boys (kids? Young men?) are enjoying the success they're having with their video. It has been interesting to watch the increase in viewing numbers - (Sunday - 80, Monday - 280, Tuesday - 1,000+, Wednesday 2,000 to 4,000 in the day, and this morning(Thursday) the figure was over 6,000. There was a big viewing boost when Rugbydump.com, one of Rob's favourite sites, chose to feature it (at Rob's urging) in its "midweek madness" section on the front page. It's been a great lesson for them - for me too.
Labels: Chaucer, Daily Telegraph, Harold Carter, Harrogate, kids, mash-ups, Pocklington, Rudyard Kipling, rugbydump.com, Surrey, Tony Blair, viral marketing
posted by Richard Donkin at
9:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home