Rhetoric and real vs unreal metaphors
Adam Fforde <fforde@unimelb.edu.au>
date May 25, 2007 12:26 AM
subject [Vsg] Rhetoric and real vs unreal metaphors
Dear cats and dogs ...
I had an interesting experience in Vietnam last week. Comments from the
culturally unchallenged and those really really good at Vietnamese -
English translation and vice versa would be appreciated. If anybody is
horrid they may expect something strange to happen to them. A segue from
this to the things that have been starting fights would seem a tricky one,
though you never know ... it is hard to stop the boys from scrapping.
I have long had the feeling that a characteristic of Vietnamese 'policy
development' (bearing in mind that 'policy' has very different senses
here(s) and there(s)) has been a strong tendency to avoid abstraction in
favour of 'reflection on the real'. I see this as a tendency, though. Any
reflection on hard line Communist policy would suggest the opposite. Be
that as it may I think the tendency is certainly there. Cuoi ngua xem hoa
...
Be that as it may, I have written a paper - in English - that is about the
nature of ideas and policy, specifically, to do with the issue of
inconsistency. Modern techniques of disbursement against outputs (rather
than paying for activities) mean that inconsistencies in policy logics
between agencies are institutionally more acceptable to higher levels. No
matter the colour of the cat ... Be that as it may ...
I wanted to construct metaphors for such inconsistencies, and did it
twice: first, 'one agency said that the sky is purple, the other that it
is green'; second 'one agency said that children are really pixies, the
other that they are hobbits'. Here clearly I am asserting stark contrasts
by usually hypotheticals that are clearly unreal. I am being quite
normally 'Tay' in doing so. It works to such audiences. They do not feel
uncomfortable thinking in terms of impossible hypotheticals.
But I was then advised by the translator that I would do better
rhetoricaly, in Vietnamese, if I used stark metaphors that were
intrinsically <<real>>, and yet also contradictory - e.g. 'one agency said
that the sky was black, the other that it was white'; 'one agency said
that the children were basically the same, if they were boys or girls, the
other that they were intrinsically different'. The translator was as
ordinary as you or me. This was very interesting. For example, it could
suggest that 'Big Bang' policy is rather unthinkable.
What do people think?
First, how does this make sense?
Second, does it make sense to use this to argue that 'policy' and its
construction will 'therefore' be different from 'Tay'? Though of course
modern 'Tay' process-oriented methods are different from classic forms
that are thought of in terms of blueprints.
Third, how does this use of stark 'impossible' hypotheticals look through
Vietnamese eyes?
Anything else, please 'chu dong'
Regards
Adam