The Los Angeles Times has published a cranky little diatribe about the grammar in National Geographic Channel’s beautiful new advertising spot, “Live Curious”. Writer Dan Neil wastes spends 700-plus words complaining about the grammatically improper use of “live curious”. He also throws a few barbs at the NGC ad for focusing on people instead of animals, which he considers to be National Geographic’s mainstay. Watch for yourself and see what you think.
Now, I’m not going to defend the yellow border reflexively. And Neil makes some decent points. But he succumbs to the disease of literalism so common among copy editors and grammar fanatics. Although I do think the video is on the soft side (and I sure as heck wouldn’t write copy like that), on balance I find it an engaging, perhaps even inspiring, glimpse of mankind. It makes me, yes, curious about the world and about NGC’s view of it. Obsessing over “Live Curious” (perhaps he would prefer “Live Curiously”, which opens another can of implied worms) is like missing the forest for the pine needles. Think different, Dan.
Telluride Contest Has a Winner: Home-Made Video Grabs the Loot
8 Days of Climbing + 10 Pounds of Tequila = New 1,100-Foot Tepui Route
The Gallery of the OIdest Living Things in the World
60-Second Expert: How to Make a Skiing Kick Turn
And the Oscar For Best Use of Sheep Goes To…
Clothes Make the Man…And They Make A Difference for Nepal’s Women
Surviving A Massive Earthquake and Tsunami: What It Feels Like
Waves That Will Make You Say ‘Hurry Up, Summer’
The New Snow Test That Could Save Your Life
Earth’s Day Shortened, Axis Tilted By Chile Earthquake
The Greenest Job? Might Be Professional Tree Climber
60-Second Expert: The Right Way to Clean Your Goggles
Before There Was The Hurricane, There Was the Double Daffy
Time Lapse of the Milky Way over Hawaii
Al Gore: The Truth, Even With Mistakes, Is Still Inconvenient
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
NGC must be going after Apple fanboys like me by borrowing a page from the Steve Jobs Book of Marketin.
Think Different
Live Curious
I’m going to have to agree with you, Steve, and add: “Get over it, Dan.”
This reminds me of the brew-ha-ha over the Apple Ad Campaign, “Think Different” Everyday language is so varied, regional, and beautiful. In the end, it adds to the correct and ‘proper’ language. If it didn’t, we would be speaking like a Shakespearean play.
National Geographic’s coverage of the natural world and history pulled me in as a reader of their varied magazines. It’s not about animals. It is about humans understanding and interacting with nature and each other. After reading Neil’s piece, I’m led to believe that he doesn’t fully understand National Geographic.
It’s not the minor grammar problem, but the focus, especially in the very first scene, on people playing as opposed to learning about the environment, and learning to respect and protect it and other animals (we are animals, too) that seems a bit off purpose. To me it says “play on Mother Earth” not “revere Mother Earth.” Is that really where NG is heading?
NG need to take a page from that Durango ski resort and cancel Neil’s subscription. Maybe they should put his photo up at all news stands with instructions to not sell the magazine to him as well.
I’ve got to agree that Dan Neil is way out of line espousing the Discovery Channel’s ad tagline “The world is just awesome” over the succinct and fresh “Live Curious”. Further, I certainly don’t need to see preening gibbons in order for National Geographic to live up to its history. But I am with him in feeling curious at the seemingly random verbiage being voiced over the beautiful visuals. Perhaps the copy writer behind the commercial was living a little too curious before sitting down at his/her desk to write?
I agree with Steve’s assessment. As with most things, strong arguments can be made from different positions. Logic has its own limitations and ultimately language, written and oral, is simply a ‘bridge between minds’ (to quote an old college Political Science professor).
I get NGC’s message…and it resonates with me. That’s all that matters in my view.
Where did Dan Neil got the idea that NG main focus is animals, I grew up learning about people and cultures thanks to NG.
I also have 2 questions:
1.- Who asked Mr. Neil to outline the editorial requirements of NG;
2.- Who named him overlord, supreme ruler and all-knowing entity about what a creative ad should say or not.
He forgets that in the creative area, we only have opinions, but no one owns a final truth.