Showing posts with label Donald Trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Donald Trump. Show all posts

Saturday, August 1, 2026

Erklärungsnot

Erklärungsnot (pronounced air-klair-oongs-noht)

Difficulty in explaining oneself; being at a loss for an explanation when one is in an awkward position, especially if one of one’s own making.

1980s: The construct was Erklärung (explanation, declaration, account) + not (distress, need, predicament, difficulty), thus literally “explanation distress”, best translated as “difficulty in explaining oneself” or “being at a loss for an explanation” but more graphically so as “explanation poverty”.  The construct of the verb erklären (to explain, to declare) was er- (a productive German verbal prefix (often indicating bringing something to completion or making something explicit)) + klären – (to clarify, to make clear).  Klären was from klar (clear), ultimately from the Latin clārus (clear, bright, famous); it was cognate with the English clear (gained via French influence from the same Latin root) and declare (from the Latin declarare).  Not (need, hardship, distress, emergency) was an old Germanic word that was cognate with the Old English nēad (necessity, compulsion), the English need, the Dutch nood and the Swedish nöd.  It was seen in many German compounds, two of late appearing increasingly in German news reports being Wohnungsnot (housing shortage) and Geldnot (financial distress).  The most common use in German appears to be in the phrase Erklärungsnot geraten (to get into Erklärungsnot), the charm of which is it can be as a lament (if of oneself) or said gleefully (in an act of schadenfreude) if of others.  Erklärungsnot is a noun; the noun plural is Erklärungsnöte.

The standard plural is Erklärungsnöte and not Erklärungsnots but if ever the word is assimilated and if the usual practice followed (English conventions used in plural formations) erklärungsnots will become an “alternative plural”.  As a general principle, German nouns ending in “-not” generally form their plural by taking an umlaut (a diacritical mark (¨) placed over a vowel (specifically in German “ä”, “ö” & “ü”) to indicate a shifted or fronted sound) and an “-e”; while appending an “-s” is one of the regular patterns in German plural formation, it’s used mostly for foreign loanwords, abbreviations or acronyms, most surnames and certain nouns ending in vowels.  When used in English, the formal rules can be “bent” and even if one is referring to several Erklärungsnöte, the singular Erklärungsnot will “do the job”.  For English-speakers, the pronunciation of Erklärungsnot is not intuitive is best written as air-klair-oongs-noht with stresses on the second (klair) and the final syllables (noht).  German language guides break it down as: (1) air (short and sharp), klair with the German “ä” spoken “ai” as in “hair”, (3) oongs assimilating the “r” in “hair” and thus pronounced like “roongs” (lightly rolling the “r” or dropping it slightly into an “ng” and (4) noht rhymes with “boat”.

Much fun is made of long German compound nouns, the classic example the 42-letter Donaudampfschiffahrtsgesellschaftskapitän (Danube steamship company captain) although linguistically adventurous Germans fashioned constructions as long as 80 letters that authorities rejected that as phoney, ruling the 63-letter Rindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz (beef labelling regulation and delegation of supervision law) the languages longest “real” word although use was rare, most preferring the more manageable abbreviation ReÜAÜG but it was rendered obsolete by changes to EU regulations meaning the 36-letter Kraftfahrzeughaftpflichtversicherung (automobile liability insurance) gained the prized distinction.  More digestible forms have been embraced by English-speakers because they say in a few syllables what otherwise would demand a phrase or even a sentence, common examples including zeitgeist (spirit of the age) and schadenfreude (the feeling of joy or pleasure when something bad happens to another person, ideally an acquaintance).  Others offer little phonetic economy such as scheisskopf (shithead) but it’s used because it (1) is a “fun” word” and (2) is semi-euphemistic in that it avoids explicit use of the vulgar “shit”.  By convention, when German nouns are absorbed into English as “loan words” (subtlety different from being assimilated as with “etcetera”), they’re not spelled with an initial capital as in the German.  Erklärungsnot always is used with an initial capital because it remains a non-assimilated “foreign word”, a quality vesting it with an additional quality.  By convention, (ie this is not an absolute rule), in text, loan and assimilated words are not printed in italics, unlike most foreign forms.

Case study in Erklärungsnot: Chelsea Clinton (b 1980; FDOTUS 1993-2001)) & Bill Clinton (b 1946; POTUS 1993-2001) watching crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) on stage with Donald Trump (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) second presidential debate, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, 9 October, 2016.  Mr Clinton was a serial offender or, as he may have put it, a serial victim”. 

For students of political mendacity & obfuscation (a well-documented field), examples of course abound and, to succeed in the business, the art of “handling Erklärungsnöte” must be mastered to the point it’s a politician’s stock-in-trade.  Of course, a politician might (at least briefly) succeed by being truthful but it seems doubtful that’s ever been tried so empirical data is lacking.  While the behavioural phenomenon of Erklärungsnot would have pre-dated the Stone Age, the word, although constructed with old elements, is not ancient, the first use thought to be by journalists during the early 1990s (ie shortly after German re-unification although perhaps no significance should be attached to that, German politicians having long before often been “at a loss to explain something”).  Quickly it became a staple of German political commentary and from there spread to wider use, it’s popularity artificially exaggerated in the statistics because the internet encouraged a proliferation of lists of rare words or those thought fun, interesting, weird and such.  In English, it has never caught on to the same extent as the loan words zeitgeist, schadenfreude or scheisskopf, probably because the pronunciation is “challenging”.  So, with no one-word equivalent in English, speakers of that language stuck with phrases like “I’m not absolutely certain (ie “don’t know”) or “it's hard to explain” (ie “if I tell the truth it will be bad for me”), neither of which so elegantly capture the moment.

It can’t with statistical certainty be said politicians more than most suffer Erklärungsnot but generally that perception exists because so many instances of them falling victim are recorded and in some form broadcast (most of us enduring the pain before a smaller audience, often WAGs (wives & girlfriends)).  Some politicians have of course so honed their techniques of avoidance or obfuscation that viewers, long since mentally bludgeoned into an acquiescent insensibility, have “tuned-out” to the extent even lies slur effortlessly into the waffle.  Markers of a politician being in a state of Erklärungsnot include (1) being asked a question and responding with something like “I think it's incredibly important...” before going on to talk about something else, (2) frequent use of the word “obviously” (whether or not things seem “obvious”), (3) rambling off-topic for a while and then saying “what was the question?” and (4) blaming the media.

Barnaby Joyce interviewed by Sarah Ferguson (b 1965) on the ABC’s (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) 7:30 Report, July 2026.

One who tried a tactic more novel than the usual clichéd subtleties of evasion was Barnaby Joyce (b 1967; thrice (between local difficulties) deputy prime minister of Australia 2016-2022), a man who more than most has come to be confronted with questions he’d rather not answer.  In many cases, he’d be better off displaying his Erklärungsnot (usually otherwise a kiss of political death) than trying to answer because in his latter-day position, being “lost for words” would be better than “trying to come up with something” or (the Lord forbid), “tell the truth” but his commendable tactic was to turn away from his interviewer and “shout at the dog”.  While performative, theatrically, it was great television and while the interviewer doggedly pursued her line, the clever diversion did give Mr Joyce a few moments to “come up with something” and ensured national coverage would be all about “Barnaby’s dog”.  Nobody will remember the questions or the issues raised and, as was the case when he was filmed one midnight, lying drunk beside a planter box in a Canberra street while having an expletive-laden conversation with his (second) wife, the public’s reaction generally was positive.  That's because shouting at their dog or being seen sprawled drunk in the street makes a politician (in the parlance) authentic, a valued commodity in an age when so much is (or is assumed to be) fake”.  It is of course not impossible there really was a misbehaving dog requiring Mr Joyce shout at it (animal behavior experts were quick to comment on whether that's a good idea) and it may be the convenient interruptions to the interview were not just a politician's trick to gain time.  Those of a generous spirit can extend him the benefit of the doubt.    

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.  Ms Lohan named her first dog Gucci” after he chewed-up her new pair of Gucci boots but never commented on whether that was crisis enough for her to shout at the playful puppy.  Barnaby would have shouted.

Erklärungsnot has for generations been well-known to school students asked by the teacher why their homework wasn’t handed in for marking.  The classic “the dog ate my homework” might at the time, briefly, seem a good “work-around” for one’s instant, sinking feeling of Erklärungsnot but telling the truth probably is preferable.  Adults of course (usually) get better at the techniques, the most prevalent one in politics being “plausible deniability” but that can work (at least in the short term) only if the “plausibility” really is to one’s interlocutor(s) truly “plausible”.  Case studies include the lives and times of Boris Johnson (b 1964; UK prime-minister 2019-2022) and Bill Clinton (b 1946; POTUS 1993-2001), two gifted but flawed characters who, when in the depths of an Erklärungsnot, were inclined to “keep digging”.  This illustrious brace illustrate the word Erklärungsnot is at its most potent when applied to someone embarrassed by circumstances of their own making.  It has been used more generally (such as in cases where someone is the victim of unfortunate events) but that's a different flavor of pathos.

Wednesday, July 29, 2026

Agastopia

Agastopia (pronounced agg-uh-stow-pee-ah)

Deriving visual enjoyment from the appearance of a specific body part or parts (some suggesting the attraction must be fetishistic to cross the threshold from admiration to syndrome).

2011: A coining of etymologists Peter Novobatzky & Ammon Shea who included it in their 1999 book Depraved English (sub-titled: "The most disgusting and hilarious word book ever", a title debatably hyperbolic but that adequately captured the intention).  While not exhaustive, there was an entry for maschalephidrosis (runaway armpit perspiration), the construct being the Ancient Greek μασχάλη (maskhálē) (armpit) + hidrosis, from the New Latin hidrōsis, from the Ancient Greek ἱδρώς (hidrṓs) (sweat) + -sis (the suffix in medicine used to form nouns of condition) so there were certainly highlights.  The construct of agastopia was the Ancient Greek γα- (aga(s)-) (very) + -topia (a back-formation extracted from utopia (and other words) ultimately deriving from the Ancient Greek τόπος (tópos) (place).  Utopia was from the New Latin Ūtopia, the name of a fictional island possessing a seemingly perfect socio-politico-legal system in the 1516 book Utopia by Sir Thomas More (1478–1535).  The construct was the Ancient Greek ο (ou) (not) + τόπος (tópos) (place, region) + -ία (-ía) (the New Latin suffix, from the Latin -ia and the Ancient Greek -ία (-ía) & -εια (-eia) which formed abstract nouns of feminine gender.  More’s irony in calling a world in which everything and everyone works in perfect harmony being best translated as “not a real place” is often lost in modern use and the word probably has genuinely undergone a meaning-shift.  Agastopic is a noun & adjective, agastopia is a noun and agastopically is an adverb; the noun plural is agastopias.

Agastopic: Studies of the soles of Lindsay Lohan's feet in three aspects.

Although in non-clinical use there had not previously been a generic descriptor of part-focused voyeuristic fetishism, there’s no suggestion Novobatzky & Shea thought their coining a "serious" contribution to the taxonomy of mental health but some commentators have adopted it, fleshing out the definitional range.  It’s been suggested the condition manifests as (1) a love or admiration of one’s own body part, compelling either a fondness of performing a particular task with it or a preference to cover and shield it with a protective layer or (2) the more familiar admiration of another’s body part(s).  Some sources, without citation, note it’s “…believed to be a rare condition” and (presumably tongue in cheek), one for which there’s “… no cure.  Despite these helpful nudges, when the fifth edition of the APA's (American Psychiatric Association) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders was published in 2013 (DSM-5), there was no specific mention of agastopia and this was maintained when the revised version (DSM-5-TR) was released in 2022.  Still, for clinicians who find it convenient quasi-medical jargon, presumably a patient found to be "fond of certain body part" without "fetishising" it (or them) would be found to be "agastopish"; fetishes also intrinsically spectrum conditions, the comparative would be "more agastopic" and the superlative "most agastopic".

In an agastopic moment: The artist moved to despair at the grandeur of antique fragments (circa 1778), drawing in red chalk with brown wash by Henry Fuseli (Johann Heinrich Füssli (1741–1825)).

The notion agastopia is “believed to be a rare condition” might be based on some obscure statistics but certainly is a reflection on (1) the profession no longer regarding (most) such things as diagnosable conditions unless certain criteria are fulfilled and (2) the general consensus most instances of agastopia (being untroubling) are never reported to a clinician.  In other words, "believed to be a rare condition" probably is better expressed a "known to be a rarely reported condition".  Impressionistically, the likely real-world experience is that the prevalence of agastopia in a subset of the population doesn't justify funding the research and agastopia should not wholly be conflated with the various fetishistic interests now listed in the DSM as "particularisms" although overlap obviously must exist.  Nor is agastopia something exclusively either a male preserve or sexually focused, some women known to enjoy (in both senses) an agostopic relationship with their hair or fingernails.  In the days when two of the most significant vectors for the distribution of pornography were magazines (that although with glossy covers should not be confused with "the glossies") and various digital media (tapes and optical discs), both forms provided content devoted to or thematically inclinded towards one body part or another, something carried over to the internet when websites became the default mode.  Among the pornography aggregation sites, it’s not unusual for body parts or attributes (and not just the old "usual suspects") to be listed as categories for consumers with a particular agastopic or fetishistic focus.

Highly qualified content provider Busty Buffy (b 1996, seen here plantar flexing), whose feet seem never to command the attention they deserve.

So, thus compartmentalized, agastopia is a thing existing at a commercially critical mass.  ‘Twas perhaps ever thus but what has in recent decades changed is the attitude of the mental health community.  Before the release of DSM-III-R (1987), fetishism tended to be described as a persistent preferential sexual arousal in association with non-living objects or an over-inclusive focus on (typically non-sexualized) body parts (most famously, feet) and body secretions.  With the DSM-III-R, the concept of partialism (an exclusive focus on part of the body) was separated from the historic category of fetishism and appended to the “Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified” category.  Although one of the dustier corners of psychiatry, the field had always fascinated some and in the years since the DSM-III-R was published, a literature did emerge, most critics maintaining partialism and fetishism are related, can be co-associated, and are non-exclusive domains of sexual behavior.  There was a technical basis for this position because introduced in the DSM-IV (1994) was a (since further elaborated) codification of the secondary clinical significance criterion for designating a psychiatric disorder, one of the implications of which was it appeared to suggest a diagnostic distinction between partialism and fetishism was no longer clinically meaningful or necessary.  The recommendation was the prime diagnostic criterion for fetishism be modified to reflect the reintegration of partialism and that a fetishistic focus on non-sexual body parts be a specifier of fetishism.

Fetish was from the the French fétiche, from the Portuguese feitico, from facere (to make) which begat factitious (created; artificial).  A fetish in this context was defined as "a thing irrationally revered; an object in which power or force was concentrated".  In English, use of "fetish" to indicate an object of desire in the sense of “someone who is aroused due to a body part, or an object belonging to a person who is the object of desire” dates from 1897 (although the condition is mentioned in thirteenth century medical documents) and it was in the late nineteenth century the lexicon of modern psychiatry began to be assembled.  However, in the literary record, surviving from the seventh century AD are dozens of brooding, obsessive love letters from the second century AD of uncertain authorship and addressed to both male and female youths.  That there are those in whom an object or body part has the power to captivate and enthral presumably has from the start been part of the human condition.

Poster for Der Blaue Engel (The Blue Angel, (1930).  Marlene Dietrich (1901-1992) understood (and exploited) herself as a “fetishized object” but her construct was as knowingly artificial as was Blue Angel of most of Weimar Berlin.

One obvious linguistic virtue of “agastopia” is it can be used as an alternative to “fetishism”, the latter a word with the power to mislead or distort meaning because of the associations vested by popular use although some estimable writers have found “fetish” indispensable while maintaining clarity.  In The Dark Valley: A Panorama of the 1930s (2000), a study of the politics on that troubled decade in Europe and the US, English historian Piers Brendon (b 1940) used “fetish” in the way most familiar when writing of a certain aspect of Berlin during the last days of the Weimar Republic (1918-1933): “Sleazy clubs offered anything from cocaine to fetishism and perversions abounded: one coven of coprophagists gorged a prostitute on chocolate, gave her a laxative and settled down to a feast.  There were so many homosexual bars, transvestite dance halls and nude cabarets that an enterprising publisher issued a ‘Guide to Vicious Berlin’.  Outside the palace at the bottom of Unter den Linden [literally “under the linden trees", a boulevard in the central Mitte district running between the Brandenburg Gate and the Berlin Palace, the name gained from the linden (non citrus lime) trees lining the thoroughfare] were two stone lions, one of which was said to roar whenever a virgin walked by.  If some of what was in the Christopher Isherwood’s (1904–1986) Goodbye to Berlin (1939) was an indication, the lion would not often have had to stir but literature can be highly selective, lives of most of the burghers in Weimar-era Berlin likely as stolid and respectable as stereotypes of Germans suggest.  While Isherwood and Marlene Dietrich painted captivating pictures of a decadent city, generally life was more prosaic.

Brendon however also applied “fetish” to attitudes expressed toward objects, institutions and concepts decidedly non-sexualized including “the Maginot Line” (a French border fortification that proved illusory), “rural conservation”, “the League of Nations” (1920-1945) and “liberalism”.  Of the last, perhaps gleefully, he documented L’Osservatore Romano’s (the daily newspaper of Vatican City) lauding of Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & Prime-Minister of Italy 1922-1943) as a man of the same mind as Pius XI (1857–1939; pope 1922-1939) and a “man whom Providence has sent Us (sic)... [who did not believe in the] “villainous fetishes of liberalism. The Holy See’s mouthpiece concluded by saying it was “…thanks to the Duce” that “Italy has been given back to God and God to Italy.  The extent of God’s gratitude can of course only be guessed but as the fate of Italian fascism (with the fall of Mussolini in 1943 it “burst like a bubble” in the unguarded phrase of German Generaloberst (Colonel General) Alfred Jodl (1890–1946, chief of the OKW operations staff 1939-1945)) suggested, the movement never became in Italy quite the fetish the Duce had hoped.

Of Foot Particularism: The DSM-5 Criteria

Criterion 1: Over a six month period, the individual has experienced sexual urges focused on a non-genital body part, or inanimate object, or other stimulus, and has acted out urges, fantasies, or behaviors.

Criterion 2: The fantasies, urges, or behaviors cause distress, or impairment in functioning.

Criterion 3: The fetishistic object is not an article of clothing employed in cross dressing, or a sexual stimulation device, such as a vibrator.

Specifiers for the diagnosis include the type of stimulus which is the focus of attention (1) the non-genital or erogenous areas of the body (such as feet) and this condition is known also as Partialism (a preoccupation with a part of the body rather than the whole person), (2) Non-living object(s) (such as shoes), (3) specific activities (such as smoking during sex).

WikiFeet is a wiki which curates users’ submissions of women's feet with a predictable emphasis on celebrities. The Lindsay Lohan page contains 3639 images with the WikiFeet community rating her feet at 4.7 stars (out of 5) and that means she's in the category: "beautiful feet".  The site includes sections for “feet of the day” and “feet of the week” although the criteria for "making the cut" for these honors are not disclosed.  An illustrative sample from WikiFeet's rating table includes:

Billie Eilish, 97 images, rated 4.1 (nice feet)

Anna Kournikova, 362 images, rated 5.0 (beautiful feet)

Selena Gomez, 1963 images, rated 4.7, (beautiful feet)

Nicki Minaj, 1135 images, rated 3.4 (OK feet)

Mila Kunis, 1131 images, rated 4.6, (beautiful feet)

Janelle Monáe, 486 images, rated 5.0 (beautiful feet)

Nancy Pelosi, 14 images, rated 2.9 (OK feet)

Rihanna, 5663 images, rated 5.0 (beautiful feet)

Emily Ratajkowski, 2571 images, rated 5.0 (beautiful feet)

Paris Hilton, 997 images, rated 3.2 (OK feet)

Emma Watson, 1047 images, rated 5.0 (beautiful feet)

Megan Fox, 1866 images, rated 4.1 (nice feet)

Emma Raducanu 80 images, rated 4.6 (beautiful feet)

Charli XCX, 960 images, rated 5.0 (beautiful feet)

Crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013, left) and Donald Trump (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025, right).

Crooked Hillary Clinton’s feet must convey something of her crooked crookedness because Wikifeet's connoisseurs rate them only at 2.5 stars (OK feet) but politics in the US being so polarized, there may be an element of strategic voting involved and the sample size is anyway small, crooked Hillary's page having only 24 images.  Following in the footsteps of the original, there exists a companion WikiFeet page for men’s feet although, predictably, it’s a mere shadow of the feminine version and that must be emblematic of many things in sociology, sexual politics and fetishism.  On the male site there is a solitary entry on Donald Trump’s page and while it’s not the only known photograph of his bare feet, it is the one with the best angle; with only a single image on which to base an assessment, the rating of 1.3 stars (bad feet) may reflect political bias rather than objective judgment.  That may also have influenced voting on the 32 images on Kamala Harris’s (b 1964; VPOTUS 2021-2025) page though the fact she rated a solid 4.0 (nice feet) clearly wasn’t enough to help her win the 2024 presidential election, feet clearly just not an issue.

Shine envy: Field Marshal el-Sisi (left) and President Trump (right), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, May 2017.  Military men usually have shiny shoes, the more senior ranks allocated a batman to do the polishing and some branding of consumer shoe polishes reflect (get it?) the tradition, "Parade Gloss", "Military Tan" and "Rollcall Black" all having been sold "in the tin".

There was nothing in the recent testimony of Stormy Daniels (stage name of Stephanie Gregory, b 1979) to suggest Donald Trump has a particular thing for feet but he certainly notices shoes.  When meeting Field Marshal Fattah el-Sisi (b 1954; president of Egypt since 2014) in Riyadh, Mr Trump couldn’t help but be impressed how much shinier were the field marshal’s shoes, his seemingly close to identical pumps dull by comparison.  As they left the room, Mr Trump remarked to him: “Love your shoes.  Boy, those shoes. Man …” but knew he’d lost face and doubtless the White House shoe-shine operative loudly was told: "You're fired!"  The Democratic Party seems never to have drawn attention to Joe Biden's (b 1942; VPOTUS 2009-2017 and POTUS 2021-2025) shoes, presumably because they feared Fox News might have demanded proof he could still tie his own laces.

Noting the definitional model in the DSM-IV-TR (2000), despite the history in psychiatry’s world of paraphilias and a notable presence in popular culture, there were those who claimed the very notion of a foot fetish was false because of that critical phrase “non-living” that would seem to disqualify a foot (unless of course it was no longer attached to a living being) but such an interest would be seriously weird (the "lucky" rabbit foot from another tradition) and a more disturbing condition; although in this context there are deconstructionists who would make a distinction between a depiction of a live foot and the foot itself, clinicians probably regard them as interchangeable tools of the fetishist although the techniques of consumption would vary.  It's a nuanced aspect of "body parts as this and that" because some are, in many religious traditions, venerated as holy relics or icons.  The critics noted many fetishes are extensions of the human body, such as articles of clothing or footwear, but that did not extend to feet and that diagnostically, a sexual fascination with feet did correctly belong in the category of “Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified,” and thus should be regarded as a partialism: Foot partialism.  While there are those who greatly admire elegant creations such as a stiletto heeled slingback, the interest in these as pieces of design is separate from those who focus on their "associative connections": Thigh-length, laced leather boots with a five inch (125 mm) heel are likely to be "enjoyed" not as stand-alone objects but because of the thighs, calves, ankles and feet of those stereotypically assumed most often to pull them on (and, of course, take them off). 

OnlyFans, a place for agastopics.

A genuine phenomenon, OF (OnlyFans) is a niche player in the gig economy but the niche is big and if not quite the oldest in the world, it's been around a while.  Something of an early-adopter of techniques embracing the implications of AI (artificial intelligence), while "feet" is just one of many genres serviced, OF is able to engage in "category proliferation" at little more than marginal cost because the site works on a "bolt-on" principle.  The business model works because the platform's content exclusively is user-generated with revenue streams provided by PPV (pay-per-view) customers and monthly subscriptions with creators collecting the bulk of the payments, OF essentially "clipping the ticket" on the way through their gateway.  OF was one of the "plague winners" in the disruptions wrought by the lockdowns imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic but the earnings profile of the content creators is a highly exaggerated curve, a relative handful finding it most lucrative while for most it's at best a hobby or side-hustle; for OF that's OK, they still clip the ticket.  Although best known for creators posting sexually explicit content, in 2021 (in response to political pressure) it was announced things would be "sanitized" with NSFW (not suitable for work) material purged site-wide.  Such was the outcry from creators & customers the plan survived not even a week, cynical analysts concluding the original announcement had been made to provoke the revolt, OF's management well-aware nothing quietens tiresome politicians as quickly as mass public discontent.  The OF content creators are an imaginative lot and some are said to make "feet" NSFW so those wanting a purely (in the sense of "knee & lower only") anatomical experience are recommended to search with caution.

Foot Finder

When OF attained critical mass it encouraged the growth of an ecosystem of sites acting as "third party intermediaries" servicing those who for whatever reason preferred their transactions to be handled with a guarantee of anonymity (if curated with care, one’s own feet on an OF page should be similarly anonymous).  Content providers are known as “sole traders” while in the jargon the third party operators run parasitic sites which may sound harsh but that does mirror the analogous use in biology.  Amusingly, although the internet doomed many other platforms with business models dependent on revenue from advertisers (notably the print media, in the West, many magazines and all but a handful of newspapers driven extinct or taking "an unconscionable time a-dying"), FootFinder (above, left) clearly sees value still in physical, three-dimensional mobile advertising and a large fibreglass foot (above, right) atop a Kei car (diminutive, small displacement Japanese vehicles sold mostly in the JDM (Japanese Domestic Market) certainly must draw the eye.  As long ago as the 1950s, there were those predicting there would one day be a world-wide system (at least one encompassing the Western world) of real-time interconnectivity (ie the concept of the internet) but most seemed to envisage it as people having portals (with acid-green screens) through which to look-up stuff in databases or receive text-based content such as news reports or educational instruction.  In short, a world of "few uploaders and many downloaders".  It's doubtful many imagined "mass-upload" models such as YouTube and definitely not OF; while many would have assumed users would become interactive, Foot Finder would not have occurred to many as a template.  How, 50 years from now we'll all (or at least some of use) be indulging our agastopia(s) may be just as unpredictable.

The feet of Ana de Armas, OnlyFans "Feet of the Year, 2023", plantar flexing.

It need not be an expensive hobby, provided one focuses on one's favorite feet.  English singer Lily Allen (b 1985) has an OF page (Lily Allen FTSE500) for her (US size 6) feet and subscriptions are offered at US$10 per month, her hook on an Instragram post titled “La dolce feeta” including a snap of her toes next to Rome’s Fontana di Trevi (Trevi Fountain) in which Anita Ekberg's (1931-2005) feet splashed, all those years ago.  While to those not part of the fetish it can be hard to tell one foot from another, the cognoscenti have eyes as well-trained as a sommelier's palate; in 2023 OF's "Feet of the Year" title was awarded to Cuban-born Spanish actress Ana de Armas (b 1988).  It was Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) who admitted, lawfulness aside, as animals, the only truly aberrant sexual behavior in humans could be said to be its absence (something the modern asexual movement re-defines rather than disproves).  It seemed to be in that spirit the DSM-5 was revised to treat agastopia and many other “harmless” behaviors as “normal” and thus within the purview of the manual only to the extent of being described, clinical intervention no longer required.  Whether all psychiatrists agree with the new permissiveness isn’t known but early reports suggest there’s nothing in the DSM-5-TR (2022) to suggest agastopics will soon again be labeled as deviants.

The washing of feet

Not everything foot-centric is agastopic.  In the New Testament there are three texts describing Christ washing feet, the best known of which is John 13:1-17 (Jesus Washing the Disciples' Feet).  The ritual is explained usually as Jesus demonstrating his humility and mission to serve mankind but it's clear he wished also to set a good example to the not infrequently fractious dozen:

"So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you? Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you."  John 13:12-15 (King James Version; KJV, 1611)

Pope Francis kisses the foot of a female inmate of Rome's Rebibbia prison, 28 March 2024: Symbolic or a "performative photo-opportunity" depending on one's view. 

One of the set-piece motifs of Christianity, the foot-washing ritual takes place on Holy Thursday (the Thursday before Easter) and seeks to imitate Christ’s washing of the Disciples’ feet the night before he was crucified at Golgotha.  It was on that evening he said to his Disciples: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.” (John 13:21).  The sight of a pope washing feet is familiar but when Francis (1936-2025; pope 2013-2025) performed the ritual at Rome’s Rebibbia prison on Holy Thursday 2024, it was apparently the first time in the institution’s two-thousand year odd existence a pontiff has washed the feet only of women.  Historians concede records from earlier centuries obviously are incomplete but so remarkable was the event deemed, most seemed to conclude a precedent had been set.  In the past Francis had washed the feet of women, Muslims, refugees and other minorities but never women exclusively.  He certainly cast a wider net than his more conservative predecessor, Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) who sponged the feet only of men and, in the final years of his pontificate, only those of ordained priests.  It’s believed feet proffered to popes, scrupulously are pre-sanitized.

Saturday, July 11, 2026

Estate

Estate (pronounced ih-steyt)

(1) A piece of landed property, especially one of large extent with an elaborate house on it.

(2) By extension, in computing, an institution’s collective ICT (information & communications technology) resources.

(3) In law, property or possessions.

(4) In law, the legal position or status of an owner, considered with respect to property owned in land or other things (the degree or quantity of interest that a person has in land with respect to the nature of the right, its duration, or its relation to the rights of others; interest, ownership, or property in land or other things.

(5) In law, the property of a deceased person, a bankrupt etc, viewed as an aggregate.

(6) In UK use, a housing development (sometimes a class-based slur (Council estate (ie directed at those living in social housing)).

(7) As “industrial estate”, land areas designated exclusively for industrial or commercial purposes.

(8) In automotive use, as “estate car” (often clipped to “estate”), an alternative term for a station wagon.

(9) A period or condition of life (archaic).

(10) Within society, one of the major political or social group or classes, historically: (1) the clergy, (2) the nobles, and (3) everybody else; they were style respectively as first, second & third estates with a fourth (the press) later added.  Subsequent additions are not universally acknowledged.

(11) Condition or circumstances with reference to worldly prosperity, estimation, etc.; social status or rank.

(12) The owner of an estate (obsolete).

(13) Pomp or state (obsolete).

(14) High social status or rank (obsolete).

(15) To give an estate to (obsolete).

(16) To bestow upon (obsolete).

1175–1225: From the Middle English estat, from Anglo-Norman estat and Old French estat (state, position, condition, health, status, legal estate), from the Latin status (state or condition, position, place; social position of the aristocracy), from the primitive Indo-European PIE root sta- (to stand, make or be firm).  It was cognate with the Provençal estat and for some time in Anglo-French there was the spelling astat; the form endures in modern French as état.  The native word in the Middle English was ethel (ancestral land or estate, patrimony), from the Old English æðel.  Estate is a noun, verb & adjective, estateman is a noun, estating is a verb and estated is an adjective; the noun plural is estates.

The idea of an estate being the collective property and liabilities of someone (usually of the deceased, bankrupts or debtors) dates from the 1820s and as well as being part of legal jargon (in probate or bankruptcy proceedings), it became a commercial term (“estate sale”, “estate jewellery” etc).  That ultimately was derived from the thirteen century sense when it was used generally of one’s “state, condition or rank in society”.  Presumably because of late fourteenth century use of “estate” to mean “real property” (ie land), in the early 1500s the meaning in this context between then and seventeenth century extended (socially upwards) to imply “a person of estate” (ie the rich, nobility, gentry etc); that was an example of “linguistic association” and the various uses ran in parallel with the technical use in law.  As early as the fourteenth century, there was the idea of “Estates of the Realm”, each a major social class or order of persons regarded collectively as part of the body politic of the country and possessing distinct (and very different) political rights.  At the time the “major” in that phrase referred either to wealth and power (the clergy or nobility) or sheer numbers (everybody else).  By the eighteenth century, the use of “estate” to refer to “the general body politic; the common-wealth” had faded and had been replaced by “the state” and later, “the nation”.

The Third Estate dealing with the First & Second: Execution of Marie Antoinette (1755–1793; Queen Consort of France 1774-1792), 16 October, 1793 by an unknown artist.

In the English-speaking world, the classic example of the three “political estates” was the English model of the Lords Spiritual (bishops), Lords Temporal (hereditary peers) and Commons.  There were though variations on the theme.  The ancient Parliament of Scotland comprised the king and three estates: (1) archbishops, bishops, abbots & mired priors, (2) the barons and commissioners of shires and stewartries (the lands under the jurisdiction of a steward (a magistrate appointed by the crown to exercise jurisdiction over royal lands)) and (3) the commissioners from the royal burghs.  In France the three estates were (1) the nobles, (2) the clergy and (3) the plebs; collectively, these were known as the États Généraux (pronounced ay-tah zhay-nay-roh).  Before Louis XVI (1754–1793; King of France 1774-1792) on 5 May, 1789, summoned the assembly, the États Généraux hadn’t met for 175 years, that meeting in 1614 convened during the minority reign of Louis XIII (1601–1643; King of France 1610-1643).  The 1614 assembly ended in deadlock and that meant no legislative measures ensued (suiting the kings and most of the nobility), thus cementing absolutism as the nature of the French state; operating as absolute monarchs, kings had no interest in sharing power and it was only as a last resort in 1789 with the ancien regime facing a catastrophic financial crisis and structural gridlock that Louis XVI fell compelled to convene the assembly.  By then, it was too little, too late and before long, the guillotine began its bloody business.

Danse Macabre of Basel (circa 1450), a memento mori painting by an unknown artist, Historisches Museum Basel (Basel Historical Museum), Barfüsserkirche, Basel, Switzerland.

The Danse Macabre (Dance of Death) was an artistic genre of allegory dating from the late Middle Ages; exploring the universality of death, it made clear that however high or low exulted one’s station in life, the death ultimately will visit all.  It was a popular artistic motif in European folklore and the most elaborated of all Medieval macabre art.  During the fourteenth century, Europe was beset by deathly horrors, recurring famines, the Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453) and, looming over all, the Black Death, an outbreak of bubonic plague which between 1346-1353 may have killed as many as 50 million, making it one of history's most lethal pandemics.  In reducing the population of Europe by between a third and a half, its demographic, political and economic implications were felt for centuries.  The artists often included some subtle comment about the way something like plague could take victims regardless of their wealth or social standing.  In the modern era, the principle remains, one just as dead whether one is struck by a meteorite, drinks oneself to death or is murdered by the Freemasons.

In the UK, while the composition has much changed, structurally the estates still exists as the (1) the Lords Spiritual (26 Church of England bishops with ex officio seats in the House of Lords, (2) the Lords Temporal (hereditary and life peers, a subset of each sitting in the House of Lords) and (3) the Commons (elected representatives sitting in the House of Commons).  Those examples are however only formalized examples of the ancient (and almost certainly universal) graduation of societies into hierarchical layers.  While the criteria used to establish the layers could between cultures vary, as far as is known, no society with any form of organization has ever not operated on some sort of stratified basis, something not surprising given that’s the inherent (and natural) arrangements of families, human or animal.  Indeed, so pervasive was the idea of “degree” that in the highly stratified Europe of the late Middle Ages, it extended even to the rank-order of birds in the sport of falconry: falcons exclusively were for royalty, peregrines for noblemen, merlins for noblewomen, goshawks for yeomen, sparrowhawks for priests and kestrels for knaves or servants.  Whether in the royal court, the Church, the orders of chivalry or whatever, there were established and well-understood layers.  Even in art, the sense of a living in a layered system was reflected, the many artists between the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries who created memorable illustrations of the danse macabre depicting the members of the various estates going to their inevitable death is ways that reflected their status; while there might in death be a kind of democratic equality, the last days of some were celebrated more than others although the works often were satirical and it’s obvious the demise of the rich wasn’t always something to be mourned.

Statue of Edmund Burke (erected 1868), in electro-typed copper-bronze on a square-plan, carved stepped granite plinth with incised lettering, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.  Photograph by John Sutton.

The three (in England) estates were originally the three classes of people who could participate in government, either directly or by electing representatives, originally the clergy, barons & knights and the commons (though over time this would change).  Later the “three estates” were sometimes written of as “the three organs of governmental” necessary for legislation: the Crown, the House of Lords and the House of Commons.  Building on the notion of three, the idea of a “Fourth Estate” started to appear in satirical or jocular expressions, the targets of the tag including “the mob” (1752) and “the lawyers” (1825).  In time, a “new” Fourth Estate did join the list and it described the press, the origin often attributed to Anglo-Irish Whig statesman and philosopher Edmund Burke (1729-1797) although the concept was popularized in the writings of Irish literary critic & essayist William Hazlitt (1778–1830); what Burke had suggested was that with newspapers becoming more numerous and more influential, journalists, editors and publishers should be regarded as “the Fourth Estate”.  First seriously discussed in early the 1820s, within a decade the term had gained currency, supplanting earlier associations (although in both Burke and Hazlitt there are unsubtle hints they likely thought of journalists as “the mob in print”, a view doubtlessly reflecting the opinions of most politicians.  From the modest (if sometimes strident) folios of the eighteenth century to Rupert Murdoch’s (b 1931) Fox News today, it’s clear Burke’s insight was prescient.  Subsequent creations have not universally been accepted as part of the political lexicon but the ideas explored are not without foundation.  The term “Fifth Estate” was first seen in the US during the 1960s counterculture and was used as the name of a newspaper first printed in Detroit in 1965 and still published.  Were one generous one could describe that publication as an example of “critical theory” but it was of its time and certainly an outlet for discontent and dissent.  The understanding of the Fifth Estate evolved into a socio-cultural reference encompassing the opinions of those generally excluded from (or at least marginalized by) the mainstream media and in the twenty-first century it included those distributing their content on blogs, vlogs and social media platforms.  It became a generally accepted concept.

Rupert Murdoch with an edition of News of the World, October 1968.

Mr Murdoch is the last of the old style “press barons” (though he declined Margaret Thatcher's (1925–2013; UK prime-minister 1979-1990) offer of a peerage), it will be interesting to see, decades from now, if history acknowledges him, politician W.M. "Billy" Hughes (1862–1952; prime minister of Australia 1915-1923), virologist Sir Macfarlane Burnet (1899–1985) or second wave feminist Germaine Greer (b 1939) as the twentieth century's most influential Australian.  All cast long shadows, some darker than others.

Less accepted is the idea, first suggested in the late 1980s (before the www (world wide web made the internet an accessible, mass market commodity) there’s a “Sixth Estate” functioning as an observer, critic, and counterweight to the Fourth (the press) and Fifth Estate (non-mainstream online media).  The basis of the concept was the realization a political phenomenon of the 1980s was groups of citizens organizing as pressure groups to pursue issues of interest that although tending to be relatively small in number, their clever use of the mainstream media meant they were able (often as “agenda-setters”) to exert an influence beyond their size and budgets.  Obviously, blogs and social media were the natural environment for such groups although, as big tech rapidly honed their techniques, it’s likely in some cases the hunter has been captured by the game but, at least for their sectional audiences, some of the “Sixth Estate” functions still as an unofficial counterweight to the traditional press (now described variously as the “mainstream media” (however archaic that may be), “legacy media” or, as Donald Trump (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) prefers: “fake news media”.  Wholly opportunistic was the attempt to coin “Seventh Estate”.  That was the idea the newest influence to reach critical mass and influence was the “expert strategic advisor”, apparently a collective term for “business analysts, management consultants, thought leaders, market researchers” and such.  The notion of the Seventh Estate seems less a serious contribution to political theory than a marketing promotion.  There may be a case to be made for the recognition of a Seventh Estate and that is as a description of consumer-packaged AI (artificial intelligence).  While philosophers and scientists can write erudite pieces discussing why what AI produces can’t be “independent thought”, it certainly can appear to be and, as theories of cognition explain, that may be enough for some to legitimize AI as the “Seventh Estate”.

Estate cars

UK advertising for the Australian-built Chrysler Valiant Regal Estate, 1975.

Although with engines as large as 360 cubic inch (5.9 litre) V8s, the Australian-built Chrysler Valiants might seem a curious choice for the UK market in the post-oil shock 1970s, the demise of the big Humbers left a gap in the range and in 1967 the Australian cars had the advantage of benefiting from the Commonwealth preference scheme, a low tariff regime which was the last relic of the chimera of imperial free trade.  Sales were never more than a trickle but the Chryslers were close to unique in the tiny market segment and the programme for a while remained profitable even after the tariff advantage was lost in 1973 when the UK joined the EEC (European Economic Community (1957), the Zollverein that would evolve into the EU (European Union (1993)); The cars remained available until 1976.  Although in Australia and South Africa the Valiant station wagons had been called “Safaris” (after 1973 they would in the home market become “station wagons”), in the UK they were always marketed as “Estates”, reflecting the local practice.

1950 Ford Country Squire.

The model represented a transition in method, the timber still real (mahogany plywood with birch or maple spars) but the roof now of steel.  The timber component would later become “fibreglass over appliqué” and that look would for decades endure though as something purely decorative with no structural role. Although the look is better known as the “station wagon”, “estate cars” began life literally as “a car built for use on one’s estate”.  Because, in this context, ownership of an estate was a preserve of the rich (including many with massive debts), the parameters of an estate car’s design included being large, comfortable and able easily to accommodate life’s essentials (hunting dogs, polo gear, fishing rods, shotguns etc).  So that was specific but while there was sufficient demand to make the early estate cars for decades a thing in the catalogues of coachbuilders, there weren’t that many rich folk so rather than using full-metal bodies, what tended to be done was take a the chassis and frontal components of a conventional two or four-door saloon and add a “station wagon like” rear section in timber.  Combining the eye of a coachbuilder with the hands of craftsmen skilled in timberwork, some elegant creations emerged in the pre-war years (some built as late as the 1950s) and the look influenced mainstream manufacturers in the post-war years with timber spars and panels appearing on station wagons, sedans and convertibles (although fibreglass and plastic appliqué would soon replace the natural product, despite which the “woodie” & “woody” nicknames remained).  Inheriting an earlier tradition, the coach-built estate cars came to be called “shooting brakes”.

Estate cars stared life on the estates of the rich: 1937 Bentley 4¼-Litre Shooting Brake by Vincents of Reading.

Although entirely representative of the style of shooting brakes built in the 1930s, Bentley 4¼-Litre chassis B142JD retained until 1949 its original all-weather tourer body by Vanden Plas, converted to a shooting brake in 1949-1950 by the coachbuilder Vincents of Reading.  Founded in 1805 and best known in the era for their closed horse-drawn carriages and railway cars, Vincents began building bodies for motor cars in 1899 but their most commercially successful lines turned out to be the “horse boxes” (now often called “horse floats”) which could accommodate up to four horses and were towed behind cars or trucks.  Post-war realities meant coach-building became a challenging business model and in the late 1940s Vincents shifted their focus to trucks and busses which provided a more stable flow of contracts but a small volume of cars were built as late as 1955; the Bentley shooting brake on a 1937 chassis was untypical but an example of the bespoke work possible.  Vincents built their last car body in 1981.

1961 Chrysler New Yorker Town & Country Wagon.

The economies of scale of the US industry in the post-war years was achieved volume production and efficient assembly with a high degree of interchangeability of parts.  What that meant was it was viable to manufacture even low-volume ranges like the four-door hardtop (ie no B-pillar) station wagons.  As a body-style, they were unique in the world and were in their era kind of the "ultimate estate" and a then unusual combination of something originally purely functional (the station wagon) with the flourish of a motif (the four-door hardtop) that had no purpose other than to look stylish; never big sellers, they were available for a decade, the last produced in 1964.  The same mix 'n' match approach would later produce the sports car based shooting brakes.

The industry never formalized the exact meaning of “shooting brake” but, by convention, since at least the 1920s, it came to be used to describe a two-door car (there were variations) with estate-car coachwork added aft, usually in timber (although some sheet metal was sometimes included).  The origin of the use lies in the original shooting brakes, large horse-drawn carts suitable for use by shooting parties (ie groups of people being taken to a spot at which it was convenient to slaughter wildlife).  The “brake” element in the name was derived from the popularity of the heavy-framed carts for in “breaking-in” spirited horses; etymologists have pointed out the Dutch brik (cart or carriage) but any link is speculative.  In the UK, the term “brake” became so identified with large horse-drawn carts it was applied widely, extended to carts generally, whether or not used by shooting parties.  In France, an estate car (station wagon) was called a break, the French (somewhat unusually) following the example in English, the original form having been break de chasse (hunting break).

Marilyn Cole (b 1949) with the pink Volvo 1800ES she was in 1973 awarded as the prize for being judged Playboy magazine’s PotY (Playmate of the Year).  The last scion of the P1800 coupé (1961-1972), the 1800ES was made only in 1972-1973, production ending because it would have been prohibitively expensive to re-engineer the old platform to meet US safety standards.  The lovely lines of the “estate section” were an in-house project and it remains perhaps the most accomplished shooting brake adaptation from a coupé.  In Sweden, its nickname was Fiskbilen (fish van) which wasn't encouraging but in German-speaking lands, it was dubbed the rather more charming Schneewittchensarg (Snow White's coffin), a nod to the frameless, all-glass rear door.  Doubtlessly the statuesque Ms Cole won PotY on merit but her photo-shoot was the first in which a “full-frontal nude” image appealed in the magazine so that alone may have been enough to persuade the judges.

Not all Volvo estates were as admired Snow White's coffin: Lindsay Lohan with sledgehammer destroying Volvo V70 Estate (1996-2000).

The stunt was something to do with a TV series being cancelled and while an explanation was provided, the rationale was a little difficult to understand and the text was TLDR but whatever, a Volvo got trashed and Ms Lohan obviously enjoyed swinging a sledgehammer so all's well that ends well.  It's impressionistic but it does seem likely the unfortunate reputation once attached to Volvo drivers was disproportionately gained because of those driving the estates.  

Sir David Brown's original Aston Martin DB5 shooting brake, 1965.

In recent decades, what are labelled shooting brakes have tended to be based on fast (or at least “fast-looking”) sports cars rather than the large chassis preferred for the purpose during the inter-war years.  While the shooting brakes commissioned by the HFS (huntin’, fishin’ & shootin’) set could be well-proportioned and even elegant, they were not “sporty” but that market niche emerged in the 1960s.  The best known early examples were the Reliant Scimitar GTE (1968-1986) and Volvo 1800 ES (1972-1973) and what legitimized the style (a two-door coupé with estate coachwork to the aft) was what Sir David Brown (1904–1993) thought would be a one-off based on an Aston Martin DB5 coupé (1963-1965, which the factory, in their English way, called a “saloon”).  Sir David liked his DB5 saloon but found it too cramped comfortably to accommodate his polo gear, shotguns and hunting dogs.  Now, that would be called a “first world problem” but because Brown then owned Aston Martin, he simply wrote out a work order and had his craftsmen create a bespoke shooting brake (thereby confirming the informal English definition of the term: “station wagon owned by someone rich”) which they did by hand-forming the aluminum panels with hammers over wooden formers.  It delighted him and solved the problem but created another because good customers started writing him letters asking for their own.  While folk offering to pay for a company's products usually is a good thing, at the time, Aston Martin was at full capacity building DB5s and developing the up-coming DB6, DBS and V8 models.  With a bulging order book, the resources didn’t exist to add a niche model so the project was out-sourced to the coachbuilder Radford which built a further 11 (and subsequently another 6 based on the DB6 (1965-1971)).  The “sporty” shooting brakes of course had nothing like the storage capacity of the old-style versions, the design imperative being to enlarge a sports car’s luggage space beyond the traditional “toothbrush & bikini”.  So they were better suited to dirty weekends or trips to the ski slopes than a day spent slaughtering wildlife but nobody seems to have thought of a better term and because of the historic association with class & wealth, the target market likes “shooting brake”.

Leveraging her real-life history of driving incidents and DUI incidents, Lindsay Lohan appeared in the Esurance “Sorta Mom” spoof insurance commercial, shown during the 2015 Super Bowl.  The fourth-generation Chrysler Town & Country minivan (2001-2007) was typical of what “soccer moms” drove after the demise of the station wagon.

Citroën CX Loadrunner by Tissier.

The estate version of the Citroën CX (1974-1991) was made between 1975-1991; it was called “Break” in France and “Safari” in the UK.  The most interesting variant was a six-wheel version which permitted a higher load capacity, the best known use as high-speed transporters of newspapers (remarkably heavy in bulk).  Although fitted with low-powered diesel engines, the slippery aerodynamics and advanced suspension made high average speeds possible and proved the most economical way to move the quickly, over distances.  This was a pre-digital version of the “information superhighway”.

“Estate” was but one of the terms used of the body style best known as the “station wagon”, others included “Safari” (France & Australia), “Station Sedan” (Auatralia), “Break” & “Commercial” (France), “Kombi”, “Universal” & “Touring” (Germany”) and “Squire” (US).  The station was perhaps the most emblematic vehicle of post-war America, its popularity a product of (1) increasing prosperity leading to the “two car household” becoming the norm, (2) families moving from cities to newly developed, sprawling suburbs and (3) shopping patterns shifting from inner city department and grocery stores to vast suburban malls (with ever larger car parks, groceries taken from store to car by the provided shopping carts).  Thus the perfect conjunction: women and their station wagons driving to the mall to shop, a model which contributed to the post war US boom.  Internationally long in decline, the station wagon died out in the US by the 1990s although sales in Japan and Europe continued to be strong enough for a number of models to be sustained and in Australia, Holden kept one in the catalogue until the end of the operation in 2017.  Those who once bought station wagons opted instead for minivans, SUVs (sports utility vehicles) or “Crossovers” (vehicles with SUV-like bodywork but built on a lighter platform) while those needing something suitable for unpacking the picnic basket in the polo-ground’s car-park are now (almost) all driving Range Rovers.