There’s nothing quite like a good put-down. For a polemicist the put-down is a vital tool of the trade, and can win hearts and minds just as well as a good argument: putting both together can amount to a powerful tool of persuasion. Some might regard put-downs as nothing other than a bit of funny or offensive ad hominen, attacking a person rather than an argument. However, when used after an argument is defeated the put-down becomes a rather marvellous debating strategy.
The Times newspaper carried a great feature today on the art of political put-downs, and I thought it was a good topic for today
One wonderful put-down I read comes from 50 odd years ago when Bessie Braddock, a rather fat politician, attacked Winston Churchill: “Mr Churchill, this is a disgrace. You are drunk.” To which Churchill wonderfully replied: “And you, madam, are ugly. As for my condition, it will pass by the morning. You, however, will still be ugly.”
The great thing about this put-down is not just that it is funny and rude, but is quick-witted and timed perfectly. This sort of put-down wouldn’t work if Churchill had given the reply 15 minutes later: only an immediate reply would have had the impact. Churchill’s put-downs are legendary and some suspect his retorts were not impromptu at all, but carefully thought out beforehand and loaded into his cavernous brain to wait for the right moment when they could jump out and smack someone right in the face. There’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s the skill in making them sound ad-lib that helps give them power.
Another wonderful put-down came from Benjamin Disraeli about his arch-rival William Gladstone in bygone years. When asked to distinguish between a misfortune and a calamity he replied: “If Gladstone fell into the Thames, that would be a misfortune. If anybody pulled him out, that, I suppose, would be a calamity.” Ouch. A put-down doesn’t need to be given to the person you’re, umm, “putting down,” and can actually have more effect as a result, as it comes with an air of “you’re not even worth talking to directly.” After all, there’s little worse than being present in a room hearing other people talk about you as if you aren’t there.
A few others from Churchill are worth mentioning:
Describing Clement Attlee, who interrupted his reign as Prime Minister, as “A sheep in sheep’s clothing,” and “A modest man with much to be modest about. But, my favourite Churchill putdown of all time is his response to an aide who knocked on his toilet door and told him that the Lord Privy Seal wanted to see him: “Tell the Lord Privy Seal I am sealed in my privy, and can only deal with one shit at a time.”
Wonderful, I must remember that one, “Stephen you’re dad’s on the phone.” “Yeah, well tell him to ring back later, I’m on the toilet and can only deal with one shit at a time.” Fantastic.
Of course, with a put-down you can attack someone for being ugly, horrible, fat, or whatever; but my favourite put-down, and the one you will see most often in my own articles is a put-down aimed at someone’s intelligence. Jonathan Aitken once attacked Margaret Thatcher’s lack of knowledge about the Middle East with this witty offering: “She probably thinks Sinai is the plural of sinus”.
The Times noted that most of the best put-downs are in the past and modern day politicians and commentators are bit tame by comparison, which might well be true and another bad consequence of a growing politically correct culture. It’s a pity. I love put-downs, and one of the reasons why I like to write articles directly in reply to someone is because it gives me a great opportunity to use one, or a few.
I think my favourite political putdown comes from Australian MP Fred Daly who, in the Aussie parliament, once said “half the honourable gentlemen on the other side of the house are halfwits.” When he was told to retract his statement he did so: “I retract, half the honourable gentlemen on the other side of the house AREN’T halfwits.”
I thought I’d end by throwing this open to our readers: any good put-downs, political or general?
Stephen
11 responses so far ↓
1 Rosalita Paglia // Apr 23, 2008 at 7:31 pm
I’m not sure about whether or not these qualify as put-downs, but some of your own have had me on the floor laughing in the past.
Memorable, “Whatever else we might say about Animal Rights we can at least conclude that in most cases it does something to the normal functioning of a persons mind. The cure? I prescribe a bacon sandwich for breakfast, a burger for lunch and steak for dinner.” - Stephen graham
And I went back to look for this one Stephen
“Entering the mental world of Monbiot is a little like entering a lunatic asylum: the majority of the content is intellectually retarded, unwittingly humorous at times, full of incoherent babble, and the ever-present stench of stale piss.”
And some of John’s attack letters are brutal.
Referring to the “manipulative fuckwit filmmaker Michael Moore.”
Talking about Morgan Spurlock film. “bullshit. From ideology to ideal to idea, from premise to application, from composition to execution, from beginning to end, the film was a lamentable pile of malodorous, humming bullshit; flakey and cretinous, foolish and unconvincing, vacuous and lame, demented and gratuitous, wrongheaded and disingenuous, intellectually dull, ideologically crippled, cerebrally unbolted, philosophically defective, conked out, half-baked, hare-brained, ill-judged, field-fresh, luke-warm, steaming, noxious bullshit.”
I was on the floor. Simply great reading.
2 Greg, Sacramento // Apr 24, 2008 at 8:34 am
I love the picture and what Churchill said is one of the best I’ve ever heard. How about this one, might suit you guys….
‘You have diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the ideas.’
3 John // Apr 24, 2008 at 8:55 am
Man, Stephen, some of this stuff IS great after all!
4 Stephen // Apr 24, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Rosa: Thanks for the kind words, I never thought any of ours putdowns would have got a mention here!
Greg: Yes, I like that one too…
John: it is indeed
S.
5 Liam // Apr 24, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Some good ones so far. I saw the Times piece and there were some absolute gems in there.
A personal favourite is one a friend of mine used years ago in a pub argument, when he demolished the other guy and finished off by saying his opponent had ‘delusions of adequacy.’
Another one - not quite a put-down but magnificently contemptuous - is the old favourite round here of: “I wouldn’t piss on him if he was on fire.”
6 F.G. // Apr 24, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Why do you feel the need to put people down? Surely if they committed any infraction then it can be dealt with using discussions that don’t involve unnecessary insults. If you see your task in life as to make as many people feel low and depressed as possible then continue to insult them in these ways, I think that’s horrible.
7 Liam // Apr 25, 2008 at 2:19 am
F.G
I think there’s a difference between just showering someone with abuse and a clever retort or barbed response in a dispute between grown adults.
The best such put-downs often leave the ‘victim’ struggling to work out just how he has been insulted, or even briefly thinking he’s actually been complimented. Have a look at the link below, especially the list at the end of the article. There is genuine wit in some of them, and no real viciousness.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3797745.ece
8 Stephen // Apr 25, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Liam: I like the delusions of adequacy, must remember that
FG: I guess we’re chips off very different blocks. I think some people simply deserve it, and of course are free to hit back with something: it’s like a battle of wits. You are mistaken if you think I am saying that put-downs are necessary to win an argument. I don’t think that. I do think they can help though, and can be a very effect rhetorical and polemic tool. I find a good put-down funny, and even when I look back on times when I’ve been on the receiving end I don’t feel hurt or wounded, I simply feel “damn, I wish I had thought of that.” They’re part of the cut-and-thrust of full-blooded debate, and make that debate much more interesting.
S
9 Liam // Apr 29, 2008 at 1:30 pm
FG
I don’t think we’re talking about showering someone with foul-mouthed abuse here. The best put downs can even leave the ‘victim’ briefly thinking he’s been on the end of a compliment before realisation sets in.
I’ve linked to the Times piece below. Have a look, particularly at the bottom of the article and the ‘top ten’ listed there. Some of them are truly witty.
On a separate note, I don’t think men of the calibre of Winston Churchill or Clement Attlee would have turned into quivering wrecks or gone into a depressive tailspin because of a cutting remark.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3797745.ece
10 John // Apr 30, 2008 at 10:06 am
Liam- Sorry it took a while for this to post. The spam filter is stupider than I thought. I agree, BTW.
11 Liam // Apr 30, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Thanks John, I was a bit worried that about ten of my attempted posts would turn up at once and get me banned from the site.
Hope FG responds as I’ve been trying to get back to him for a week now.
Leave a Comment