Why was he not seduced by Venice?

< Previous | Next >

farhad_persona

Banned
Farsi
Am I using 'seduce' correctly or should it be used in another way?

When in Italy, he was offered to visit Venice. Nevertheless he never visited the city of canals. Why was he not seduced by Venice?

I want ask that what is the reason that he was not interested in visiting Venice which is one of the most attractive cities in the world. Is this perhaps better? :

When in Italy, he was offered to visit Venice. Nevertheless he never visited the city of canals. How was he not seduced by Venice?

Or maybe:

Why didn't Venice seduce him?
 
  • MilkyBarKid

    Senior Member
    British English
    He didn't visit the city. How then could Venice exert its powerfully attractive beauty upon him? He didn't see how beautiful it was, in order to be seduced!
     

    DonnyB

    Sixties Mod
    English UK Southern Standard English
    It seems a bit odd to me to talk about not being "seduced" by something or somewhere you've never visited (and have therefore no prior experience of). Perhaps "Why was he not attracted to Venice?" would work better.

    Oh, and we don't say "was offered to... [do something]". Either "had the offer of visiting" or "was offered the chance of visiting" would work instead.
     

    farhad_persona

    Banned
    Farsi
    This is the definition of seduce from longman and also an example:

    to make someone want to do something by making it seem very attractive or interesting to them
    I was young and seduced by New York.

    Do you think the implication here is that this young person has visited New York? Or maybe he was living in another smaller city and was seduced to visit New York?

    I mean Venice is attractive and everyone knows it is attractive, because we've all seen pictures of it and we know it is one of the most touristic countries in the world.
     

    DonnyB

    Sixties Mod
    English UK Southern Standard English
    Do you think the implication here is that this young person has visited New York? Or maybe he was living in another smaller city and was seduced to visit New York?
    Without any context, it's impossible to say. But the implication I would suggest is that he was attracted by something more than just seeing pictures of the place.

    I mean Venice is attractive and everyone knows it is attractive, because we've all seen pictures of it and we know it is one of the most touristic countries in the world.
    But I don't think that makes it automatically seductive in the way that the phrasing of your original question was suggesting.
     

    farhad_persona

    Banned
    Farsi
    Without any context, it's impossible to say. But the implication I would suggest is that he was attracted by something more than just seeing pictures of the place.

    But I don't think that makes it automatically seductive in the way that the phrasing of your original question was suggesting.
    What if I say it like this?: Venice is one of the most amazing cities in the world. Why wasn't he seduced by it?

    or

    Why wasn't he seduced by one of the most amazing cities in the world?
     
    It's better to say, "Why wasn't he attracted to V?" or "Why wasn't he lured by Venice" or "Why didn't he feel the allure of Venice?" **

    If you must mention seduce/seduction, "Why didn't Venice have any seduction over him?"

    Of course A can seduce B from afar, but usually she(A) has to phone or at least write a letter or two.

    ==
    **These points partly overlap several suggestions and points already made.

    ADDED: Farhad. I agree with your example in post #4. Sometimes 'seduction' is used when the seducer, so-called, does nothing, is far away, etc. "I never felt the seduction of Marilyn Monroe." As to, "I was never seduced by MM," I find that a bit iffy in the case of no connection.
     
    Last edited:

    farhad_persona

    Banned
    Farsi
    This one sounds good:
    Why wasn't he lured by Venice.

    Although, the definition from Longman makes me think:

    to persuade someone to do something, especially something wrong or dangerous, by making it seem attractive or exciting


    Can lure be used for a city?
     

    farhad_persona

    Banned
    Farsi
    Since 'seduce' does not work here, I was wondering if 'lure' works. Does this make sense? :

    Why wasn't he lured by the most amazing city in Europe?
     

    e2efour

    Senior Member
    UK English
    Seduced seems inappropriate to me. If I read that someone was seduced by the charms of Venice, I could only imagine that they had been there in person.

    I would use attracted/drawn to Venice or tempted to visit Venice.
    I would not use lured since this is often used in a negative sense, i.e. lured by false promises.
     
    Last edited:

    PaulQ

    Senior Member
    UK
    English - England
    Am I using 'seduce' correctly or should it be used in another way?

    When in Italy, he was offered the opportunity of visiting Venice. Nevertheless he never did visit the city of canals. Why was he not seduced by Venice?
    I think that you are using it correctly and naturally. Your sentence has ellipsis, but a very natural ellipsis:

    Why was he not seduced by [the idea of [visiting/a trip to]] Venice?

    No correction needed. :thumbsup:
     

    suzi br

    Senior Member
    English / England
    Interesting but it seems he is a lone voice ..
    I am with the crowd in thinking seduced sounds wrong in this context of his never wanting to go. I would only ask "why wasn't he seduced?" with reference to someone who went but found they didn't care for it after all.
     

    farhad_persona

    Banned
    Farsi
    Interesting but it seems he is a lone voice ..
    I am with the crowd in thinking seduced sounds wrong in this context of his never wanting to go. I would only ask "why wasn't he seduced?" with reference to someone who went but found they didn't care for it after all.
    But Venice is manifestly alluring.
     

    wandle

    Senior Member
    English - British
    But Venice is manifestly alluring.
    But seducing is more than alluring.

    'Seduce' literally means 'lead away' or 'lead aside', in the sense of drawing someone from a position or a path into a new direction or place. Hence it is used both positively and negatively to express the effect exerted upon someone by love or infatuation.

    Thus it would be appropriate to say of someone who had visited the city:
    'He had never had the slightest interest in architecture or townscapes, but found himself immediately seduced by Venice'.

    Or:
    'He was completely committed to finishing the project: not even the prospect of visiting Venice could seduce him'.
     
    Last edited:

    farhad_persona

    Banned
    Farsi
    But seducing is more than alluring.

    'Seduce' literally means 'lead away' or 'lead aside', in the sense of drawing someone from a position or a path into a new direction or place. Hence it is used both positively and negatively to express the effect exerted upon someone by love or infatuation.

    Thus it would be appropriate to say of someone who had visited the city:
    'He had never had the slightest interest in architecture or townscapes, but found himself immediately seduced by Venice'.

    Or:
    'He was completely committed to finishing the project: not even the prospect of visiting Venice could seduce him'.
    How about this : How could he resist the allure of the city of canals?
     

    PaulQ

    Senior Member
    UK
    English - England
    But Venice is manifestly alluring.
    Exactly! :thumbsup:
    But seducing is more than alluring.
    It is being used correctly and figuratively - "Venice" is not going to bed him...

    Random selection from BNC: http://bnc.bl.uk/saraWeb.php?qy=seduced+by&mysubmit=Go
    A54 170 But I was seduced by the thought that I could pull it off.

    A7F 1335 ‘Also certain operators are seduced by the price of cheap oil.

    ASN 1221 Yes, he had been seduced by the city.
     
    Last edited:

    wandle

    Senior Member
    English - British
    But seducing is more than alluring.
    It is being used correctly and figuratively - "Venice" is not going to bed him...

    Random selection from BNC: http://bnc.bl.uk/saraWeb.php?qy=seduced+by&mysubmit=Go
    A54 170 But I was seduced by the thought that I could pull it off.

    A7F 1335 ‘Also certain operators are seduced by the price of cheap oil.

    ASN 1221 Yes, he had been seduced by the city.
    None of these examples conflicts with the point made in post 17. I gave an example there which said, 'he was immediately seduced by Venice'.

    There is nothing problematical in saying 'seduced by Venice', provided that that is the intended meaning, which was unfortunately not the case in the original sentence (compare post 20).
     
    Last edited:

    PaulQ

    Senior Member
    UK
    English - England
    So: the answer to Farhad's original question
    Am I using 'seduce' correctly or should it be used in another way?

    When in Italy, he was offered to visit Venice. Nevertheless he never visited the city of canals. Why was he not seduced by Venice?
    is "You are using it correctly." which is what I said.

    Yet there were a flurry of posts that seemed to say it was, in some way, incorrect, which then led him to offer an unnecessary alternative:
    Since 'seduce' does not work here, I was wondering if 'lure' works. Does this make sense? :

    Why wasn't he lured by the most amazing city in Europe?
    I cannot see how the original was wrong. And I take it you are now agreeing with me and recognise that the alternative was unnecessary and his first post was 'fine'?
     
    Last edited:

    wandle

    Senior Member
    English - British
    'Seduced by Venice' is a perfectly valid phrase, but it expresses something distinctly more than a desire to visit Venice (which is what farhad_persona wanted it to express).

    'Seduction', however figurative, implies not only a particular experience, but one which changes the individual's position or purpose.

    One can be seduced from a plan of work by the idea of going to Venice: but that is not being seduced by Venice (see example 2 in post 17).

    Being seduced by Venice involves (a) some experience of Venice and (b) some significant change in outlook resulting from that experience (see example 1 in post 17).
     
    Last edited:

    EStjarn

    Senior Member
    Spanish
    When in Italy, he was offered to visit Venice. Nevertheless he never visited the city of canals. Why was he not seduced by Venice?
    I agree with PaulQ in post #12 with the proviso that the suggested implicit part should be made explicit, i.e. the idea of visiting Venice. In context, to avoid repetition, that amounts to: Why was he not seduced by the idea?
     

    suzi br

    Senior Member
    English / England
    I agree with PaulQ in post #12 with the proviso that the suggested implicit part should be made explicit, i.e. the idea of visiting Venice. In context, to avoid repetition, that amounts to: Why was he not seduced by the idea?
    Which would be something different, surely? Thus NOT agreeing with Paul who thinks it is fine as it is.

    If I was the OP I would want to find some other way of expressing this idea to avoid a word which provokes such disagreement amongst native speakers!

    Edit to say... I am reminded Paul's idea in #12 is that what "didn't seduce him" was THE IDEA of going to Venice. Which would be a perfectly sensible way of saying it if those actual words were in there.

    I still don't think that the ellipsis notion works. Who's to say what words are supposedly missed out of things once you start saying it's ellipsis?

    Clarity beats ellipsis in my own style manual.
     
    Last edited:
    I'm not sure "seduced by the idea" is a happy solution to the OP's problem. A number of examples, above, show that in some contexts at least, a thing can 'seduce' someone from afar, without direct contact or signals or messages. (In other words, IF 'seduce' works, invoking an idea in the seducee is not necessary.) Getting into the intermediary mental representations does not really help.
     

    wandle

    Senior Member
    English - British
    There are two main issues here: what does farhad_persona wish to express? and what is a natural way to use the word 'seduce' in a context of the kind suggested? Taking these in the order of the original post:
    Am I using 'seduce' correctly or should it be used in another way?

    When in Italy, he was offered to visit Venice. Nevertheless he never visited the city of canals. Why was he not seduced by Venice?
    Unfortunately, that is not idiomatic. A natural way to use the word 'seduce' would be:

    When in Italy, he had an invitation to visit Venice. He saw St. Mark's and other great buildings, went round the canals and the streets, but it all left him cold: he never expressed the slightest enthusiasm for the city of canals. Why was he not seduced by Venice?
    I want [to] ask [that] what is the reason that he was not interested in visiting Venice which is one of the most attractive cities in the world.
    This is about being interested, or not, in visiting a place. A natural way to express it would be:

    When in Italy, he had the opportunity to visit Venice, yet never went there. Why was he not attracted to the city of canals?
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top