The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 266 No 7148 p664
May 19, 2001

Bullies at large
Art and character
Meaning and murk

Bullies at large

Much attention is being paid at the moment to the perennial social problem of bullying. The origin of the word “bully” is obscure, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, but its application is a trifle equivocal in terms of its history. At one time it was a term not of condemnation but of endearment and easy familiarity, as with Shakespeare and “Bully Bottom”. It was applied to a comrade, not a menace. It was not until the 18th century that the epithet came to be applied to “a ruffian hired for purposes of violence or intimidation.”

It is intriguing to note that, according to a paper from doctors at the United States National Institute of Child Health and Human Development published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) for April 25, most research into bullying and its effects on individuals and societies has been done in Europe and Australia. Only recently has the US taken a hard look at the problem, intensified there by its close connection with violence and the widespread resort to guns in schools.

Bullying among youths of both sexes in school situations is increasingly being recognised as an important factor in the undermining of some individuals' personal wellbeing and functioning as a member of the wider society. It is regarded as a specific type of aggression in which there is intent to harm or disturb another individual, repeatedly, and where a more powerful person or group attacks a less powerful one. Indeed, no bully ever argues with a stronger contestant, as we learn in the 19th century proverb that “ a bully is always a coward”. If bullies realised that their attitude was in fact a token of inferiority and dictated by an irrational fear, they would hesitate to pursue their occupation. They rarely have the brains.

Not all bullying is physical. It may often be psychological. Among girls, it more often takes the form of name-calling, teasing, social ostracisation and seizing of personal possessions. Threats of physical violence are commoner among boys. Sometimes it is difficult to discover that a child at school is suffering the effects of bullying by others. It may be revealed by a desire to avoid going to school where the abuse takes place, or by behavioural developments such as passivity, an aggressive stance or self-destructive activities. At other times it shows itself by evident signs of injury or unexplained stomach pains or fatigue.

Both bullies and victims of bullying need prompt attention of a sympathetic nature. If the situation is neglected or brushed aside as insignificant, a child's progress at school may be disturbed, and long-term psychological harm, including depression, may result. However, great care is necessary to avoid allotting inappropriate blame, dictated by vague suspicion, when any intervention is undertaken by a parent or a teacher who notices some irregularity in a child's behaviour. Any error in this regard is likely to prompt the misjudged bully to take retaliatory action.

Back to Top

Art and character

I was interested to read a report of a group of psychologists at University College, London, who have found evidence that if you happen to be a neurotic or a plain awkward person you will express a preference for pop or abstract art rather than a less challenging type.

In a study of 12 subjects their personality profile was found to have a close correspondence with their likes and dislikes of visual objects of art. The more conventional and conscientious individuals expressed a preference for representational art, such as landscape paintings, whereas the awkward ones went for abstract compositions. Nevertheless, there was no hard and fast rule, since many favouring the representational at home liked to examine abstractions in public galleries.

It is suggested that an examination of the pictures that people hang on their walls at home might offer a means of assessing their personality characteristics.

By and large, I fancy that few people deliberately choose a living room or lounge decorated with surrealist pictures comprising wedges and arcs, however much they may like to advertise their cleverness when touring an art exhibition. Realism, the reflection of a vista or a group of figures in an artistic creation is something to live with; sheer deliberate abstraction is not.

Back to Top

Meaning and murk

I am fast coming to the conclusion that government ministers and their minions have no idea of the real meaning of simple English words and sentences. Whether this denotes a lacuna in their education I do not know. Alternatively, it may be a symptom of “official dyslexia”.

Recent examples of the misuse of words included some that have been prompted by the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. One was “the epidemic is contained”, which I heard expressed several weeks ago when the number of cases reported every day was in fact increasing. Another example was the assurance that “the countryside is open”, a fact which I personally disproved when, within a mile of my door, I would come across “footpath closed” notices on all sides.

Putting aside the suggestion that perhaps deliberate lies are being trotted out to confuse people, the effrontery that allows people in responsible positions to make bald statements that are patently contradicted by the facts of a situation passes comprehension. It does not permit anyone with critical faculties to retain a belief in the democratic process as opposed to the arrogance of power.

A cynical friend assures me that the murk in political thinking stems from the fact that many Members of Parliament are either failed lawyers or industrial entrepreneurs. A good legal advocate, we are told, can make a good case for proving that black is, looked at from one angle, green. The sophists of Plato's time considered that we should not worry whether or not a belief is true or false, but whether it will help us to achieve happiness or wellbeing. And it is widely believed that a word carries meaning only when it is part of an explanatory sentence.

The philosophers maintain that the principle that determines the truth of falsehood of a statement constitutes “semantics”, and define communication as the act of meaning something. Humpty Dumpty in 'Through the looking glass' admitted: “When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

Nearer our own time, George Orwell wrote: “Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” Perhaps we should leave it at that, and look around for an honest politician who can disentangle communication and rhetoric.

Back to Top