`Our words no longer correspond to the world. (…) Every time we try to speak of what we see, we speak falsely, distorting the very thing we are trying to represent. (…) Consider a word that refers to a thing -`umbrella’ for example. When I saynthe word `umbrella’, you see the object in your mind. You see a kind of stick, with collapsible metal spokes on top that form an armature for a waterproof material which, when opened, will protect you from the rain. This last detail is important. Not only is an umbrella a thing, it is a thing that performs a function -in other words, expresses the will of man. (…) Now, my question is this. What happens when a thing no longer performs its function? Is it still the thing, or has it become something else? When you rip the cloth off the umbrella, is the umbrella still an umbrella? (…) Is it possible to go on calling this object an umbrella? In general, people do (…) To me this is a serious error, the source of all our troubles. Because it can no longer perform its function, the umbrella has ceased to be an umbrella. (…) The word, however, has remained the same. Therefore, it can no longer express the thing. It is imprecise; it is false; it hides the thing it is supposed to reveal. And if we cannot even name a common, everyday object that we hold in our hands, how can we expect to speak of thethings that truly concern us?
Paul Auster