No, I didn’t invent that God-awful phrase, but thanks to Sean Kinsell, I found it — used in a deprecating manner by a commenter to Sarah Hoyt’s discussion of her writing and Robert Heinlein.
Heinlein isn’t helped by the fact that he seems to be a favorite of libertarianesque geeks who spout sexist nonsense. It’s not always fair to judge a book by it’s readers, but it happens.
I enjoyed Sarah’s response:
if you’re going to use libertarianesque as an insult, (What in bloody hades does that mean, btw? “Somewhat inclined to be fond of liberty and individuality”? Um… yeah. Sounds dire to me) perhaps we can use “totalitarianesque” to refer to idiotish people who judge books without reading them, no?
As for sexist — I’m sorry, you’re not helping your cause when you accuse those who oppose you of being sexist and THEN provide them with ample justification.
I’m thinking of calling myself a “libertarianesque geek.”
But how far does the resemblance go? I mean, if the suffix “esque” means “having a resemblance with or having the characteristics of,” I may have more of a geek resemblance than I do a libertarian resemblance, which would mean I’d be a “geekesque libertarian.” Or if I resemble both, then I’d be “geekesque” and “libertarianesque.”
The problem is that “Geekesque” just sounds wrong. “Romanesque” and “Arabesque” are common examples of “esque” words, but is there Greekesque? No more than there is “Grecoesque.” Greco would seem to imply the esque, though. Although I think “Hellenistic” would be the closest Greek equivalent to “Romanesque.” But there is no such thing as “Romanistic,” any more than there is “Arabistic,” is there?
Don’t blame me. I didn’t start this.
(Don’t esque, don’t tell.)
Comments
4 responses to “Calling all “libertarianesque geeks”!”
I’ve been a Heinlein fan since I was about 9 when a hippy teacher gave me Stranger in a Strange Land to read.
Great book, I didn’t understand lots of what he wrote until I was a lot older but I filed away and found out it was correct when I was old enough to understand.
It’s funny, but I credit that book with why I’m conservative/libertarian that would make the hippy teacher very upset if I told him I assume. Hippies all wanted to be Valentine Michael Smith, I wanted to be Jubal Harshaw.
I’ve gotten used to people getting all upset about Heinlein. I can never understand the vitriol they use though.
I mentioned it once here and someone, I forget who, was all over me calling me an idiot at best while bragging about reading Herman Wouk and Michener(I never liked Wouk, maybe I was too young when I tried readimg him at age 9, I was raiding my parent’s bookcases when I was 8, and Michener writes really boring books that, like Wouk, people read to be seen reading them IMO).
Stranger is possibly the best book for understanding people I’ve ever read. It’s more philosophy than sci-fi.
I’ve never read any Ayn Rand (I keep meaning to), but she gets the same treatment.
I can understand not liking an author, there’s plenty I don’t like, but the anger and vituperation just seems over the top.
The closest I’ll get is to point and laugh about the inanity and the poseuresque “literature” when people go after my reading habits.
Now I’m ending all kinds of words with “esque”. I hope you’re happy.
Now that’s pernicious.
Not liking anyone’s politics is okay (okayesque?). Not liking someone’s writing skills is okay, too. But saying that someone is a bad writer because of his politics is, in the strictest sense of the word, Stalinist. When Uncle Joe was purging the writers, people got in trouble for denouncing disfavored writers, but saying that they were talented. Any good Stalinist or other variety of liberal knows that writers with the wrong opinions are untalented.
“Don’t esque, don’t tell.”
Argh. Why are some the best lines also the most painful?