Lockdown - Day 38

In an era in which articulacy in the media takes a back seat to the ability to "connect" with an audience (whatever that means), it is interesting to notice how politicians and celebrities have perfected the use of language to produce versions of what has come to be termed as the non-apology apology. Not familiar with the concept? The non-apology apology is a shrewd rhetorical device which consists in a statement whereby a public figure pretends to apologize for a mistake (sexual misconduct, agressive behaviour, racist remarks, unethical politics, etc.) without actually apologizing for anything.

I still remember Russell Crowe's infamous apology on TV, when he said "I'm sorry about what happened". He failed to mention a tiny detail, namely, that he had thrown a telephone at a hotel concierge, who subsequently sustained a cut under his eye. That's what happened. Anyway, this blog is not about good actors with short fuses. So let's just analyze Mr. Crowe's words: "I'm sorry about what happened".

Do you notice what he did? In that sentence there are two verbs (am and happened), but only one of them has a personal subject. So, Russell Crowe was sorry that something happened. In other words, he did nothing wrong. He did not own up to anything at all. That is the kind of structure that an understanding friend might use to show empathy: "I'm sorry that it rained on your wedding day".

By using apology-related vocabulary, words like sorry or regret, a celebrity can dupe a listener into believing that they are really showing remorse for what they did. On closer inspection, all those statements turn out to be evasive, vague and definitely unapologetic. How do they do that?

The video below, which centers on non-apologies in US politics, points out how President Nixon's strategies have been replicated over the years. The narrator says exactly this:

"You can hear the same notes, the same conditionals, indefinites and passive voice in dozens of political apologies"

(02:43)

Indeed, it all comes down to grammar. And it is here that we find a reason for mastering the abovementioned techniques:

• Conditionals: I'm sorry if I offended anyone
• Indefinites: Somehow I offended her 
• Passive voice: Mistakes were made

Nouns also play an important role. An agression becomes the incident. An abuse of power is described as the course of events. In my view, however, of all those tricks the passive voice is arguably the most perverse because it removes the person from the equation, as it were. And I think a student should master this verbal form, mostly because it is often necessary. The passive voice can be necessary when the person responsible for a particular action is irrelevant (3,000 surgical masks are manufactured everyday in this plant) or not immediately important (your mother has been mugged). The passive voice also allows us to sound professionally detached from the facts that we explain or comment on.

In this second video I briefly discuss the causative passive. It is for my C1.1 class, but of course, you're welcome to check it out if you feel like refreshing your memory.