Outrecuidance

a vocab word that’s the downfall of many a hero. Or villain.

Don Huely’s Word of the Day is on TikTok as well as Insta. Here’s the link to this word on Insta.

Merriam/Webster lists Outrecuidance as: ‘extreme self-conceit / presumption’. Mr. Huely, above, has a definition more in the realm of hubris, or overweening pride. It’s a tiny difference, but I think that nuance is important. Maybe. Something there in the difference between ‘presumption’ in that the person presumes a lot about themselves that maybe isn’t up to the snuff they assume, and just a basic swagger. Something in there about the pretentiousness. But why the French-ish look or roots of this word? 

What Does it Meeeeean

I used to be fluent in French and so this word caught my eye because of its obvious French roots. Turns out, it’s from older French and of course therefore Latin. Here’s how I’d piece the word together:

• Outre: meaning ‘out there,’ or ‘extreme.’ So the self-aggrandizing thoughts or opinion of the self is exaggerated and extreme.

• Cuidier: This isn’t actually the word for ‘thinking’ in current French—this is an older word from an older version of the language. 

Put the two together and there you have it: exaggerated thinking. Of oneself. 

Speaking of ancient languages. Does anyone remember this meme? It was originally a video. Double rainbow. Yanno.

Variations of this attribute tend to be a sweeping staple of old drama (especially tragedy but not always, especially in Shakespeare)—I wonder why? And actually it continues to this day: think about your favorite smug asshole character in any medium you enjoy, whose demise is so very satisfying. There are many, and I notice that they take a prime place especially in action movies, and sci fi too. I think it’s because in sci fi, the jerk who suffers from outrecuidance can be more often literally supernatural, or upgraded in some way, beyond normal humanity. So they have those extra excesses.

The Harder They Fall

Why do we find it entertaining to watch arrogant men fall, or fail? Do we see something in ourselves in their failure? Or is it more of a: hey look what happens when you’re an asshole /wise shaking of the head/…

Is it usually men? It is, isn’t it. It’s not as fun to watch women fail, even arrogant ones. I discuss this a bit in one of my Problematic Badass Female Tropes: Down the Rabbit Hole. That one discusses the torture porn of women as a bait-and-switch of titillation that I would claim is a way our social hierarchy still keeps women marginalized to a certain extent. And so a woman’s spectacular downfall isn’t the same gleeful comeuppance as it is when it’s a powerful man. The men with the hubris and the outrecuidance deserve it. The women don’t tend to, even the asshole ones. I can think of only one exception, and even she is often considered with an ounce of empathy, by readers who aver that the implied punishment meted out on her is too severe for her crime. I don’t know that I agree, but you chat with me in the comments if you’d like to discuss. The character is Dolores Umbridge, from Harry Potter book 5. I won’t go further into her, just because I don’t want to give J.K. Rowling more opportunity to suck all the oxygen from the cultural room, but that character is the only woman that I can think of whose comeuppance for her outrecuidance is satisfying. Usually it’s the powerful men. Villainous, powerful men.

The torture James Bond goes through (for example, as he escapes through the ventilation booby traps in Dr. No), or the elaborate tests John McClane goes through to save the day in Die Hard, serve to show how tough and resourceful the characters are. Not so for female characters—with them, it’s all about titillation, and about keeping the female badass subservient withal. And no male action hero of this kind is ever infantilized: Born Sexy Yesterday applies to women only.

Good ol’ Hans is a queer-coded villain, too. But that’s another article. How happy are we to watch this guy who thinks he’s so much smarter than he is, fall out of that building? They gave this character a fall long enough to match the level of his outrecuidance. (Also: yes, this is a Christmas movie. Don’t make me fight you.)

Not in the face!

This concept is akin to the rules of comedic combat: if we’re meant to feel pity for the person getting slugged, then it’s not funny. The old rule of standup comedy refers to this older slapstick rule: ‘punching up’ is a moral issue in standup but it’s a basic rule of effective clowning and knowing what you’re doing when creating theatrical violence. Punching down is reprehensible; punching up is funny. This rule originally comes from slapstick, when the punching was literal. This is why the wailing blonde sidekick in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom isn’t funny: the script punches down on her, as an inferior (feminine) being. Can this be why we haven’t yet had a main Bond villain who’s a woman? The downfall after the outrecuidance just works so well on a man with too much power and too big of a head. Think about how much we’re slavering for a Trump conviction, an Elon Musk dissolving. 

The powerful getting their comeuppance, or an oppressor falling into the mud, is a satisfying end to a piece of dramatic tension. The underdog having his day is satisfying too, for the same reasons, inverse.