OMG!: Profanity in a Profane World
Posted on 27. Oct, 2009 by Alexander Carpenter in Editorial
Recently our Student Services and Dramatic Arts Society co-presented a free showing of Lyrics from Lockdown, a spoken word performance by Bryonn Bain. Mei Ann Teo, the director of the show, prefaced the show with a disclaimer: “This is a true story of wrongful imprisonment. There are times when profanity is appropriate to describe profane conditions.” And the saga that Bryonn shared that Sunday, of systemic racism, negotiating the various responses to it in the black community, as well as the thoughtful death row letters of a seventeen year old who was unjustly convicted, a case championed by Amnesty International, was certainly more serious than the missed quiz question I just heard a student utter a flippant “f**k” over.
But apparently, despite the director’s caveat, someone wrote in to the president to complain that they are heard some bad words: damn, piss, s**t, etc. (A smart actor, Mr. Bain mumbled some of them, emphasizing the choking injustice.) Not only that, but a few other folks on campus as well have objected to the show because of the language. As usual, no one has actually stood up and talked to the artists involved.
These mostly anonymous censors certainly have a right to express their taste, and I think that a good education should broaden folks’ vocabularies beyond the dullard’s default to a couple-a friggin adjectives. But by focusing on less than one percent of the words, they reveal that they missed the social justice message of Lyrics from Lockdown. Naturally, given our increasingly diverse student body, all of the tens of students I’ve asked about the show praised it highly. One student I heard talking to another faculty member said it made her very proud to be at our college.
It just doesn’t strike me as in good faith (in all senses of that phrase) to listen to a man who tells a story about being wrongly locked up for two nights and three days and then at the end say: “Um. Not cool, dude. You swore.” But these folks aren’t even facing the artists. They are complaining to others. This sort of behavior is not conducive to community, particularly one that wants to pursue conversations about faith, learning, and Adventist identity. The last I checked, talking over folks’ heads is not a conversation.
Of course, as a member of the audience, I felt that the lyrical profanity expressed the inanity and insanity. Bain gave us a gray world not shown by Hannity, but, it is a true reality, for far too much of humanity. Henry David Thoreau once wrote, “Could a greater miracle take place than for us to look through each other’s eyes for an instant?” I’m personally glad for the chance to see and hear from New York while cloistered in Angwin. What a profane miracle.
Yes, sometimes seeing the world through anOther’s eyes can be shocking. But sometimes, that’s the point. It definitely was in Lyrics from Lockdown. It was a free show, no one was required to attend, and Bryonn Bain was a guest on our campus. Unless the folks objecting have also spent three days in New York jails because of the color of their skin or worked within the soul-sucking prison industrial complex, I imagine we probably shouldn’t be telling guests how they should describe their experiences with racism and wrongful imprisonment. There was nothing tasteless in the truth that Mr. Bain shared about how he was profiled and dehumanized. Now if someone is more offended by swearing than racism and injustice, at least going public about that confusion of priorities is a good place to start a conversation, I guess.
There is a quaint myth out there that Christians don’t use strong language. But in fact, the Bible spits plenty of vulgar language. For example, Isaiah writes, and the Authorized King James Version committee of scholars translates, “Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? Hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? (36:12)” Oh, snap! And Saul calls Jonathan a “son of a bitch,” which I find repulsive, but it fits with the narrative that’s unfolding in 1 Samuel 20 of the first king of Israel destroying everyone around him. There’s more. But most importantly, Jesus calls us to care about captives and even bring freedom to the oppressed (Luke 4). And Bryonn Bain, who uses his Harvard Law degree in his prison reform work, seems to be doing the work of the Lord. And from my reading of the Gospels, especially Matthew 5:22, as long as someone is not swearing at another person, Jesus really cares less about what we say, and a lot more about what we do.
This gets back to an old problem: prooftexting in which folks focus on a word or link random verses while losing sight of always, already present truth. All too often we not only do it with the Bible, but also with folks around us, taking them out of context, and looking for a way to dismiss messages that don’t fit with our sheltered experience of the world. As the great Christian pastor Tony Campolo likes to say, “I have three things to say today. First, while you were sleeping last night, 30,000 kids died of starvation or diseases related to malnutrition. Second, most of you don’t give a shit. What’s worse is that you’re more upset with the fact that I said shit than the fact that 30,000 kids died last night.”
After all, although we teach nineteenth century literature, history and visual arts here, Pacific Union College is not a finishing school. But we do have some work to finish. And a world of actual injustice, not merely words, to get upset about.
5 Responses to “OMG!: Profanity in a Profane World”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Alex,
Thank you for a very well written article!
It was a joy reading it!
I hope people will read it and really listen to what is being said here.
twid
Alexander states the case just right. In a profane and often obscene world, profanity may on occasion be not only tolerable but absolutely necessary.
I am interested in the basis for the protests and complaints about Bain’s language. Profanity may be be crude and distasteful, but clearly it is not a sin. Surely in Angwin we have rules enough without running after even more.
I am not a big user of profanity in my own everyday speech (I assume anyone on skis or trying to hit a golf ball gets a few profanity passes). However I do on occasion use very profane Anglo-Saxon terms for basic biological functions in class; I find that sometimes nothing but the Anglo-Saxon language can properly convey the intensity of human emotion. If our visiting artist Bryonn Bain is to be protested for his use of profanity, I suppose those of us who are actually paid to be here sure line up and give the protesters a clean shot at us. Those dedicated to protecting students from such powerful language (never heard, of course, in the dormitories) should be helped in getting properly organized.
I used several profane words this week in my Principles of Counseling class, so all protests over that will have to be retroactive. However I know I will be using one particularly profane word, featured in the book *Denial of Death* by Ernest Becker, repeatedly in my Psychology of Personality course November 6 – 13. I don’t want to give anything away, but it is likely this profane word will feature in the answer to a question or two on the Final Exam. My class is at 9:00 am – protesters are welcome to picket in front of Davidian Hall.
Oh Aubyn…. =)
If you have yet to take a class from Dr. Fulton, I highly recommend it. Although, please do not take a class from him if you cannot handle being offended. It happens to be a goal of his, offending students, so chances are it will happen.
Slightly more on topic, although arguably more related to another article, I highly agree with Alex and think his advice applies in multiple settings. If you have a problem with something another person has done, it is extremely important to talk to them first.
I’m not sure if I’m making myself 100% clear, so I will just come out and say it: If you are still enraged about the “Free Robb” case and you have yet to talk to the administration about it, please don’t go whining to WASC or even the president. Take it up with administration first, and then move on to a higher authority.
Sorry Peter for somewhat highjacking this space. I just can’t help tying points together from articles, it’s probably 80% of what I do in grad school.
Alex, I’m glad you made the distinction of artistic expression vs. everyday scenarios. I believe that artistic license and hyperbolic comparison (as in the case of Tony Campolo) are very distinct and allow leeway in areas that wouldn’t be acceptable in most other instances.
I wasn’t at the play. From what you describe it seems like proper warning was given, and the words weren’t used in a gratuitous fashion. I don’t know the individuals lodging complaints nor have I had the benefit of reading their correspondences. Therefore, again, I can only rest on your account of the scenario.
However, I do have a problem with the scriptural justifications you lay out in your article. In Isaiah 36, the words “eat their own dung and drink their own piss” already have striking impact and immediately conjure up a powerful image. That’s even without the profane English equivalent. To suggest that the original Hebrew words were more than just full of potent imagery and that instead of being correctly translated with powerful English words, they would be more closely translated as our English vulgarities is a bit of a linguistic leap. It becomes even more of an absurd argument when you understand that even some of the words we currently consider as profane in our own English language weren’t considered profane several centuries ago—and that’s in the same language!
Secondly, your example with Saul seems like a strange choice: since when is he the poster child for exemplary behavior? There are some texts in the Bible that are prescriptive-the principles are applicable and believers are encouraged to incorporate those values into their lives. Some are descriptive: they tell the story, they relay what happened (much akin to your play). Just because they describe a behavior does not mean that it is desirous for us to replicate that behavior. At the point where Saul curses at his son (didn’t you also concede in this article that cursing at someone IS in fact chastised by Scripture-which makes this example selection even more bizarre), Saul had become a homicidal madman. He had been rejected by God, was “tormented” by an evil spirit, was consumed by jealousy and rage, and began to mentally unravel. Several chapters later, he even tried a séance to get a comforting message from the deceased Samuel. This guy is hardly the prototype for acceptable conduct from God’s people. If he uses profanity, that would be a good deterrent—not justification—from doing the same in our own lives.
No one in my family are “practicing Christians”, but even they know that there are boundaries in language. Many times I’ve heard (and personally agree with) the adage that the use of profanity demonstrates a lack of depth of vocabulary. You can’t think of ANY other word to use except an incendiary one? How can we possibly condone using language that even people who REJECT God consider to be profane and vulgar? Throughout Scripture, we are given the commission by God to live lives that witness to others (Matthew 5:13-16; I Peter 2:9-12).God asks us to be different in a good way. Our actions should represent the highest ideals–not the basest—in the way we relate to others, the way we talk, in the way we settle disputes, in our public and even private conduct (Matthew 5:21-48; James 3; I Corinthians 6). We’re supposed to be different from the world. Yes, I know a lot has been done by Christian fanatics to make “peculiarity”, itself, into a “dirty word”! Often in our efforts to be distinct from everyone else we isolate ourselves and create a perception of Christianity that repels instead of attracts. But just because those mistakes have been made doesn’t give us license to correct it by swinging the pendulum to the other extreme. We can’t be so bent on wanting to be “normal” in society, that we lose the uniqueness that God asks us to have and therefore destroy our witness.
Lastly, I think the principle of “Christian liberty” prevails. Sure, in I Corinthians chapter 8 and ch. 10:19-33, Paul was talking about food offered to idols, but the principle that’s laid out can be applied elsewhere: even if I think it’s fine, is it worth being a stumblingblock? Is my “liberty” to use profane words so important that I’m willing to have it distract from everything else that’s being said? If someone’s going to oppose me, I would want them to do it on the content of my arguments, not word selection. I don’t want my words to drown out my message, especially if it’s the message of God’s love.
Courtney, thanks so much for posting. I feel like it is becoming more and more rare to find a Christian who not only reads Scripture but tries to practice a “Christian” lifestyle.
I must object, however, to the underlying assumption that Christians are somehow supposed to be “better” than non-Christians. In my experience it has often been the other way around. I don’t think that being a respectful and loving person or even a moral person is a strictly Christian virtue. Many other religions hold their members to high moral standards, and even those who do not claim any faith are taught by society what is virtuous. Indeed, even Gandhi once said, “I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”
To me, what is perhaps more disturbing than use of profane language is the derogation of sacred entities through profane actions. As you mentioned, language depends largely on context, both historical and societal. Actions, on the other hand, are much more concrete, and can do far more damage across settings.