The New York Times Book Review ought to get an editor — fast. Somebody’s not minding
the store.
What’s wrong in this sentence? “She is equally ferocious when she expresses her disgust with
consolidated radio empires and the ludicrosities of the F.C.C itself.”
The noun, as far as I know, is ludicrousness. It’s not a word that comes rippingly off the
tongue and is better avoided. But
find it in the online slang dictionary
as:
1. A descritpive [sic] term used to describe the state of a person, place, thing
or event of a particularly ludicrous nature.
“Nas and Jay-Z in a gay prono [sic] together … what kind of ludicrosity is
this?!?!”
I’ll grant ludicrosity its place in that context if I must. But it’s not the sort of
neologism that sticks — and in a Times review it’s, shall we say, way misplaced. A rap
reference in a critique of a book about pirate radio? How hip!
If being hip was intended, how to explain this from the same critique? “She writes in a
straightforward enough magazine style, but veers between entertaining overdisclosure and a
seeming fear of divulgation.” Divulgation? Hello? That word is so long out of use it
smells of mothballs. As for the timid hedging … oh, never mind.
