Going What? Rogue? I Think Not!

I went to the dictionary today (not because I wanted to live deliberately – that is Thoreau’s territory) because I was not entirely sure of the meaning for a given word. The dictionary is the constant companion of any writer, teacher and teacher of writing. It clarifies what we think we know and helps us with arguments. The word I looked for was in fact there! Go figure. And, it has been there for a few centuries. Yet, somehow this word has really only become a part of our common language due to recent events in our nation’s history. I had heard the word many times and had even dared to use it on various occasions. I am not bragging, I am just stating a fact. Learning this word comes with having been an English major in college and a reader over time. Being a Shakespearean novice, I have a passing familiarity with the word. I think it is a good word, but do we use it correctly? Shakespeare sure used it well!
One is a rogue and peasant nave in Shakespeare, or is it a pleasant and naïve rouge? I cannot recall the exact scene and verse – though I am sure someone will go to Google and search those terms to let me know. Regardless, when one is rogue in Shakespeare it speaks to their character, to their individual station in life. The dictionary has several definitions for rogue: “a dishonest, knavish person; a scoundrel;” as well as, “a tramp or vagabond;” but also including “a playfully mischievous person.”
These definitions represent nouns - persons, places or things. If we are to accept that we either are human or are not, in that we cannot by will make ourselves into dogs, then we accept the fact that nouns in general are not changeable. A dog cannot be a house and a house cannot be a human and a human can only be in the doghouse through bad choices in marriage, but I digress… See, one either is or is not a noun; thus, one either is or is not a rogue. Rogue is a noun that implies being. I am human, I cannot change that despite bizarre surgeries that could alter anything from my gender to my eye color. I am American, and that can be changed, but American is a proper noun. See the difference?
It is my understanding that one cannot become rogue by choice or by action. Perhaps, one can be seen as rogue if actions were to change throughout one’s life, but one cannot just willy-nilly hope to be rogue. It is much like a nickname – one does not grant himself his nickname, a nickname must be earned through determination or sheer embarrassment. Likewise, one must either be rogue or not be rogue.
I am no fan of politics. I am trying in my adult years to understand, appreciate, and, yes, even learn about politics more, but so far it is only with a passing interest. We live in an unfortunate time when media and politics have blurred into a complex popularity contest that seems to drive ideas and actions. We teach students less so that they are less informed. In the end, the information they pursue is less and less nationally-minded and more and more personally-motivated. I am not casting aspersions. I was (and to some degree still am) the same way. I am trying to make up for lost time.
While I am no fan of politics I am also not a fan of political figures. I suffer the near-sightedness of my generation. If the actions of congress have not yet done something great, then they make little sense to me. I admire Jimmy Carter more for his literary merit than for his time in office; I respect Ronald Reagan more for what I have learned about him than I cared when he was alive. I don’t wish to be anyone from Billy Carter to Bill Clinton or from Spiro Agnew to John McCain. However, I empathize with the likes of Harry S. Truman, Geraldine Ferraro and Lyndon Johnson who were placed where history placed them.
One person I am confused by is Sarah Palin. She seems to think that she can go rogue. “Going Rogue” to me seems to be impossible. Yes, she has been caught up in the maelstrom of the political race in which she found herself so openly thrust two summers ago, and she has suffered the ups and downs of a life in the spotlight. Her life cannot be fun! Nor do I wish to be her. Were she to run for president in 2012 or 2016, who knows, maybe I will vote for her. I voted for Hillary! Just because one is a registered Democrat does not make one a hardcore democrat. I simply chose “D” over “R” because the Ds make more sense to me. (Maybe it is because I saw a lot of those in high school, but that is another topic for another day, er, another blog.) I try to see each issue, and I have said on many occasions that we need to stop worrying about who “WINS!” an election and focus more upon who will best lead our cities, our counties, our states, our nation and ultimately our world.
But Sarah going rogue just doesn’t make sense to me either. I have not read the book, so I will not judge. I am sure she explains in detail the conundrum of her title within the book. If you don’t know the meaning of conundrum, look it up in that dictionary thing mentioned earlier. If given the chance, I might read the book down the road. I read too much fiction and I am trying to improve upon that by reading other genres. So far, it hasn’t worked. I did not finish "The One Percent Doctrine" and only bought "Profiles in Courage" because I know I should own a copy and should read it some day. When I find the courage to read more than one percent of "Going Rogue", I will perhaps comprehend Mrs. Palin’s ideology, which will be a good thing because I will be better informed to some percentage. However, I doubt I will understand just how she justifies “going” to a noun.
One cannot become a blogger, one either is or is not, and one can only blog.
Until the next post…