”THE ART OF EXAGGERATION
By Ella M. Ware
EXAGGERATION tries to bridge the gaps of language. It is an attempt at compensation for the inadequacy of human speech. It is the outcome of intellectual laziness. We use it to cover our conversational and literary defects, and save ourselves the mental exertion entailed by the choice of the right word, forgetting that the true beauty and strength of language lie in fitness rather than emphasis,— that an aptly chosen phrase is worth a dozen over-packed descriptions, and that the right adjective is of more value than many superlatives.
Exaggeration is the last resort of wise men and the first resort of fools. The former use it in judicious moderation, if at all; the latter employ it upon the slightest pretext. In our daily intercourse it plays a prominent if not important part. It generally usurps the place and ignores the prior rights of carefully chosen speech. Many persons habitually raise their adjectives to the superlative degree, instead of reserving that honor, as was originally intended, for state occasions only. The chief drawback to this lavishness, aside from the monotony of continual “issimos,” is the fact that when something really above the average presents itself these verbal spendthrifts have no reserve vocabulary from which to draw, and are reduced to the sad alternative of either applying the already overworked and weakened phrases, or remaining silent altogether. Needless to say, of the two the latter is preferable. To the sensitive nature there is a certain disrespect closely akin to desecration, in labelling the tender beauty of a sunset or the grandeur of a noble work of art with the same word that has served to qualify the trophies of a bargaincounter.
From one point of view, however, exaggeration must not be too harshly condemned; for, after all, it serves a purpose. It may perhaps be classed among the necessary evils. In some instances it might almost be said that we are obliged to employ it in order to be believed, or even understood; that it is necessary, even, to convey the truth.
This seeming paradox is easily explained. There is always more or less “mental distance” between the speaker and his audience—a distance that varies indefinitely according to circumstances, and depends largely upon the receptiveness of the hearer’s mind. Assuming that the aim of the speaker is to produce upon his listener a correct and truthful impression, and since it would frequently seem impossible to accomplish this by a mere ungarnished statement of facts, he is obliged to call in the aid of exaggeration to compensate for the diminishing effect of perspective, and by magnifying the truth present it to his audience on the same scale on which it appears to him. In fact, there is a distinct parallel here between mental and physical vision. Exaggeration acts as the lens. Mathematically stated, therefore, the amount of exaggeration required varies in the same proportion as the mental distance between the person speaking and the person spoken to.
In some cases the distance is such that it requires the most emphatic language to convey to the listener even a vague idea of the truth. And on the other hand, there are occasional moments when the difference is so slight, when the gulf that separates two individuals is spanned by such a firm, swift bridge of sympathy, when the moods of each are tuned to so close a key that the simplest words suffice for interchange of thought, and exaggeration would be utterly superfluous. There are times even when a look, a handclasp, and the simple eloquence of silence, can cross the borderland where speech might trespass in vain, and where the faint, mysterious “communion of spirits” may condense into the brief space of a thoughtflash more than all the volubility of language can translate.
The theory of exaggeration might be reduced to an exact science, and its application to a fine art. This presupposes, however, on the part of the user a keenness of perception greatly above the average, or high intuitive power that borders closely upon mind-reading. As a matter of fact, it is by no means an easy matter to determine the mental distance between one’s self and one’s hearer, and the exact amount of receptiveness of the latter’s mind. We can only vaguely approximate these conditions; and we do so, on many occasions, half unconsciously before we speak. Unfortunately, however, in our effort to traverse the chasm, exaggeration often proves a short-cut which leads only to misunderstanding; and therein lies the danger of its use.
It is difficult to get away from exaggeration. We find it on all sides of us. It seems to permeate our thoughts, our speech, our customs, our very lives. Religion teems with it. It is inseparably woven with some forms of art—a fact of which the cartoon and the caricature are familiar, if extreme, examples. Its trail is over much of our literature. It is the backbone of allegory and symbolism, and epigrams are usually exaggerated truths, condensed. History is full of it, and as for contemporary commerce—it forms the basis on which the art of advertising rests!
With most of us, however, the habit is an unconscious one. Its practice has become almost a second nature. But if we can persuade ourselves to stop for a moment and consider its disadvantages; if we can bring ourselves to a realization of all we lose by this constant disregard for the lights and shades of expression; if we can only recognize the futility of overlavish phrases and the value of careful speech, the weakness of unnecessary emphasis and the strength of a well-placed word,—then we shall cease to cram our conversation with wild, extravagant superlatives, and rely no longer for verbal assistance upon the doubtful virtues of exaggeration.”
Reference Data:
The Editor: The Journal of Information for Literary Workers, Vols. 33-34, 1911, pages 235-5
