I’m getting tired of words not meaning what I think they mean.

 

I don’t know if this is me saying I don’t like lingo or me saying I don’t like myself for not knowing the lingo. I think it’s a little bit of both to be honest.

 

I’ve always been a fan of slang and how the meaning of certain words evolves over time with frequency and tone of use. But usually I’m on the front foot of those evolutions. I was there when “bulk” stopped being used exclusively as a prefix to “billing”. I was there when “keen” was the equivalent of “I just grew several penises and each one of them is erect at the prospect of joining your proposed Maccas run”. I was contributing to the cutting down of long words to one syllable or “syllb”. I was there for it all!

But now I’m out of the loop, and words are different to me. Words that used to mean one thing now confuse me. “Dank” is a pretty good example. Right now it’s being thrown around a lot, and it seems to have varying uses. Back in my day, which was only like five years ago, dank was absolutely a bad thing. For something to be described as “dank” meant for it to be grotty, shabby, unpleasant and just all around shit. I viewed it as a mix between “rank” and “damp”. So by that logic, one would use it in a sentence to describe an old, soiled mattress. Maybe a flanno left on the floor of a recovery party, soaked in food dye and beer, drenched in poor decision making. Hell, you could even use “dank” to describe a cave full of wet but warm dogs.

 

But now it’s being used to describe remixes and memes. Now, for the love of all things holy please do not ask me to define the word “meme” for you. Memes are like the meat in sausage rolls – everyone loves them and eats them right up, but no one can say with exact certainty what they are. They’re like funny pictures, mostly with accompanying text that are shared around the many corners of the vast World Wide Web we love so much. In the final throws (A.K.A. about a month out) of the federal election, everyone is banging on about “dank memes” that are going about as political propaganda, albeit shitty propaganda.

 

And despite all the hard work dedicated media minders do, sometimes politicians think they can own this whole social media game. They think it’s in their best interests if they handle their Twitter handles and put the “I” in their insty posts. It’s a real win for us, The Voters, because we get an understanding of the person behind the politician. The posts they make up themselves can be absolute gold. This is because most politicians running in this election are daggy old dads (I can say this because out of 10 candidates running in my electorate, not one of them is a woman). Case and point? Behold our Deputy Prime Minister:

 

Now, fest your eyes on some of the weird, completely dad-like posts he obviously made without the assistance of a trusted adult, like he was Ralph Wiggans and Lisa Simpson in a state costume contest:

 

You see, the thing about daggy old dads is that they don’t fully grasp this whole young people thing. If you make it to their ages, you can probably expect to develop some weird quirks, bank up a horrible repertoire of odd, and sometimes slightly racist, sayings and a general disconnect from the generations below you. My dad is a classic example. One time I caught him intensely reading The Many Uses of Vinegar recipe book like it was a novel while wearing his Akubra and belt with a pocket knife on it. Another time he asked my sign writer uncle to make him a stick for the back of his ute to tell other drivers to “stop sniffing my arse”. He thought it was both smart and hilarious. We [his offspring, general humanity] were mortified. Thankfully, this sticker was never fixed to his vehicle, but I feel like it is representative of the kind of political claptrap flying around the internet. I Googled “dank memes political Australia” and this is what came up:

 

So by looking at this garbage, one would assume that “dank” still meant bad. But the other day I was listening to the radio and heard a producer talking about how he spend his time making “dank tunes”. From memory, the sample of his work I heard on my commute was reasonably not shit. In fact I would have to say that this fellow had a track record of dropping bangers (not the sausage kind, the “this song is very enjoyable and encourages me to dance” kind; I at least understand that one). So in this sense, I would have to assume that “dank” not only meant “not shit” but also “quite fantastic” and “inspired gregarious dance moves”.

 

So where does this all leave me, a person unsure of whether it is an insult or a compliment? How do I prove myself to be “with it” when the definition of “it” keeps changing? I can only assume it is like the word “sick”. That word is usually used to explain a general state of being unwell, and sometimes is a euphamisim for vomit (e.g. “he was sick all over the back seat” or “the pile of sick in the corner of the room did little to dull the passions of the two 19-year-old drunkards”). As such, the word is often used in place of “gross” or “disgusting”, as in “this pantsuit is sick, I can’t be seen in it or I won’t get a date to the formz”. It is sometimes used to describe a deranged person; “sick puppy” is my favourite example of that. But when used as “sik”, the word sounds the same but takes on a whole new meaning. “Sik beatz”, “sik singlet” and straight up (language warning!) “sik cunt” are all massive compliments. In fact, that last one is probably the highest honour that can be bestowed on any Australian. “Sik” is the kind of “good” that is usually paired with a surfie hand gesture and even an outstretched tongue. It’s exclusively a young people term.

 

So maybe that’s the case with “dank”. Maybe “dank” is the new “sik”. Maybe the word can have multiple meanings; many other words do after all. Maybe I’ll be able to be with “it”, even if they change what “it” is. Even if what I’m with isn’t “it”. But I have to say that right now, what’s “it” seems weird and scary to me.