My daughter, Hortense, was greatly distraught to see the f-word used in this article. The context was a quotation from Lyndon Johnson, speaking to the Greek ambassador in 1964. It referred to what President Johnson advocated doing to the Greek parliament and constitution.
My daughter has been delicately bred and is on sabbatical from Sarah Lawrence College in the United States. She wishes me to register a complaint at this unheard-of breach of journalistic protocol. I personally am not offended, as I am a tough old broad whose husband, Horace Beasley, uses the f-word all the time, although not in the presence of our daughter. Indeed, even as I type this, he is standing at my side, beer in hand, foaming and bellowing against the prissified canons of political correctness: “F--- the f----ing f-word! Why can’t these p---ies tell it like it is? If you want to say f---, say f---! F-word, my a--!” In his primitive and inarticulate way, he is trying to make a case for the robust use of language.
I agree with my husband, but also fear for the delicate sensibilities of my daughter, who is not accustomed to seeing such rough language in a distinguished journal like The Nation. There are various ways of turning the f-word into a euphemism. One is to use hyphens, as in the common vulgarism “F--- you!” Another is to use asterisks, thus: “F*** you!” The difficulty here is that knowledgeable readers will automatically fill in the missing letters, so one is compelled to wonder what the point is.
I believe we need to establish a consensus on this issue, which is fraught with possibilities for violent conflict amongst contending factions. May I suggest that we revert to the French? French is always more elegant than English. In French, I believe the vulgarism quoted above would be translated as “Phouquez-vous!” That has both robustness and a charming elegance that will convey the desired meaning without offending anybody. I therefore suggest replacing the f-word with the French word “phouque” in journalistic usage. But there may be other possibilities, and I would welcome your readers’ input on this sensitive issue.
Constance Beasley
Bangkok