As I first began reading this article, I easily found ways to engage in a conversation with the author. To me, this article was much easier to understand and think deeply about compared to the transcript of Geary’s ted talk.
When reading I was surprised at some points but agreed, and even disagreed with other points he made. When Erard mentioned that metaphors weren’t targeted/created to affect us or designed for a specific reason. If metaphors weren’t created for us to understand or explain complex and abstract concepts then what was the reason they were created? To me the very purpose of the creation of metaphors was exactly the reason he claims they weren’t. Metaphors are ways to explain things that otherwise can’t be explained as easily. He himself describes himself as a metaphor designer. They were created for clarification’s sake.
The other section of the article I want to explore and explain deeper is on the same page. When Erard is explaining the metaphor of a paintbrush as a pump, he says “it isn’t beautiful, it’s very useful.” I think this quote is true about the most impactful metaphors. There are of course very simple sweet metaphors like “Juliet is the sun” as Shakespeare uses and Geary in his ted talk describes. Yet, those don’t accomplish anything very special or unique. It conveys what the author wanted it too but it does not have a very profound purpose. I think the better and more important metaphors are longer, or harder to understand, maybe even ugly sounding. The metaphors with more important meanings, that actually are trying to convey a point, are not as poetic sounding. As Erard explains later on in the article, the true purpose of a metaphor is explanation, to make harder or confusing concepts easily digestible.
