"Self-appointed" is a
put-down shot that wounds a lot of people, though it misses about 80% of the
time. Here's how to tell if you've
actually been hit.
Say you're Mark Twain, saying some
bad things about a beloved poem.
One of the poet's admirers calls you "a self-appointed literary
critic." You ask him,
"Are literary critics appointed by somebody else?" He has to answer, "No." There is no official roster of those
entitled to criticize poems.
Everybody's a literary critic.
So, for anybody who's not expected
to be other-appointed, from Twitter scolds to serenity gurus,
"self-appointed" is a clear miss.
On the other hand if you're an NGO
busybody making unapproved peace gestures to a foreign government and the
Secretary of State calls you "self-appointed" you've been hit dead
center. Only the SOS appoints
government emissaries.
There are, of course, intermediate
cases, where you lose some cloth, or get knicked, or even take one in a
limb. If you are Fidel Castro and
get called by Henry Kissinger the "self-appointed leader of the [world]
revolutionary struggle" (Memoirs III,
785) you'll probably have to bleed some.
Other third-world Marxists might be prompted to ask who appointed
you. But still, there's no
official list.
Requiring a list over-tightens the
concept, which, loosened, is still useful. Kissinger was uncomfortable with the word, as he showed in
his next sentence, justifying it ("[Castro] was probably the most genuine
revolutionary leader then in power") but he nevertheless used it. Castro's self-appointment might well
have been just a recognition of a fact — but still, Haile Mengistu over there
in Ethiopia, and Josip Tito over there in Jugoslavia, nobody elected him,
nobody put him ahead of you. It's a bullet that will get some
attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment