Home > The Magazine > Features

Saturday 22 November 2008

Dare to dream and make your ultimate trip a reality

The latest culture as recommended by our staff

Michael Henderson

Michael Henderson suggests

Email registration

Free weekly email update

Great products and special offers for Spectator readers

Click here for great value events

Click here for exclusive articles, offers, tasting notes and discussion

Sorry, but apologies really are the work of the Devil

Anna Blundy

Wednesday, 28th May 2008

Saying ‘sorry’ is mostly wicked and usually irrelevant, says Anna Blundy. People should not be allowed to dump their inner shame so easily

A recently divorced friend of mine needed somewhere to stay. We were going away for three weeks and I offered him our flat. Grateful, he promised to pay the cleaner and feed the goldfish. The keys were delivered to him and we went away. A week later the cleaner called to say there was no money left for her. We texted the friend who apologised and promised to leave double the cash the week after. Fine, we thought. Then, the night before I was due to return to London, I emailed to ask him to leave the keys on the table as I’d be getting back very late that night.

He replied that actually he hadn’t stayed at the flat at all so the goldfish was probably dead. ‘Sorry.’ He pointed out that it was only a goldfish. He also said that most people are desperate to get rid of their goldfish, suggesting that he had in fact done me and my children a favour.

This is a particularly insidious tactic of the serial sorrysayer — the claim that the recipient of the apology is ridiculous if she minds. So, not only is the goldfish dead and I am sorry, but also, you are stupid for caring. (In fact, the goldfish miraculously lived, slightly damaging my case...)

This kind of apology, the sort that follows a clear-sighted act of intense selfishness/meanness, simply (and very effectively) removes the right of the sorree to anger and/or revenge and makes her look a complete idiot if she does not immediately forgive (preferably weeping). Who can rage at someone who is saying sorry? Who can plot some complicated act of vengeance when the flowers have been bought and the squirming, self-pitying (let’s face it) apology has been made? What ‘sorry’ ends up meaning is that a person who plans to be sorry later can behave however he wants without ever having to face any redress, precisely because, poor darling, he is sorry. Or he will be.

‘Sorry’ is like honesty. When someone says; ‘To be honest...’ they are either about to lie or they are about to tell you that they’ve slept with someone else. My advice in either of these situations would be — keep it to yourself and don’t try to scuttle, cockroach-like, out of it by begging for guilt-purging forgiveness.

Previous page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next page

More articles from: Anna Blundy | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (12)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Water

May 29th, 2008 11:53am

I'm glad the vast majority of us don't think like you. This isn't to say the vast majority of spec readers don't, neither is it to say that they do.

Air

May 29th, 2008 3:34pm

Spot on, Anna, except for one nagging detail; there seems to be some confusion in the article between forgiveness and reconciliation. All forgiveness means is that the injured party not exercise active revenge against the wrongdoer; it doesn't mean injured parties can't cut wrongdoers out of their lives altogether.

Reconciliation is something else altogether; the burden lies with the offenders, who must 1)acknowledge the offenses committed 2) apologize sincerely; and 3) actively make amends. If they can't or won't do that, the injured parties aren't obliged to take them back.

Abu Nudnik

May 30th, 2008 12:40pm

Great!

David Short

May 30th, 2008 11:23pm

This is far too much over-long blathering to make one simple point, and in any case it belongs in the Polly Filler sections of the Evening Standard, where they have a lot of pages to fill up around the advertising five days a week, not in an expensive, supposedly thoughtful weekly such as the Spectator.

Gordon H

May 31st, 2008 11:41am

How do you feel, Anna, about those who apologise on behalf of others?

Here in Australia we have a new Prime Minister who felt it necessary to say sorry to people who claim they were of a stolen generation.

He was referring to young Aboriginal Australians who were put into care decades ago because they were suffering great deprivation or abuse.

They were not stolen, but given a chance, often by their parents, of a better life.

Wilf

June 1st, 2008 12:38pm

And?

Sam Korn

June 1st, 2008 3:59pm

Let's look behind the blather at the logical step you are making...

* People abuse apologies when they are insincere;
* Therefore, apologies are bad.

This is so remarkably devoid of logic as to be completely nonsensical.

Len Burch

June 4th, 2008 4:42pm

Ever heard the "Soaps"?

They are nothing more than a succession of apologies and sighs mixed with expressions of wants - liking or disliking.

Len Burch

June 4th, 2008 4:51pm

Time Anna realised that brackets go as two's and confusingly make no sense in the way she uses them

Deepak Malhotra

June 7th, 2008 6:44am

Sorry, nothing to say.

Ella

July 15th, 2008 4:24pm

This is great, and perpetually true. Well done, I laughed out loud.

BILL

August 20th, 2008 11:55pm

Needed to be said.

It is interesting that people try to fend the pseudo sorry on people they generally feel they can piss on.... because that's the kind of person they generally have no compunctions supporting.

I sent this to my brother, who while 19 and in college lived with my family free of rent while I lived in a children's home and haven't heard from them since. As a straight A, well behaved student, who wondered for years why I was cast out... he expects me to accept sorry for his years of privilege. He nurtures self-pity that I don't accept his 'apology'.

To which I say, SORRY.

Thank goodness we can have a run on the pound when we need one

Martin Vander Weyer

Martin Vander Weyer looks ahead to next week’s Pre-Budget Report and reflects on George Osborne’s contentious remarks about the devaluation of sterling. It looks like Gordon Brown is getting away with his borrowing binge — leaving the Tories isolated

I loved Oliver Stone’s Bush film — and I know why the critics hated it

Rod Liddle

The movie W. did not provide the crude anti-Bush agitprop that the reviewers craved, says Rod Liddle. This was precisely its strength: we need to get inside the minds even of those we most deplore

The great Tory tax and spend battle: seconds out...

Fraser Nelson and Daniel Finkelstein

In the wake of Cameron’s decision to drop his pledge to match Labour spending, Fraser Nelson and Daniel Fin kelstein of the Times trade rhetorical blows over the issue that is gripping and troubling the Conservative party as it adjusts to the transformed economic context

Where is our inspiration when we most need it?

Bryan Forbes

Bryan Forbes remembers listening to Churchill as a 14-year-old evacuee and now looks with envy at Obama’s capacity to galvanise hope. Where are his UK counterparts?

For a bit of perspective, try thinking Jurassic

Christopher Lloyd

The first takeaways originated about 150 million years ago, says Christopher Lloyd; global travel is pretty ancient, too. And as for democracy...

Who put a sock full of cocaine in my drawer?

Venetia Thompson

Venetia Thompson, who has never taken the drug, was shocked to discover a stash in her house. What to do? Her friends’ response was a collective shrug as if it were nothing unusual