Lakhoff a great guru, lousy framer?
George Lakoff is all the rage in the Democratic Party these days. Perhaps his thinking deserves it. But Ezra Klein has given voice to some of my discomfort with Lakhoff. Mostly, I don't think his frames are convincing.
In presenting his case for why Howard Dean's determination to make George Lakoff the Democratic Frank Luntz is the wrong strategy, Brad Plumer forgets to mention why it's completely insane.
Geroge Lakoff -- I'm sorry to say -- is absolutely horrible at framing things. No, I mean it, the guy is atrociously fucking bad at it. He's a perfectly good guru because he understands what framing is and why it's important and I'm glad that Democrats are realizing we need to put some thought into our language, but Jesus Christ, has anybody actually read his book? He's the worst goddamn framer I've ever read. Democrats should be the nurturing parent? Are you kidding me? [via Needlenose]
It's food for thought, anyway.
posted by Chris Dykstra @ 3:27 AM |
| 
2 Comments:
Lakoff is both a lousy "framer" and *exactly* the kind of person a Republican would wish the Dems would adopt as their guru. He's like Diet Chomsky.
As a linguistics geek myself, I am tickled pink that the Deaniacs are curling up at Lakoff's feet. He's an intellectual Rasputin.
The same tired (i.e. losing) platform and even the same tired candidates.
The DFL must find some new candidates and they need to shed Kennedy and the rest of the clowns who decry becoming GOP-Lite.
It has to be about the process, not the destination. It has to be about momentum, or at least arresting the momentum to the right. Berg is right, Lakoff isn't good for the DFL.
Post a Comment
<< Home