# ideology of plain language in garmes critique scenario: in which players imagine there's been a lot of interesting discussion recently over the need for so-called "plain language" in garmes critique however one unspoken premise behind such a call might be that 'plain language' somehow automatically translates into 'transparency' of the ideas expressed by such talk - that 'simply' by apparent virtue of being easy and breezy to read any ideas expressed are also somehow inherently and intrinsically **+** 'real' **+** open and apparent **+** immediately comprehensible **+** morally straightforward forthright **+** lucid authentic(tm) honest and sincere ideologically it seems "plain language" wants to be (correctly simply) read as being the naked whiteness of a morning swan perfectly unadorned - except of course swans are often draped and smothered with the sediment of human anthropomorphic sentiment regarding ir so-called symbolic purity. (more interestingly perhaps the swan is also a symbol of artistic inspiration and discerning perception) regarding human appearances the term "plain" has historically been an euphemism for "ill-favoured ugly." but whether ridiculously reductively plain or outrageously embellished the realer point might consist of clarity and directness in one's thoughts (whatever that means - and since this is not yet entirely clear no amount of precise semantic scrubbing or polishing may help. indeed so-called 'clear' sentences and the apparently luminous explanations of ideas and concepts they symbolize often merely 'explain away' that which is in fact actually complex to understand) a major perhaps endemic problem with modern mainstream garmes criticism is that isn't nearly intellectually nutritious enough when it comes to including ideas outside any immediate (cultural garmes industry) need for 'plain language that appeals to (demographically captures) the widest possible audience' with the least fuss and bother indeed most garmes writing online seems distinctly bereft of truer intellectual engagement with complex cultural ideas. advocates of transparent language in garmes criticism often (bizarrely) argue that opaque discussion and 'big words' are detrimental to the cultural garmes industry. yet this is simply an outright fiction; the industry believes the precise opposite and in fact often requires plain language to disguise its own prudent (ie. strictly 'economic') position in/as culture plain language too often seems to disguise and obscure the existence of both bad ambiguously complex ideas - and bad overly simplistic ones. it makes 'normal' (normalizes) a dubious idea: that of 'speaking plainly about the inherent self-evident purity of garmes' such industrial pseudo critics (ironically) point out that jargon is deliberately employed in government and business to ill effect for everyone else - that it disguises morally suspect information in order to dull and neutralize negative reactions to the actual truth. sure - but what advocates of plain language in garmes criticism label 'jargon' might just mean a wilful failure to engage with any critical collective intelligence - and therefore (simply) avoid criticism as an industry of garmes. theirs is the economy of language at play after all what could be more innocent than play more inherently virtuous and inoffensively joyous than garmes which are always discussed in plain on-my-sleeve terms of raw candid (/candied) 'passion' - as though public displays about / of the feelings one has about them automatically translates into something spontaneous organic candid and genuinely (david cage) 'emotional'(r) it seems to keep one's philosophical wits nowadays in such a (virtual) environment players must simply continue to question such plain speaking obscurantism lying in plain sight - the (easily understandable) complex needs of those who deliberately seek to keep such discussions of garmes and ir effects 'simple' // republic of bob