Sir, – It was a particular pleasure to read Joe Humphreys’s insightful and informative article on the use of language in politics (“A question for Willie O’Dea and Sharon Keogan: What exactly do you mean by ‘woke’?”, Unthinkable, March 18th). He references the recent book by Jennifer Mather Saul which examines these issues of political language and expression. He challenges for an explanation of “woke”.
It is easier, I think, to describe the state of mind or emotional attitude represented by anti-woke.
To me, anti-woke denotes a highly reactive expression of conservativism, of strongly expressed and fervently felt antagonism towards change and progress, a desire to retain past certainties and an unwillingness to embrace the challenges of the present and the future. It is generally a keenly felt emotional state.
Anti-woke outlook, as expressed, values tradition, old-fashioned values and a rose-tinted nostalgia. It is the emphatic rejection of that which is “other” or appearing as alien or unfamiliar.
Your top stories on Friday: Warnings issued as Storm Bert set to batter Ireland; the false election promises being made to under-40s
Johnny Watterson: Conor Niland’s The Racket is a seminal book in the sports genre
Ballsbridge mews formerly home to Irish musician for €1.95m
‘I could have gone to California. At this rate, I probably would have raised about half a billion dollars’
As such, anti-woke can sometimes be a vote of no confidence in the benefits of social progress, expressing a deep-seated antagonism toward diversity, plurality and to anything which is even slightly redolent of progressiveness. – Yours, etc,
ANTHONY LAYNG,
Dublin 4.
Sir, – Joe Humphreys has no need to ask Willie O’Dea and Sharon Keogan what they mean by “woke”.
He can consult the Oxford English Dictionary, where it is defined as doctrinaire, self-righteous, or pernicious political and social views stereotypically associated with a state of awareness or vigilance. – Yours, etc,
Dr JOHN DOHERTY,
Gaoth Dobhair,
Co Dhún na nGall.