I am sick of useless adjectives. Not adjectives in general, but just the handful that my generation relentlessly uses to describe everyfuckingthing. They're not bad words; they've just been hanging around the wrong crowd. (Idiots.) They're always positive words, because sorostitutes with coke-rotted brains like everything. Words like amazing, awesome, fabulous, fantastic, and so on.
Those are just a few I heard today. Someone in a show I was captioning used the phrase "amazing farmer." Really? He's amazing? What the fuck does he grow? Invisible carrots? Gasoline trees? No, I do believe those were just some winter greens. And the mushrooms, while they looked delicious, are not "awesome."
Martha Stewart is particularly guilty of this. I once heard her use the phrase "fabulous drop cloth." I've seen drop cloths. I've used drop cloths. In fact, I used one just this weekend. And I can assure you all that its ability to keep paint off my kitchen floor did not astound or otherwise impress me. It just did what it was supposed to do -- actually, it did that and more, because it was an old shower curtain. It came out of retirement to protect our laminate. And even that I did not find amazing.
While we're all at it, everyone can stop using the word "miracle." Everything is a goddamn miracle. A baby is a miracle, a sunrise is a miracle, not getting hit by an asteroid is a miracle.
No. Just, no. Things can be positive without being a miracle -- and they also don't have to be wonderful, amazing, or any other lazy adjective.
And as a sub-diversion, I'd also like to point out that not everything is a poem. Sunrises are popular here, too. Flowers are poems. Children's laughter. Snowflakes.
Again, no. The people who insist on perpetuating this kind of bullshit are the same people who insist that all talent is supernaturally doled out; that honing a craft is useless. They reduce everything to the simplest definition possible because thinking is way too hard.
This has turned into a new rant, but that's okay.
A while back, I stumbled across www.helium.com and found what I thought was going to be a forum of intelligent discussion. The way it works is this: anyone can write anything on any topic they choose, and other writers/readers rank those articles. Unfortunately, the other members (or at least those who are active in the poetry discussions) are complete and utter morons. I wrote an article a topic called "Why is poetry so hard to define?" Here is that article. It's currently ranked 45 out of 63 because apparently Jack Nicholson was right and they can't handle the truth.
Here's the number-one ranked article, which is complete bullshit. The eye of the beholder? Um, no. Art can be subjective, but a poem means what the poet intends. If there's ambiguity in a poem, it's intentional. (Well, in a good poem, anyway.) How in fuck does a number-one ranked article on poetry assume that every poem rhymes? And contain misspellings and incorrect grammar and punctuation? What the fuck? "A writer uses their skill to convey a message." "Their" is plural, asshole. I'd really like to round up every breathlessly passionate poet I have ever met and have an intervention for every one of these jackasses. We'll see how impossible they find the definition of poetry after that.
I guess we all know what kind of professor I'm going to be. I hope I don't ever hit my students, but I'm not going to promise anything.