Archaic (adj): very old or old-fashioned
I am of the belief that human beings do need things in their lives that are “fashioned.”
Yes–well-constructed, organized, purposeful, sensitive, gentle, aware and involved.
Without these “fashioned” virtues, we begin to rely on our own understanding and become a prideful lot, not worthy of interaction.
Unfortunately, no one ever uses the word “fashioned” without adding the prefix “old.” So at the whim of any cynical individual lies the weapon to disembowel great ideas, emotions and courtesy.
We also can attack art because it dares to reflect a stream of intelligence from a former time.
Certainly music cannot contain any beat, lyric or sentiment that was ever expressed before, lest we become slaves to our history instead of innovators in techno-pop.
Here’s my criterion for determining whether to use something that is well-fashioned: has it survived the past, still works today and has all the signs of being universal for the future? If the answer is yes, it is not archaic, just underused.
So I am not going to be discourteous just because the tendency leans in that direction.
I’m not going to be surly in order to appear focused and stubbornly irreversible.
I’m not going to reject the beauty of poetry because a generation of numbskulls have deemed it corny.
And I’m certainly not going to follow the bigotries of my time which have been conquered–often by the blood of martyrs.
Before you call something archaic and throw it in the trash-heap labeled “old-fashioned,” just make sure we can actually live without it.
Thank you for enjoying Words from Dic(tionary) — J.R. Practix