Offensive Language

A few words about a pet peeve

I knew when I sent the email to my publisher requesting a typographical adjustment to my page proofs that I was likely to be turned down. And I was. It was the way I was turned down that I found so aggravating. The representative from the typesetting firm mediating between me and the press explained that the publisher “preferred” to stick to house style rather than accommodate me. “Thank you for understanding,” she wrote.

“Thank you for understanding.” This has become the standard locution for those who deliver information to parties likely to be unhappy about what they’re hearing. But has there ever been a phrase more literally presumptuous than this one? The underlying logic seems to be, “I realize the outcome I’m purveying is likely appear disappointing to you. But since my reasoning and motives are unquestionably logical and honorable, I know you will agree that my view of the matter is the only appropriate one under the circumstances.”

“Actually,” I wrote back to my correspondent, “this does not appear to be a ‘preference,’ but rather a decision. And I’m afraid my understanding cannot be presumed. However, I accept it.” I say I wrote this, but I discarded the draft: it seemed unnecessarily querulous and ultimately pointless.  Besides, this person was only caught in the middle. But I would like to start a little campaign here: Let’s get rid of “thank you for understanding.” Let’s make it a relic of the 2020s, that exasperating age of virtue-signaling, to be replaced by something more honest, like, “I’m sorry this didn’t go the way you might have hoped.” If what you think you’re saying is right and/or necessary, don’t encroach on other people coming to their own conclusions!

And if you don’t agree with me on this, well: go right ahead. I may or may not understand.