Look. I can't edit everyone's essays and blog postings. But can't we have a Manual of Style or something that makes this clear: Hoover isn't a verb. It's a proper noun. And a brand name. And the first two syllables of the the word Hooverlove. But not a verb. And it never, never, never should be used as a synonym for suck.
I was passing time as I do during my lunch break, reading different things on the web. Downloading some songs by the Cheetah Girls. Freaking out that Filth and Wisdom was denied an Oscar nod. Then I came across this on Slate.com:
Slumdog Millionaire, with 10 nominations (second only to Benjamin Button's 13), seems positioned to Hoover up every award in sight by virtue of being the cute, inoffensive crowd pleaser that no one hates.
Grrrrrrr. I hate that! Why couldn't this essayist just use the word "suck." Why Hoover? Why not "vacuum" or even, in this context, "grab." Look, nothing wrong with being linked with Slumdog Millionaire. Hooverites have told me how much they like the movie. It seems like a great underdog story. And the movie being nominated for Best Picture? Heckabagosh! That's a feel-good story too. A little movie that could, going nose to nose with The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which cost $150 million to make, has two studios behind it, and stars tabloid heart-throb Brad Pitt. What's not to love? Go Slumdog! But that's not the point. Can I say this one more time? Maybe in a way you math-heads will get: Hoover ≠ suck.
2 comments:
Unless you're talking about the former President...
But see who the author is. Hoover as 'suck' is generally English slang (or so I thought...).
Bill! Bill! Bill! We need to throw up the barricades sometime. The verbization of nouns continues without pause. "Text" me. No! It's time to take to the streets and stop this. And I am drawing the line on Hoover. Why? Because it is our word to defend. Let Random House defend text. We are standing up for Hoover. Are you with me Bill?
Post a Comment