(Caution: italics ahead!):

From the school playground to the presidential election, the art of a truly fine insult is a universally accepted cultural tradition with a long, inglorious history. The most effective insults use irony, metaphor and personification tropes –  along with humor – as a way to attack their opponents’ character, and to frame them in a negative light in the minds of the audience. The most effective rhetoricians are able to take their rivals’ own metaphor and turn it against them, as Abraham Lincoln did against Stephen Douglas: “A house divided against itself cannot stand…”

Some tropes are just plain nasty and mean-spirited (like tapinosis, i.e., ‘YOU SUCK!’), or sarcastic (sarcasmus in Greek), with no purpose other than to offend or make one’s opponents look foolish.

There is much irony and pathos embedded within offensive, divisive rhetoric. Irony uses the strategy of ‘speaking in such a way as to imply the contrary of what one says, often for the purpose of derision, mockery, or jest.’ Pathos is an appeal to the emotions. Some classic insults use a combination of different rhetorical strategies to enhance the inherent shock value, although others are nothing more than ad hominem attacks on a person, or even entire groups of people. Slurs on ethnicity and nationality are in the overwhelming majority through the years, but although ethnic minorities have always been prime targets of derision, slurs against women, gays and the government have recently been on the rise.

Today, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and their ilk make a living from their hateful rhetoric, continuing the tradition of muck-raking and race-baiting. Making shocking, outrageous statements insulting Muslims, women, immigrants, and the less fortunate is essentially their job. Their mastery of persuasive rhetoric clearly has an effect on their audience. This is why they remain so popular, and it’s a perfect example of why the extremists are so much better at “messaging.” Their arguments are centered on pathos, erotesis (emotional appeals) hyperbole and cataphrasis (gross exaggeration, illogical comparisons). They use meosis to belittle their enemies and usually end up resorting to tapinosis and ad hominem attacks when all else fails.

And yet, by studying the cultural history of rhetoric and insult, authors like Thomas M. Conley, Joseph Romm and others argue that studying the rhetoric of insult is crucial for understanding human relationships, and some cases, breaking down cultural barriers. These researchers suggest that while insults are offensive, they can also build intimacy or reinforce social bonds.” He describes slurs and insults as a “powerful mode of truth-telling” with the power to motivate people very effectively. The use of a simple phrase or slogan can be an extremely powerful tool.

Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer and political theorist, but he was best known as a brilliantly effective and merciless public orator. He helped to classify many of the figures of rhetoric speech still in use today. Cicero was also a master of the insult. In The Fourteen Orations of M.T. Cicero Against Marcus Antonius, Cicero gave the following disparaging description of his adversary Mark Antony: “where a belch would be disgusting, he threw up and filled his own lap – and the entire dais – with gobbets of food reeking of wine!”

Later in his diatribe he states: “But let us say no more of your profligacy and debauchery…” which is classic innuendo. Cicero’s legacy is evident from ancient times through the Reformation era pamphlets, to the undisputed master of rhetoric: William Shakespeare.

A few examples of insults from the Bard’s works: ‘Thou puking, toad-spotted pottle-deep barnacle; fawning fly-bitten vassal; mewling milk-livered clack-dish; loggerheaded pox-marked nut-hook; spleeny clapper-clawed pumpion; rank crook-pated pigeon-egg; bilious doghearted flirt-gill; cockered folly-fallen hugger-mugger; spongy milk-livered giglet.’ My personal favorite: ‘thou bootless plume-plucked whore’s son!’

I will begin my very brief analysis with a quote from another brilliant rhetorician, a man who studied the masters very carefully and became a master orator himself. He wrote his first treatise on the subject at the tender young age of twenty-two, The Scaffolding of Rhetoric in 1897.

• “He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire” -Winston Churchill

Historians have concluded that Churchill made this comment about a political rival, Richard Stafford Cripps. Cripps was an avowed Marxist, and at one time was part of a tentative political coalition with Churchill. The above quote uses several rhetorical devices, all of which were certainly intentional, given Churchill’s encyclopedic knowledge of the figures. The primary themes in this quote are metanoia and ethos – he is implying that his vices are better than Cripps’ – and that he is somehow more credible. This could also be a syncrisis, which is a contrast and comparison in parallel clauses, and certainly antithesis – a juxtaposition of contrasting words or ideas. Simile is clearly evident here as well: an explicit comparison of vices and virtues.

• “He has no enemies, but is intensely disliked by his friends” – Oscar Wilde
• “He hasn’t an enemy in the world – but all his friends hate him” – Eddie Cantor

These two famous quotes say exactly the same thing in a slightly different way.  The figures used here are primarily irony (all of his friends hate him) and paraprosdokian – a rhetorical term describing an unexpected shift in meaning at the end of a sentence or short passage. Paraprosdokian is often used for comic effect, providing a surprise ending in both of these examples.

• “He has Van Gogh’s ear for music.” – Billy Wilder

It’s not clear who the famous (and very much over-rated, in my opinion) movie director Billy Wilder was referring to when he spoke these words, but this is another clear case of irony, or at least implied irony. This insult is meant to insinuate that someone is tone-deaf. This could also be considered antiphrasis (a derisive compliment) or catacresis (an outrageous metaphor), hyperbole or adynaton – terms of exaggerated comparison.

In reality, though, Vincent Van Gogh only cut off part of his outer ear-lobe; it wouldn’t have affected his hearing per se – but the visual metaphor still works. This insult could also be considered tapinosis or meosis; the statement can be used to belittle people who are not only tone-deaf, but those who have no taste in music.

• “He is a fine friend. He stabs you in the front.” – Leonard Louis Levinson

This is an effective metaphor – the image of being ‘stabbed in the back’ by a former confidant is a universal meme. In addition to the obvious metaphor in this quote, Levinson uses sarcasm and irony (he’s a fine friend), and pathos to make his point: instead of the ‘friend’ being deceptive and figuratively sticking his knife in your back, he’s the kind of guy who looks you in the eye and smiles as he (metaphorically) plunges it into your chest. The implied wisdom of this statement is that the person being described is obviously not a good friend.  There is also an element of paraprosdokian here as well – it starts off with what appears to be a compliment; then we get the ironic twist. Pathos is also a major theme.

• “He writes his plays for the ages – the ages between five and twelve.” – George Nathan (about George Bernard Shaw)

This put-down is a classic case of meosis (to belittle) and paraprosdockian; the dash upsets one’s expectations to hilarious effect. This balancing of two opposing statements is antithesis. One could also argue it is a ploce (a figure by which one balances one statement with a contrary, qualifying statement). The second part of the statement re-frames the opening back-handed compliment. Tapinosis is also clearly evident in this statement – Nathan is certainly being very nasty – but humor is the most effective device used in this passage. You can almost hear the rim shot and Ed McMahan shouting, “Hiiiiii-YO” at the punch line.

Another perfect example of paraprosdokian – a quote by Ellen Glasgow:

• “He knows so little and knows it so fluently.”

Both of the following quotes use humor, sarcasmus, Metanoia, irony and antithesis.

• “He’d make a lovely corpse.” – Charles Dickens
• “I didn’t attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it.”- Mark Twain

How can one make a ‘lovely’ corpse?’ The statements are ironic (and funny) because Dickens and Twain would clearly be more than happy to see their adversaries’ dead.

• “I’d call him a sadistic, hippophilic necrophile, but that would be beating a dead horse.” – Woody Allen

I love this one. It’s a line from Woody Allen’s classic 1966 film, What’s Up, Tiger Lilly? He bought the rights to a low-budget Japanese spy film called International Secret Police: Key of Keys, and overdubbed completely different dialogue over the original in English, along with a group of comedic actors including his then-wife Louise Lasser, later of Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman fame. In perhaps the most bizarre juxtaposition of all, the on-screen musical interludes (as well as the soundtrack) were provided by American folk-pop legends, The Lovin’ Spoonful singing bluegrass songs about going fishin’!

Woody Allen’s words are overdubbed by Lasser, playing a female character with the very politically incorrect name of Teri Yaki (played by former bond girl Mie Hama in the original). She is referring to Shepherd Wong, the ‘bad guy’ in the movie. Here finally is an example of incrementum – going in little steps from lowest to highest (worse to even worse, really). Also: procatylepsis, the “I’m just saying” clause. Sort of a ‘plausible deniability’ statement. Mostly, though, the phrase is metaphorical. To ‘beat a dead horse’ means to waste time raising issues which have already been thoroughly resolved. This passage is a good example of Hyperbole (exaggeration). In this quote, Allen puts a new twist on the old saying, and in the process he creates a neologism, a Greek word meaning “new word”, or the act of creating a new word. Hippophile is defined as a newly coined term, word, or phrase – although it has yet been accepted into mainstream language. The Greek name Phillipos is roughly equivalent to “phil” (love) and “hippos” (horse). Allen was just making a lame attempt to create a funny word along the same lines as ‘necrophilic.’ As my wife said, why not use Equiphile instead – a zoosexual/zoophile/bestialist term describing someone who’s sole sexual outlet is directed toward equine (donky, horse or zebra)?

Neologisms are common in today’s pop culture, and whether we like it or not, many are here to stay, including Spam: it used to describe a potted food meat product made of hooves, snouts and beaks; now it means flooding the Internet with a message in an attempt to force it on people who wouldn’t otherwise want to receive it. Noob: someone new to an online community or game. Other words derived from neologisms are: Aspirin; Band-aid; Kleenex; Xerox; Coke, Levis…you get the picture.

• “Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go.” – Oscar Wilde

This is another classic example of ploce (a figure by which one balances one statement with a contrary, qualifying statement) by the eminently quotable Oscar Wilde, with a bit of irony as well. Also, antistasis: a rhetorical term for repetition of a word or phrase in a different or contrary sense. The second part of this passage might also be considered an asyndeton.

• “That’s not writing, that’s typing.” – Truman Capote

More meosis and tapinosis. The old bitch is clearly belittling the object of his scorn; in this case, his literary contemporary, Jack Kerouac. This is similar to calling an author a ‘scribbler,’ or referring to an administrator as a ‘paper-pusher’. One could also argue for antithesis as well: “not this – but that.” My wife and I use a similar phrase to describe our friend who makes himself out to be a brilliant songwriter and guitarist – when he’s actually grown worse over the years. We say, ‘he’s not a musician – he’s a guy who plays the guitar.’

Some of the more creative put-downs – racial slurs excluded – can help to contextualize human relationships. Clearly this is a subject worthy of further study. In this age of political oppression and religious extremism – when a YouTube video can literally result in deadly riots – people have become far too sensitive; too ready to take offense. The uproar over The Innocence of Muslims is a perfect example of a group being purposely targeted for manipulation in order to incite violence. Rhetoric can certainly do that.

We all need to lighten up.

People take themselves way too seriously.