Editorial [Antae, Vol.3(3)]  

Abstract

Often (wrongly) cited as the longest word in the English language, the presence of 'antidisestablishmentarianism' in a conversation was once probably owed largely to its linguistic quirkiness. Lately, however, things have started to change. Candidates for the US presidency are criticised for being too close to the Establishment —yet, in the same breath, one of them is elected for being the very image of dissidence and non-conformity. What does this tell us about transgression? To begin with, certainly, that transgression is highly subjective. Although it may present itself under various guises, it is safe to say that, often, the point of transgression is to produce an impact and to make a statement. Making a statement, quite literally in the form of text, is, however, tricky business. Indeed, the distrust of the written word in Western culture has a long history. In the Phaedrus, Socrates is famously suspicious of it and he links it to forgetfulness and the higher risk of misinterpretation.1 In this sense, there is even an element of transgression within text itself. The words that one dares to write, to imbue with an intended meaning—all in the face of these risks—are an instance of defiance.