A version of the essay below was originally published in Jacobin on October 28, 2020 — just before Donald Trump’s defeat in that year’s presidential election.
The appalling neologism of the title presumably means 'profaned' but could equally mean 'disconnected the hips from the pelvis'. Either could describe what that bloke has done to an office which Americans have seemed to revere in the teeth of the evidence for as long as I can remember. Whether that triumph of patriotism over fact can survive this degree of corruption domestically one can only wait and find out but it looks like the rest of the world has largely woken up to the decline of American authority and the opportunity handed to China after the Iran fiasco.
I did not say new words are bad. Shakespeare did it all the time. So did Hopkins. And don't assume i hate all modern neologisms either. Some are great; 'enshitification for example. I just think 'desacralization' is an egregiously shoddy attempt at creating one. You are welcome to nonconsentize with my view 😊
Sorry Luke, I was not for a moment attributing the word to you and, even if I had, the fact that I do not like it is a side issue and I was actually agreeing with the post!
It has similarly been argued that the 'former' Prince Andrew has done much to remove the odour of sanctity from the British royal family and that stripping the creep of his title was an effort to minimize that effect. It seems to me, now that I come to think of it,that there was always something in the American attitude to the presidency which smacked of a romantic harking back to a lost monarchy and the (completely spurious but psychologically compelling) sense of stability which appears to accompany that. If you treat an elected leader like a king, there is a danger that they may come to think of themselves as one. (Who could I possibly have in mind here?)
(Anyway, right or wrong,that seems a more interesting idea to debate than the validity or otherwise of my distaste for a word I personally find aesthetically dissatisfying but others may consider hunky dory. Good on them.)
Interesting comparison.
The appalling neologism of the title presumably means 'profaned' but could equally mean 'disconnected the hips from the pelvis'. Either could describe what that bloke has done to an office which Americans have seemed to revere in the teeth of the evidence for as long as I can remember. Whether that triumph of patriotism over fact can survive this degree of corruption domestically one can only wait and find out but it looks like the rest of the world has largely woken up to the decline of American authority and the opportunity handed to China after the Iran fiasco.
It’s definitely not a word I invented. It actually appears quite frequently in scholarship on the French Revolution.
Shush. New words is good. Linguistic prescriptivism is for dorks who are allergic to having a personality.
I did not say new words are bad. Shakespeare did it all the time. So did Hopkins. And don't assume i hate all modern neologisms either. Some are great; 'enshitification for example. I just think 'desacralization' is an egregiously shoddy attempt at creating one. You are welcome to nonconsentize with my view 😊
Once again, it’s not a word I created. See above.
Sorry Luke, I was not for a moment attributing the word to you and, even if I had, the fact that I do not like it is a side issue and I was actually agreeing with the post!
It has similarly been argued that the 'former' Prince Andrew has done much to remove the odour of sanctity from the British royal family and that stripping the creep of his title was an effort to minimize that effect. It seems to me, now that I come to think of it,that there was always something in the American attitude to the presidency which smacked of a romantic harking back to a lost monarchy and the (completely spurious but psychologically compelling) sense of stability which appears to accompany that. If you treat an elected leader like a king, there is a danger that they may come to think of themselves as one. (Who could I possibly have in mind here?)
(Anyway, right or wrong,that seems a more interesting idea to debate than the validity or otherwise of my distaste for a word I personally find aesthetically dissatisfying but others may consider hunky dory. Good on them.)
Keep up the good work Luke.
S