The History of a Foul Mouth

[Rowan]

No matter how many times I read a historical fiction book, I cannot wrap my head around encountering what I've always thought to be modern words. That is, curse words. (Or however you may refer to them.) I'm reading the third book in CJ Sansom's Matthew Shardlake series and Shardlake's companion uses the word arsehole a lot, but in the bit I was reading at the breakfast table this morning, he used the "F bomb" (anyone know why it's called that???) and I was a bit surprised. I know there aren't many words that can truly be considered modern, in the sense that they've only come into use within the last 50 years or so, but does anyone else have this problem? Either with "bad words" or with any other words that seem out of context in historical fiction.

Please don't tell me I'm alone in this. :(:p

[wendy]

Well, when I was writing about pirates I discovered they had their own ripe vocabulary and chose my curse words very carefully from THE PIRATE PRIMER. I couldn't envisage Blackbeard and Co. sticking to the Queen's English (and the novel needed to sound authentic).
I've just finished a book on the 1612 Lancashire witches and used many traditional Shakespearian oaths for them.
I have never yet used the f*** word because it has not been appropriate to the period in question.
So I agree with you that it belongs in the modern era - but I also think it is wrong to exclude swearing if the characters would have addressed each other accordingly.
Is your issue just with the f*** word - or all expletives you find offensive?

[Rowan]

Hi Wendy,

I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'm offended by the use of the words (I have occasion to use them liberally myself :o:o:o:o ), but just find that they seem to stand out more to me in a historical setting than outside. Does that make sense? Kinda like a mental speed bump. I don't know how else to explain.

[Ariadne]

By coincidence I was recently asked about the historical usage of the F-word, so looked it up in the OED. Its usage is late 16th century (as a verb), and cited often in bawdy rhymes and plays and such in the centuries following. But as a curse word, usage is much later, cited as late 19th and early 20th c. in writings. (And I'm sure it was used in speech earlier than in writing!)

[Rowan]

So either way, usage of the word during the 1400s is wrong.

I wish I had access to the OED. Thanks for that Ariadne. :)

[Misfit]

Hi Wendy,

I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'm offended by the use of the words (I have occasion to use them liberally myself :o:o:o:o ), but just find that they seem to stand out more to me in a historical setting than outside. Does that make sense? Kinda like a mental speed bump. I don't know how else to explain.

Ditto (for using the word on occasion) as well as being thrown out of a story when it is used liberally like you. This happened with me with a book about R3. I can't recall where I inquired about it (the old board or elsewhere), but I think someone (EC?) had some examples of its earlier use.

[Kveto from Prague]

I just started reading a new book written a few years ago. It is set in 3rd century rome. Then right there on page 5, a pratorian guard tells a messanger to "Go fuck off."

It jarrs me right out of the narrative. not for any puritanical reasons. it just feels so blarringly modern. I know that we are supposed to guess that the character was using roman/latin equivalent of the time but it just feels too modern. makes you instantly remember that you are reading a book written in 2008 not a story set in old rome. on me, it has the worst effect that it could elicit, reminding the reader that this is just a book.

For the record, its not the f-bomb that turned me off. id have had the same reaction if the roman would have said "groovy" or "whizzo" or "bling-bling". whether or not "fuck" is an ancient word, it just feels too modern. Would it be so hard for the author to try to find an insult which would sound a bit more authentic?

[SonjaMarie]

I was once told long ago that the "f word" meant For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge, lol.

SM

[Rowan]

I just started reading a new book written a few years ago. It is set in 3rd century rome. Then right there on page 5, a pratorian guard tells a messanger to "Go fuck off."

It jarrs me right out of the narrative. not for any puritanical reasons. it just feels so blarringly modern. I know that we are supposed to guess that the character was using roman/latin equivalent of the time but it just feels too modern. makes you instantly remember that you are reading a book written in 2008 not a story set in old rome. on me, it has the worst effect that it could elicit, reminding the reader that this is just a book.

For the record, its not the f-bomb that turned me off. id have had the same reaction if the roman would have said "groovy" or "whizzo" or "bling-bling". whether or not "fuck" is an ancient word, it just feels too modern. Would it be so hard for the author to try to find an insult which would sound a bit more authentic?

That's it exactly Kveto!!!

[LoveHistory]

I had the same problem watching Titanic when Rose flips off that guy who works for her fiance.

[parthianbow]

I have to say that I disagree with most sentiments here. As someone who writes about Rome (which most of you know), I've done a lot of research into ancient swear words. I'm fully aware that Romans wouldn't have used the F word. I'm also fully aware that they would have had uncounted swear words that we don't know. Soldiers down the millennia haven't been exactly known for their clean mouths. So, while I use terms like 'whoresons', 'b*stards', 'mangy dogs' etc. a lot, I also occasionally use the term 'f*ck off' or 'f*cking'. 'Piss off' isn't harsh enough, and I haven't found a suitable swearword to fill that space.

There are so many enormous gaps in our knowledge about Rome that large amounts of what is described in a novel is contrived. How then can it be 'incorrect' to use just one term like 'f*ck'? Unless everything else that has been assumed is also taken out, I don't think it can.

*I already know that most of you disagree with me, but I wanted to put my point across.*

[Lel]

I wish I had access to the OED.

Well, you're in luck for the next couple of weeks! The OED is offering free access till Feb 5 with username and password trynewoed.
http://www.openculture.com/2011/01/oxford_english_dictionary_free_for_limited_time.ht ml

[sweetpotatoboy]

I have to say that I disagree with most sentiments here. As someone who writes about Rome (which most of you know), I've done a lot of research into ancient swear words. I'm fully aware that Romans wouldn't have used the F word. I'm also fully aware that they would have had uncounted swear words that we don't know. Soldiers down the millennia haven't been exactly known for their clean mouths. So, while I use terms like 'whoresons', 'b*stards', 'mangy dogs' etc. a lot, I also occasionally use the term 'f*ck off' or 'f*cking'. 'Piss off' isn't harsh enough, and I haven't found a suitable swearword to fill that space.

There are so many enormous gaps in our knowledge about Rome that large amounts of what is described in a novel is contrived. How then can it be 'incorrect' to use just one term like 'f*ck'? Unless everything else that has been assumed is also taken out, I don't think it can.

*I already know that most of you disagree with me, but I wanted to put my point across.*

I agree with you Ben actually.

Firstly, in your case, where you're using a different language to that which would originally have been spoken, you have to make your own rules up largely and just try and use modern-day vernacular equivalents for what you guess your characters would originally have said. Granted, you don't want to use anything too faddish or associated only with current times as it would lurch the reader out of the historical setting. But the f-word, for example, has certainly been around hundreds of years in English and, to me as a reader at least, doesn't sound necessarily only modern-day when used in informal settings.

Secondly, I feel one has to take datings in dictionaries with a little pinch of salt, at least when one is talking about colloquial language. The further back we go, it's really anyone's guess when a word first started to be used, by whom and in what setting. All a modern-day dictionary has to go on is written texts that have survived and to attempt to deduce from those when the word first started appearing in print and with what meaning. And the further back we go, the less likely it is that the texts we have are of much use on colloquial language.

[LoveHistory]

In my case it depends on the time setting. Ancient time periods are more flexible for me because of the knowledge gap. More recent ones though (like early 20th century iceberg incidents) get less leeway.

[Elizabeth]

So either way, usage of the word during the 1400s is wrong.

I wish I had access to the OED. Thanks for that Ariadne. :)

It's not the OED, but the Online Etymology Dictionary is an excellent resource, uses good sources including the OED, and has the advantage of being free. :)

Online Etymology Dictionary (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php)

[EC2]

I think language that pulls readers out of a story should be avoided. I used the 'f' word once in The Greatest Knight, but not since then, and in hindsight I would take it out. I recently read a Roman novel that was so full of modern language that it lost all sense of being a historical - for me anyway. (when the writer started out, the novels contained it, but in a more restrained way). I won't read any more in that series by that author because enough is enough. DH has given up on that author too, but since the modern language has increased down the series, I guess there are a lot of readers who like it, and perhaps it's a response to their taste. It just ain't mine. I don't expect archaic language, but I do expect that illusion to be created of being in period. Too many modernisms and hale and farewell I'm afraid.

As to the 'F' word. Everyone should have on their research shelves the wonderful 'The Lover's Tongue' A merry romp through the language of Love and Sex by Mark Morton. He tells us that the first recorded instance of use of the word as a fornication word is in the early 16thC and William Dunbar's poem 'In Secreit Place This Hyndir Nycht.' The word itself, unrecorded has been around much longer than that and comes from the Scandinavian 'fukka' meaning to copulate. 'Fuck Off' as an insult dates from the 1940's, but 'Fuck You,' has a pedigree going back to 1895. 'Fuck off' to run away goes back to 1929.

[fljustice]

As a reader, modern language (and attitudes) throw me out of a story, but I've noticed a tendency lately for some authors to use modern language because at the time, it was modern. As a writer, when I use swearing, I try to translate backwards (does that make sense?) and use words that feel more appropriate at the time. Colleen McCullough uses the Latin words in her Masters of Rome series and provides a glossary. One of my favorites: "mentula caco" or "I shit on your prick."

I picked up a book called The Anatomy of Swearing by Ashley Montagu a few years ago. From the back cover:

"Swearing is one of the most cathartic and common modes of language. Montagu examines the genre in all its aspects--its origins, philosophy and psychology--as well as its evolution and differing manifestations in various ages and cultures...[He] traces this phenomenon from the ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, and Babylonians through Elizabethan Englande to the middle class contemporary American."

Haven't read it, but after this conversation, I think I'll give it a try!

[EC2]

As a reader, modern language (and attitudes) throw me out of a story, but I've noticed a tendency lately for some authors to use modern language because at the time, it was modern. As a writer, when I use swearing, I try to translate backwards (does that make sense?) and use words that feel more appropriate at the time. Colleen McCullough uses the Latin words in her Masters of Rome series and provides a glossary. One of my favorites: "mentula caco" or "I shit on your prick."

!

Yes, it makes perfect sense and I agree. (Will also add the swearing book to my research TBR pile, thanks). I try to follow the mindset of the times. So in the medieval period, swearing by bodily functions just wasn't done as a matter of culture. Taking God's name in vain and insulting a man's ancestry or prowess were their hot buttons. Article here by Dr. Gillian Polack. http://www.triviumpublishing.com/articles/fightingwords.html (http://www.triviumpublishing.com/articles /fightingwords.html) These days, I follow her rules.

[MLE]

Swearing is an interesting pilological phenomenon. As a linguistic tool, it encompasses a set of words that a given culture agrees should be offensive. Therefore, when the speaker wants to offend, or to express extreme emphasis in annoyance or outright pain, this vocabulary is used.

What happens to swear words is that, through use, they lose their 'punch' and the meaning changes for the next generation, while for the former one, they tend to still be shocking. Thus somebody in their nineties might not blink at the use of the word 'nigger' but be mortified by the term 'shit'.

Religious swear words were most effective when there was a sense of awe at the sacred; bodily functions were so commonplace they didn't have the same effect. Back when everybody had to deal with shit, their own and their livestock's, on a daily basis, it was probably so much used in a non-swearing context that it wouldn't have much shock value. The same with words for copulation--when you breed animals for daily survival, there isn't much about fucking, tupping, copulation, mating, et al which would raise an eyebrow.

The problem with using cursing in fiction nowadays is that the words will have a different impact on different people. I can't get through a Stephen King novel because the constant foul language of his characters always jars me out of the story. In my daily life, not many people speak like that, and the ones who do cause me to keep my 'filter' on, so that I will understand what they mean instead of my first reaction to what they say. It's has the same effect as reading in Spanish--something I do for research, but not for pleasure.

Speaking of which, I remember a revelation on the personal/cultural nature of swearing. a decade ago, my Spanish teacher used to show familiar movies with Spanish subtitles to see if we could keep up. Some of her movies choices included some extremely foul language, to which her only reaction was to point out how the Spanish version 'cleaned it up'.

But then she showed a film in Spanish with English subtitles, and it included several uses of the Spanish-equivalent f-word. None of us were in the least bothered, but she turned bright red and explained several times why it had to be in there for the sake of story.

The lesson I learned is that as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, obscenity is in the mind of the listener. I suspect that either is only relevant to what is learned very early in life.