two horrid wank-word trends

This is just a quick one really, a follow-up to my rant on wanky weasel words from a month or two ago. The first irksome cliche I’ve been shuddering about seems only to come from one person whose articles I read. I won’t name them, because aside from this irritating habit their articles are really great stuff. It’s just that there’s no reason why I should ever be asked to keep anything “in my thought orbit”. I’d be happy to bear something in mind. I’m willing not to forget. However, I refuse point-blank to keep something in my thought-orbit. Besides, I’d be the first to admit that my mind is incapable of gathering circling objects by sole virtue of its enormous mass.

The other phrase that’s really grinding my gears is a proclamation that “the optics are bad”. Or worse, that “the optics are terrible”. When a situation or someone’s actions create a poor impression, we’re generally not talking about how it literally looks. Surely the point is that the result is a negative emotional reaction is caused by the idea of what has happened. The aesthetic is not what’s important here, it’s the concept. To say that the optics of a situation is bad is to me equally as incongruous as saying, “You’re doing so well! I mean, you’re literally on fire out there!”

Bah. These don’t sound clever. They don’t get the point across more clearly and they’re not precious little nuggets of poetry. They’re both just a couple more examples of irritating cliches that distract and confuse. Stop that!