Mind My Metaphors

07 July 1997, 969 words


The human mind is programmed to think inmetaphors.As Bernard J.Baars (author of In the Theatre ofConsciousness: The Workspace of the Mind), so succinctlyputs it, "Experiments show that visual imagery elicitsactivity in the same parts of the cortex as visualperception."

Why am I telling you this?Because this column isintended to be educational as well as entertaining, justlike Adesh Nanan every time he makes a public statement (oreven when he refuses to make one.) The difference is thatNanan's statements are educational only because he is theMinister of it.

Anyway, the preceding was the entertaining part.Let'smove on to the educational aspect. Baars goes on to say,"The names for abstract categories will bring to mind, notan abstract definition, but a specific mental image....Muchof our abstract thinking is encoded in manageable'prototypes.'"

A simple experiment will confirm the truth of this.Take an abstract category like "sycophantic UNC hack". AnilMahabir, of course,immediately springs to mind (which makesthis the first time I've minded having a dirty mind.) Orconsider an abstract emotion: "desperation."One thinks of aman hanging on to a cliff and the man is Patrick Manning.The terms "multi-million government contracts" is synonymouswith Ishwar Galbaransingh."Misleading Parliament" brings tomind a pool-table with the eight-ball and the yellow stripeball facing each other:or you could imagine Keith Rowleyand Agriculture Minister Reeza Mohammed. Even seeminglycommonplace words will recall particular images: a categoryof animal like, say, "pompek" will once again make us thinkof Anil.

Even really abstract concepts like "democracy", "freespeech" or "human rights" tend to bring up mental images,unless you're Express columnist Burton Sankeralli. But we'rein a sorry situation in Trinidad when democracy recalls the1990 attempted coup or the Trinidad Guardian; when freespeech is anything Clive Pantin and Pastor Cuffie wouldapprove of; and human rights is Ramesh LawrenceMaharaj.(This last is beyond irony: you'd have to call itcarbon-steelny or titaniumy in order to truly express theimpervious hardness of that reversal.)

It is undoubtedly this innate liking for metaphor whichhas caused everyday speech to be filled with expressionstaken from activities which most people don't even do:things like hunting and war, printing and publishing,sailing and fishing, and several sports. As Baars soeloquently puts it, "Perception of the physical world may bethe most ancient mode of consciousness.The sensory systemsare evolutionarily old and very highly developed.Sensoryperception is necessary for survival in a world that arose long before cultural evolution began to explode withchallenges to our Paleolithic brains only 10,000 years ago."

What that means is that we will talk about "tracking" awoman and "using strategy" to get her into bed; buying anexpensive car in order to "offset" our sexual insecurity andthinking so much about her that we "miss our deadline" forpresenting a report to the boss; and if when we "throw her aline" she says she doesn't approve of sexual harrassment, webecome an emotional "wreck."

It might interest you to know that the metaphoricalexpressions for love are the same across many cultures:expressions are used which signify a journey("I shall climbthe highest mountain, swim the deepest ocean, cross thehottest desert for thee, Myrtle)" a partnership ("the beastwith two backs"), a unification of two selves ("they arejoined at the hip, well not quite at the hip") a heatedexperience, ("looking for some hot stuff, baby thisevening"), a capture ("man chases woman until she catcheshim)" and nutrition ("you are the channa in my doubles").

And yes, I will write your love letters for you at areasonable fee.

It is from sport, however, that human beings draw theirmost telling and largest supply of metaphors."One advantageof metaphor," writes Baars, "is that it connects vagueabstractions to a solid perceptual grounding." Few of uswould, I think, disagree.So, cricket-wise, Justice LennoxDeyalsingh will be "batting a sticky wicket" ifParliamentary privilege is removed from his report on theairport expansion project, which caused Ish Galbaransingh tobe "hit for six." Reeza Mohammed was "clean-bowled" by KeithRowley and Adesh Nanan is obviously "stumped" by theresponsibilities of the Education Ministry. In more medievalpastimes, the Attorney-General has "thrown down thegauntlet" to the media with his Green Paper for MediaReform, yet seems"floored" that the press has "giventongue" in such vociferous protest. Some commentators thinkwe have been brought to a "turning-point" in our democracy,though they probably don't know that this was the placewhere chariot-racers turned at each end of the stadium; andthey have given the "thumbs-down" to the UNC government,which in the same stadium was a signal from a Roman emperorsignalling death for some unfortunate gladiator.

But it was the boxing match (or heavyweight bite)between Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson last Saturday whichmade me think of Prime Minister Basdeo Panday.(You didn'tthink he was going to escape unscathed, did you?) Tyson'sexcuse for biting off part of Holyfield's ear was, "Hebutted me, this is my career, I have a wife and child, whatwas I supposed to do?" Obviously, that US $30 million forlosing just wouldn't have kept the wolf from the door, if Ican mix in a purely literary metaphor here.Mr Panday, whoselogic and political aggression is on the same level asTyson's, undoubtedly thinks he has the media "on the ropes"and on the verge of "throwing in the towel."But, in takingon the press, the Prime Minister has "led with his chin."

In truth, though, the Holyfield-Tysonbout seemed to meto go beyond conventional metaphor. Take Panday as Tysonand Holyfield as the country. When Panday entered the ringin November 1995, he had more popular support than he willever know. The trouble was, he thought the cheers from thenon-Indians were sarcastic. And then, faced with this huge(and, not irrelevantly, black) holyfiend, Panday rainedblows everywhere except below the (sugar) belt. His opponentembodied real issues like unemployment, crime, poverty andwasn't "knocked out." So, realizing he wasn't "up toscratch" (which was a line drawn on the ground betweenboxers) Panday, showing himself as Prime Minister to be"punching above his weight", decided to bite off the ears ofhis enemy: because if you can't hear about your problems,they will just go away.

Metaphorically speaking, of course.

Copyright ©1998, Kevin Baldeosingh