As I noted in previous posts of this blog, this 21st
century of change and chaos uses words to indicate more than the
literal meaning and combine words in a way that says another thing.
Recently I had some free time to
read from my stack of The New York Times
“Book Review,” and when I read the September 6, 2015 review of the recent
translation for Joseph Roth’s Hotel Years, George Prochnik, the reviewer said,
“Roth excelled at the feuilleton—a short-form, first person report riffing on
whatever struck the writer’s fancy…”
Looks to me like Mr. Prochnik has
a 21st century concept of these two words, because he uses the word
“riff” in combination with “feuilleton."
However, the synonym for ”riff”
is “interpretation.”
And whatever the current POTUS tweets, the zealous press wants to take it literally—like the tweet “wire tapping” POTUS says is in quotes for a reason.
The average person doesn't know that a "riff" is an interpretation, but the zealous press shifts the meaning of the word "riff" for whatever purpose they need to write their headline and politically inspired "feuilleton."
The 21st century conundrum comes when words and meanings are shifted to emphasize the political bias.
An average person living in 21st
century must read the context of words and take words as “entries” into
understanding like a reading measurement test at
school.
I always read each paragraph as
presented and then I answered the multiple choice questions.
My reading test score in grade
school beat every student in my school district.
I don’t believe anything has
changed since then but I bring to my understanding a sense of the world that I
live in.
Should everyone living in this 21st century read words within the context of a particular political party?
No comments:
Post a Comment