Merry Christmas, or Happy Holidays? Why Does It Matter?
’Tis the season for many things. Friends and family, gifts and good cheer, and, unfortunately but inevitably, some amount of petty Christmas quarreling. For decades now, mainly in the United States, one of the most popular such arguments is over whether to wish people merry Christmas, or happy holidays.
Of course, the two phrases do, to some extent, mean different things. But the vast majority of Americans do celebrate Christmas, or at least are pleased to spend this week with family instead of at the office. Few are actually offended by the traditional greeting. I was recently in Japan, where there are even fewer Christians than there are Jews in the US, and Christmas décor is everywhere. But the debate points to a highly significant linguistic point that everyone knows, but fewer consciously realise. Often, how you say something, rather than what you say, conveys more meaning.
Where “Merry Christmas” used to be the neutral default this time of year, “Happy Holidays” gained favour in liberal circles as a more “inclusive” alternative. The two greetings are somewhat semantically distinct. But a survey of analogous debates demonstrate that the difference lies more in vibes than anything you would find in a dictionary. For example, generations of English speakers have casually used “they” to refer to a generic third person, but since that has become explicitly identified with “woke” gender ideology, using it (or not) has become meaningful conscious choice.
At the same time, Americans have shifted from referring to “black people,” then to “African-Americans,” then back to “black” (or “Black”) people again. South Africans still use “coloured,” though they do so for people most nations refer to as “mixed race.” No one thinks the people signified have changed, but the way we talk about things is significant.
“Happy Holidays” is less common overseas, though America’s global clout means it is hardly unknown. But other countries have their own Yuletide tiffs. Two years ago, I published an article in which I claimed that “Happy Christmas” is the standard in England. It was, after all, what I usually heard while I studied at Oxford and worked in London. I never expected it to attract such a storm of controversy, mostly from people from the north of the country, who zealously informed me that Christmas is happy for posh Londoners, while their Christmases remain merry. Likewise, many of those defending the same greeting against “Happy Holidays” feel some socioeconomic, as well as culture war, frisson in their festive insurgency.
Choosing one’s words in the spirit of one’s values is, of course, nothing new. It shapes political discourse. Centuries ago, when class was the hottest social issue in Anglo-American life, people pointedly rejected the formal “you” in favour of “thee/thou.” Today, those concerned with gender do the same with “they/them.”
Past such differences seem more comical today. In the 1950s, British style guides advised people to avoid uncouth Americanisms like “seafood” and “teenager.” Conversely, 19th Century Americans regarded the word “cucumber” as a Tory snob mutilation of the humble “cow-cumber” (the Old English was earþæppla, “earth-apple”). During the French Revolution, addressing someone as monsieur/madame, rather than citoyen/citoyenne would earn you cancellation by guillotine.
These differences are also connected to the broader linguistic concept of euphemism. Being wary of how you talk about touchy topics is a concern so old that it is embedded in every language. To use a well-loved example, English did not have a common verb for “to have sex” until the early 20th Century. There were, of course, numerous euphemisms, though a four-letter alternative to all of them has been in currency at least since 1310. And, even in our less prudish age, we are still coining new ways around saying things — my favourite, popular in British politics, is “discussing Ugandan affairs.”
Such avoidance language can say a lot about the culture from which it arises. Anyone who reads the Bible will be familiar with the traditional Jewish taboo against writing the name of YHWH (i.e., the proper name of God). Buddhism holds relatively little sway in today’s Korea, but people still politely refer not to people “dying,” but “returning.” The Albanians are particularly colourful. Rustic superstitions are so ingrained that, for example, the typical way to refer to a wolf is the phrase, “may God close its mouth.”
Interesting though all this may be, in my personal opinion, it is usually good to say what you mean. Traditional phraseology does tend to be more precise. Most people in Western countries do celebrate Christmas, so there is nothing wrong with wishing them a merry one. Unless you know they do not, in which case an alternative greeting is the more apposite one. Unfortunately, many people on either side would rather choose their words to make a point, which makes language a tool to confuse and annoy, rather than to communicate.
As I have observed in many other places and contexts, language’s best purpose is to build connections between people. So, however you choose to keep this Christmas season, I do hope it is a merry one. For the avoidance of controversy, I will really return to our language’s most ancient basics, and wish Glaed Geol Eallum!
