justplainbil

Just Plain Bill

Surly, with just a touch of arrogance

My wife recently pointed out to me that I’ve been using the word “surly” quite a bit lately when describing someone’s attitude or demeanor when responding to a question. I finally looked up the definition, which led me to realize that I was often mixing up the word surly with arrogant, another adjective, but not nearly the same attitude intensity. 

“Arrogant” describes a person full of himself…a projected superiority based on self-importance. “Surly” however, describes a threatening person full of himself. Take a look at these definitions for surly:

·     Churlishly rude or bad-tempered

·     Unfriendly or hostile; menacingly irritable

·     Dark or dismal; menacing

This research led me to ask: “Self? What gave rise to my increased use of this term, or my increased sensitivity to the “attitude” expressed by the responder?”

The latest occasion when I used “surly” was during an interview with a football coach who was asked what he thought about one of his players getting into trouble with the law. His response was beyond “arrogant” and even well beyond “defensive” for his player or program. To me, his response was to the point of being rude, menacingly irritable, and downright dismal.

Is it my imagination that with the exponential increase of news “coverage”, there is a monumental increase in the opportunity for someone to be “interviewed” to the point of overkill?

Perhaps I’m simply remembering the good-old-days, when we were not subjected to a constant stream of questioners arrogantly probing for a scoop, while poised to catapult even the simplest “incorrect response” into the Twittersphere.

Am I becoming cynical? Am I becoming suspicious when a responder takes on a surly tone - tending to believe there’s something to hide? Or is surliness now a legitimate and necessary defense mechanism?  

What do you think?