“Simple” Is For Simpletons

The word, “simple,” is not only an insanely overused adjective. It’s misused as well.

Case in point: The moronic expression, “a simpler time.”

When people use this phrase, it nearly always ends up with “simpler” being used to mean the exact opposite of what the word, “simple,” means.

For instance, someone might talk about how doing research has changed over the years.

“It was a simpler time. Back then, instead of Googling a search term, we drove to the library, presented our library card, went to the card catalog section, found the call numbers for the books that pertained to the topic we wanted to find information about, went to that section and browsed through the indexes of the books in order to find the page numbers for the sections that pertained to specifically what we were looking for, skimmed through those sections, and chose the books we thought would be best. Then we checked them out. So simple! No Google. No CTRL-F.”

Of course, to anyone who isn’t an imbecile, typing a search term into Google and quickly finding results is much simpler than researching something at the library.

A major misconception lay idiots have is that “simple” is in some way synonymous with, “good.”

It’s not.

“Simple” is neutral. And “simplistic” is bad.

“Simple” is only good if you don’t want to do any work. In other words, it’s lazy people’s way of praising something.

This is not to say that what people sometimes are referring to when they stupidly misuse the word, “simple,” isn’t good.

Here’s an example of a stupid phrase you may hear about something visual, be it art or any kind of design:

“There’s beauty in its simplicity.”

This is the kind of thing morons say about the work of visual artists or designers who take a “less is more” approach.

But what they should say instead is, “the artist/designer used tasteful restraint in the composition.” Or perhaps, “Quality > Quantity.”

In other words, the artist/designer eschewed a busy design/composition in favor of something that is both more efficient and more visually striking. It may or may not have been easier to create than something convoluted and ineffective, but the ease of something’s creation only makes it “simpler” for the creator. Sometimes.

Sometimes the thought that goes into creating something with restraint is much more complex than the thought that goes into something with more quantity/more physical work, and this increased mental work could make it more complicated a task for the creator.

Either way, there is no beauty in simplicity in and of itself. The beauty can therefore not be in its “simplicity.” The beauty in something with restraint is in how all of the elements of the creation work together.

Here’s another example of how you may hear the word used:

“This TV show was so good. So simple and innocent!”

No, idiot. If the TV show was, in fact, good, it was complex.

Trashy reality TV is simple.

The good show also probably wasn’t “innocent.” You’re just the latest in every generation of human history to think that young minds have been “corrupted” by modern entertainment, and that your entertainment was somehow, “wholesome.” Any good show will portray the good, bad, and ugly of life. It may end up life-affirming, or it may not. But if it’s good, it will show conflict, be it internal or external, on its way there.

“It has a simple plot…”

Here, these people usually mean, “premise.”

If a premise isn’t, “simple,” it’s not a fucking premise. If you can’t summarize the conflict in a sentence or two, you don’t have a real premise.

The excessive use and misuse of the word, “simple,” is a sign of a shitty mentality in our culture. It reveals people’s aversion to work and deep thought. And that’s exactly why our culture sucks now. That’s why nobody has any clue what they’re talking about when it comes to much of anything.