Just what, then, is the meaning of the word “great?”
In contemporary use, and ignoring… or in ignorance of the meaning, it is used to describe a film/play (“great film”), a day (“great day”), a meal, a journey, sleep, a sporting event and… in fact, is the universal word to describe… what and whatever? It is used to lay emphasis on the most banal of pastimes, events and happenings, and in this universality of use its meaning has been forgotten, and/or, has lost its meaning…
But the word “great” had/does have a meaning as “pre-eminent”, “highly gifted…” it means noteworthy, consummate, sovereign, unparalleled, matchless, unsurpassed/unsurpassable, insuperable, monumental, remarkable, incomparable… these but a small selection of words synonymous…
That meal might have been “tasty”, the film might have been entertaining, riveting, even mesmeric, the day glorious, a sporting event matchless, leaving one breathless with excitement – but great …?
That close finish might excite and leave one breathless, that film might have one on the edge of the seat, the nerves atwitter, that meal may satisfy and bring an air of contentment, the evening’s entertainment may absorb all one’s attention… but “great” – methinks not
Ergo… the next time one is given to describes a meal, a film, a days outing, or the horse that just won a race, or any thing that may have pleased one, give mind to “great”, and think of a word more appropriate in a sliding scale, as enjoyable, competent, talented, brave, useful, middling, mediocre, mean,.. too often pleasing and/or ordinary might better fit.
Of course in the sport-cum-industry of horse-racing, “great” embraces the gamut from the indigent to those that earn the “apparel.” Of colts, and dealing only with the males of the breed, St Simon, Hurry On, Man O’War, Prestige, Sea Bird – one could easily add dozens – spring to mind (I would/could include Citation et al, and such description could not be gainsaid), but… room for one more is an unlikely gain.
Which brings me to a newly published book (American) “Great…American Thoroughbreds”
That such as Secretariat, once humbled by a horse named “Potatoes”, and whose claim to fame is his victory in the Belmont Stakes in record time, is so described, is fatuous, predicated upon one’s lack of knowing the meaning of the word “great”. It is an instance of fiction ignoring and/or in ignorance of the facts, taking root. Overlooked or blacked-out are those less than “great” – no extraordinarily inept performances when second in Belmont’s Woodward Stakes of just 5 runners, and when beaten 4½ lengths by 4YO Prove Out, who conceded 7 lbs, and Saratoga’s Whitney Stakes, again of just 5 runners; or when beaten 1 length by the 4YO gelding Onion, level weights, who managed but 8 successes in 22 attempts (one victory on each 3 starts ) – “Secretariat, who was meeting older horses for the first time, tired noticeably after racing head and head with Onions through the stretch. So much so, in fact, that he was all out saving second.”
The Belmont Stakes of 1973, was of just 5 runners, two whose names are forever forgotten, but remembered here… The race itself was all over after 6 furlongs when “Sham”, the only horse that might have been looked to make a challenge”, broke down. Thereafter, it was a “training spin.” At any rate, clock times of horses as a measure of ability is fatuous, with factors other than ability intruding.
As said at the outset, “great” is the throwaway word in the latter years of the 20th century… might even be regarded as meaningless – and in the meaningless throwaway context of “great”… Yes… one might describe Secretariat as “great” – but “the best among a very ordinary bunch of 3YO thoroughbreds in America in 1973” would seem more reasoned an appraisal.
Richard Ulbrich© 2009
Back to Articles:
