Stéphane Velut is a neurosurgeon and a writer. He recently published The Hospital, a New Industry. Language as a symptom (Gallimard, Tracts collection, 2020).
Having written about language in the hospital, having tried to reveal its origins and motives within such an institution, has earned me many returns. Among them, several came from members of other public institutions (justice, education) and reported the same observation, even the same dismay at having to undergo, in fact, the symptom of a sick society. "Saying things the way they are," these messages told me, gave way to formatted speech. The formatted discourse of those who, wanting to obtain consent, substituted elements of language for simple words considered to be too direct, too sincere in fact. Elements of language that have become as much those of the political as those of the communicator, the former can no longer do without the latter before addressing people.
Thanks to the crisis, the words suddenly, like everyone's job, made new sense.Crises are a revelation: they reveal all the flaws and strengths of institutions, politics, human behavior, a society, in short they are ruthless in many respects. In terms of language, we have seen this crisis change the situation, but not long and not everywhere. We were all moved by the words of doctors and many nursing staff, pronounced at the height of the health crisis. They were satisfied, sometimes even enthusiastic about working in a hospital that had become theirs again and where, precisely, there was no longer any question of spreadsheets, sterile meetings, figures and profitability. I also saw this change take place in the area of language: useless e-mails had given way to shorter information, simple words again became used. The words, suddenly, like everyone's job, made new meaning.
The President and his Prime Minister addressed the French like schoolchildren.This was not the case everywhere. Indeed, while the dedication was read on the faces, that spontaneity was heard in the mouth of all those who were close to people - I mean the caregivers -, the government made the political mistake of not not to say things, in short of not being sincere. Because if such a situation allows us to sail by sight, prisoner of an uncertain horizon and time, it deserves the captain to take stock of the state of the ship he commands. It did not happen. On the contrary, with each speech, both the President and his Prime Minister addressed the French as schoolchildren. Rather than admitting to the country that we had (because it is us) a serious problem with the means of protection by using simple and sincere words, they took the astounding risk of increasing the distrust which they already aroused. , by "masking" us, precisely, the thing, while speaking of "war". War: a word that requires no more than the historical knowledge of a sixth grader to know its meaning and symbolic charge. This shows the little esteem that our leaders have for a population that reads, learns, has notions of History. But no doubt they subscribe to the opinion of Ludwig von Mises, neoliberal economist of the Austrian school, who estimated in Le Socialisme (1922) that "The majority of human beings do not think" . A term therefore, "war", which Frank-Walter Steinmeier rightly refuted on April 11, still giving meaning to the words. This misestimate culminated in Edouard Philippe's speech to the Assembly on April 28, where, almost as a conclusion, he said he had been "struck by the number of commentators with a perfectly clear vision of what should have been according to them at all times ” , referring them all to the “ café du Commerce ” .
Of certainties, however, many journalists who had done their work had it, and shared it with us, documents in support, concerning the real sanitary disarmament which increased the stock of masks from 2.2 billion in 2009 to 117 million at the time. where the Covid-19 took place. But of these certainties, rather than admitting them as much to silence them, as much to affirm, from the outset, as to protect oneself was useless and, as much as to do, as much to encourage the commentators of the cafe du Commerce to say nothing about it no more. Clearly, communicators, who have become in politics what advertisers are for business, have a hard life and a tenacious influence.
I was hoping for the language of the next post, error. Here he comes back, exhausting, more exhausting than before.However, will the price of this lack of sincerity serve as a lesson to all those whose discourse is the profession? Probably not. In terms of language, this crisis will certainly have changed the situation: conciseness, daughter of authenticity, will have found its place, but not long. Already, thanks to the "recovery" in the hospital, I received again, in three days, endless emails equipped with a total of fourteen attached pieces grouping tables, flowcharts, graphics, directives and instructions illegible that would fit in ten lines. It could be simpler but no. I was hoping for the language of the next post, error. Here he comes back, exhausting, more exhausting than before. And I'm afraid I can't do anything about it. It is in the nature of the technocrat to prefer to write, to occupy himself, that "Recently, mom left for a long journey of which we do not know the duration, in view of the forecast uncertainties that we learned from the statistical calculations taking into account the temporal variations of a natural and conjunctural nature "rather than saying - like Albert Camus: " Today, mom is dead " .
