Apology vs Apologia (defining moments in language and history)
1 a : a formal justification : defense b : excuse 2a
2 : an admission of error or discourtesy accompanied by an expression of regret <a public apology>
3 : a poor substitute : makeshift
: a defense especially of one’s opinions, position, or actions <the finest apologia or explanation of what drives a man to devote his life to pure mathematics — British Book News>
Source: Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
If the implication of an admission of error accompanied by an expression of regret is less distinguishable than the defence of one’s opinions then it must necessarily be an apologia and not an apology. Not so synonymous after all.
Viz in re:
Galileo Galilei: Eppur si muove! (The Universe)
William Jefferson Clinton: I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I’ve never had an affair with her. (Lewinsky)
Richard Nixon: I regret deeply any injuries that may have been done in the course of the events that led to this decision. I would say only that if some of my judgments were wrong, and some were wrong, they were made in what I believed at the time to be the best interest of the Nation. (Watergate)
Pope Benedict XVI: “Here I would like to pause to acknowledge the shame which we have all felt as a result of the sexual abuse of minors by some clergy and religious in this country.Indeed, I am deeply sorry for the pain and suffering the victims have endured and I assure them that as their pastor I too share in their suffering. These misdeeds, which constitute so grave a betrayal of trust, deserve unequivocal condemnation.They have caused great pain and have damaged the Church’s witness. (Australia)
- Guidelines to Public Figures (Mark Sitrick – $400/hour apology consultant)
A) Try not to make a mistake.
B) If you make a mistake, be brutally honest about it.
C) Never get into any sort of cover-up mode because that will cause you more trouble than the incident itself.
“You have a sense of what the public accepts and does not accept. It’s common sense. Murder, no. Genocide, no. Having sex with a hooker? Yes, if you apologize.” – Mark Sitrick (a.k.a Wizard of Spin)
3 replies on “Non Sequitur #93”
@ Jacques – Skuzani imma ha naghmel kumment li ma tantx ghandu x’jaqsam mas-suggett tal-bloggata tieghek – speci ta non sequitur tieghi. Ghandu x’jaqsam ma dak li jaghmlu certu bloggers (mhux Jaccuse). Xi drabi ninnota li l-“kummentaturi” juzaw lingwagg identiku u ghandhom stil simili hafna ghal blogger. U ghalhekk nistaqsi – imma possibli li l-blogger qed jikrea persona fittizjuza biex isostni l-argument tieghu? U kemm jiflah jitnejjek bil-qarrejja tieghu meta jahseb li mhux qed jindunaw?
Bhala ezempju ara dal-kumment ta “Rosa Luxembourg” fuq il-blog ta Daphne u ghiduli li l-fissazzjoni dwar “a pistol in his pocket” u r-referenza ghal Mae West ma jitfaccawx ta spiss (anke fl-artiklu tal-llum ta DCG? Waqajna ghal dawn it-tip ta vavati biex insostnu l-punt taghna?
Rosa Luxemburg says:
Wednesday, 21 October at 1044hrs
Our Ken said in the same article that back in the politically-tormented days of 1979, when he was 23, he knew nothing about politics. He still doesn’t. When he said that Joseph Muscat’s words were statesmanlike, it was his infatuation speaking, and not his powers of political analysis. In no other context would our Ken, so correct and so very concerned with manners, have classed ‘X should never have happened’ as an apology. He was in the audience to gaze admiringly at the love object.
He says in that article that he won’t be voting with a gun to his head in 2013. Is that a pistol in his pocket or is he just pleased to see Joseph Muscat (Mae West is so useful)?
@Sully: Tinkwetax. Niehu gost meta dan il-blog jintuza ghal diskussjoni u meta l-qarrejja joghgobhom iqajmu xi punt. Basta fil-limiti tad-dicenza u jidhirli li dan il-kumment tieghek huwa fil-limiti.
Dwar bloggers li jilbsu xi psewdonimu biex ihallu kummenti fuq bloggati taghhom stess nahseb li jista’ jkun li qed isir però ma nahsibx li l-ezempju li uzajt huwa l-kaz. Ir-raguni hi li certa espressjonijiet u lingwagg huma “catchy” f’sens psikologiku (ara artiklu ta’ Finkelstein fit-Times ta’ Londra tal-bierah 21.10.09). “gun in your pocket” intuzat minnhom wara li KZT uza l-espressjoni “voting with a gun at your head” li ovvjament ma nizlitx tajjeb ma dawk li isibuha komda ibiddlu l-ghazla tal-vot f’Hobson’s Choice li twassal ghall-least harmful option (i.e. PN skonthom).
Tiftakar il-Wasted Vote? Dak kien catchphrase iehor. Issa ghandna il-metafora tal-“gun” imhallta ma cajt meskin fuq sesswalità ta’ persuni. Zgur li ma tieqafx hemm. Nistghu (gustament) nitnejku b’Marisa Micallef ghax tikteb b’metafori imma anki nies bhal Daphne ghandhom bzonn immaggni semplici u rikorrenti biex iwasslu l-messagg lill-qarrejja fidili. Ara per ezempju il-perijodu li jien insejjahlu tal-annimali fejn kellna il-“peacock” u l-“iljunfant” imsemmija b’mod kostanti.
Fil-qosor: mhux necessarjament ghax certa frazjologijia (kif kien jghid Spiru Sant) issir komuni allura ifisser li l-blogger qed isir commentator ukoll. I.E. Non Sequitur!
@ Jacques – Grazzi talli tajtni l-opportunita nesprimi il-hsieb tieghi. Kollu minnu li certu frazijiet isiru catch phrases (kif ghidt seww int il-frazi tal-Wasted vote) izda din il-loghob tal-kliem tal-pistol in his pants (DCG illum – innuendo sesswali pjuttost ovvju)- xi hadd qamlu ghal Muscat – u nistghu nimmaginaw ghal min qed tireferi DCG) imhallta b’referenza ghal dak li kiteb Kenneth Zammit Tabona (voting with a gun to my head) ghandi nghid intuzat biss minn DCG. Sa fejn naf jien, l-ebda artikolist iehor ghamel xi loghob bil-kliem kif qed taghmel hi….u ghalhekk jidhirli li din Rosa Luxembourg xi sock puppet…
Kif qed tghid int qed nitkellmu bil-paraboli ftit bazici biex jifhem il-popolin….kif kien jaghmel Duminku meta kien jitkellem….Kos Daphne u Duminku ghandhom xi haga in komuni…