Evil

Evil (pronounced ee-vuhl)

(1) Morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked; morally corrupt.

(2) Harmful; injurious (now rare).

(3) Marked or accompanied by misfortune (now rare; mostly historic).

(4) Having harmful qualities; not good; worthless or deleterious (obsolete).

Pre 900: From the Middle English evel, ivel & uvel (evil) from the Old English yfel, (bad, vicious, ill, wicked) from the Proto-Germanic ubilaz.  Related were the Saterland Frisian eeuwel, the Dutch euvel, the Low German övel & the German übel; it was cognate with the Gothic ubils, the Old High German ubil, the German übel and the Middle Dutch evel and the Irish variation abdal (excessive).  Root has long been thought the primitive Indo-European hupélos (diminutive of hwep) (treat badly) which produced also the Hittite huwappi (to mistreat, harass) and huwappa (evil, badness) but an alternative view is a descent from upélos (evil; (literally "going over or beyond (acceptable limits)")) from the primitive Indo-European upo, up & eup (down, up, over).  Evil is a noun & adjective (some do treat it as a verb), evilness is a noun and evilly an adverb; the noun plural is evils.

Evil (the word) arrived early in English and endured.  In Old English and all the early Teutonic languages except the Scandinavian, it quickly became the most comprehensive adjectival expression of disapproval, dislike or disparagement.  Evil was the word Anglo-Saxons used to convey some sense of the bad, cruel, unskillful, defective, harm, crime, misfortune or disease.  The meaning with which we’re most familiar, "extreme moral wickedness" existed since Old English but did not assume predominance until the eighteenth century.  The Latin phrase oculus malus was known in Old English as eage yfel and survives in Modern English as “evil eye”.  Evilchild is attested as an English surname from the thirteenth century and Australian-born Air Chief Marshall Sir Douglas Evill (1892-1971) was head of the Royal Air Force (RAF) delegation to Washington during World War II (1939-1945).  Despite its utility, there’s probably no word in English with as many words of in the same vein without any being actually synonymous.  Consider: destructive, hateful, vile, malicious, vicious, heinous, ugly, bad, nefarious, villainous, corrupt, malefic, malevolent, hideous, wicked, harm, pain, catastrophe, calamity, ill, sinful, iniquitous, depraved, vicious, corrupt, base, iniquity & unrighteousness; all tend in the direction yet none quite matches the darkness of evil although malefic probably come close.  

Hannah Arendt and the banality of evil

The word evil served English unambiguously and well for centuries and most, secular and spiritual, knew that some people are just evil.  It was in the later twentieth century, with the sudden proliferation of psychologists, interior decorators, sociologists, criminologists, social workers and basket weavers that an industry developed exploring alternative explanations and causations for what had long been encapsulated in the word evil.  The output was uneven but among the best remembered, certainly for its most evocative phrase, was in the work of German-American philosopher and political theorist Hannah Arendt (1906–1975).  Arendt’s concern, given the scale of the holocaust was: "Can one do evil without being evil?"

Whether the leading Nazis were unusually (or even uniquely) evil or merely individuals who, through a combination of circumstances, came to do awful things has been a question which has for decades interested psychiatrists, political scientists and historians.  Arendt attended the 1961 trial of Adolph Eichmann (1906-1962), the bureaucrat responsible for transportation of millions of Jews and others to the death camps built to allow the Nazis to commit the industrial-scale mass-murder of the final solution.  Arendt thought Eichmann ordinary and bland, “neither perverted nor sadistic” but instead “terrifyingly normal”, acting only as a diligent civil servant interested in career advancement, his evil deeds done apparently without ever an evil thought in his mind.  Her work was published as Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963).  The work attracted controversy and perhaps that memorable phrase didn’t help.  It captured the popular imagination and even academic critics seemed seduced.  Arendt’s point, inter alia, was that nothing in Eichmann’s life or character suggested that had it not been for the Nazis and the notion of normality they constructed, he’d never have murdered even one person.  The view has its flaws in that there’s much documentation from the era to prove many Nazis, including Eichmann, knew what they were doing was a monstrous crime so a discussion of whether Eichmann was immoral or amoral and whether one implies evil while the other does not does, after Auschwitz, seems a sterile argument.

Evil is where it’s found.

Hannah Arendt's relationship with Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) began when she was a nineteen year old student of philosophy and he her professor, married and aged thirty-six.  Influential still in his contributions to phenomenology and existentialism, he will forever be controversial because of his brief flirtation with the Nazis, joining the party and taking an academic appointment under Nazi favor.  He resigned from the post within a year and distanced himself from the party but, despite expressing regrets in private, never publicly repented.  His affair with the Jewish Arendt is perhaps unremarkable because it pre-dated the Third Reich but what has always attracted interest is that their friendship lasted the rest of their lives, documented in their own words in a collection of their correspondence (Letters: 1925-1975, Hannah Arendt & Martin Heidegger (2003), Ursula Ludz (Editor), Andrew Shields (Translator)).  Cited sometimes as proof that feelings can transcend politics (as if ever there was doubt), the half-century of letters which track the course of a relationship which began as one of lovers and evolved first into friendship and then intellectual congress.  For those who wish to explore contradiction and complexity in human affairs, it's a scintillating read.  Arendt died in 1975, Heidegger surviving her by some six months.

New York Post, November 1999.

In 1999, Rupert Murdoch’s (b 1931) tabloid the New York Post ran one of their on-line polls, providing a list of the usual suspects, asking readers to rate the evil to most evil, so to determine “The 25 most evil people of the last millennium”.  The poll received 19184 responses which revealed some “recency bias” (a cognitive bias that favors recent events over historic ones) in that some US mass-murderers were rated worse than some with more blood on their hands but most commented on was the stellar performance of the two “write-ins”: Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) & crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013), the POTUS coming second and the FLOTUS an impressive sixth, Mr Murdoch’s loyal readers rating both more evil than Saddam Hussein (1937–2006; president of Iraq 1979-2003), Vlad the Impaler (Vlad Dracula or Prince Vlad III of Wallachia (circa 1430-circa 1477); thrice Voivode of Wallachia 1448-circa 1477 or Ivan the Terrible (Ivan IV Vasilyevich (1530–1584; Grand Prince of Moscow and all Russia 1533-1584 & Tsar of all Russia 1547-1584).

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

While fun and presumably an indication of something, on-line polls should not be compared with the opinion polls run by reputable universities or polling organizations, their attraction for editors looking for click-bait being they’re essentially free and provide a result, sometimes within a day, unlike conventional polls which can cost thousands or even millions depending on the sample size and duration of research.  The central problem with on-line polls is that responders are self-selected rather than coming from a cohort determined by a statistical method developed in the wake of the disastrously inaccurate results of a poll “predicting” national voting intentions in the 1936 presidential election.  The 1936 catchment had been skewered towards the upper-income quartile by being restricted to those who answered domestic telephone connections, the devices then rarely installed in lower-income households.  A similar phenomenon of bias is evident in the difference on-line responses to the familiar question: “Who won the presidential debate?”, the divergent results revealing more about the demographic profiles of the audiences of CBS, MSNBC, CNN, ABC & FoxNews than on-stage dynamics on-stage.

Especially among academics in the social sciences, there are many who object to the frequent, almost casual, use of “evil”, applied to figures as diverse as serial killers and those who use the “wrong” pronoun.  Rightly on not, academics can find “complexity” in what appears simple to most and don’t like “evil” because of the simple moral absolutism it implies, the suggestion certain actions or individuals are inherently or objectively wrong.  Academics call this “an over-simplification of complex ethical situations” and they prefer the nuances of moral relativism, which holds that moral judgments can depend on cultural, situational, or personal contexts.  The structuralist-behaviorists (a field still more inhabited than a first glance may suggest) avoid the word because it so lends itself to being a “label” and the argument is that labeling individuals as “evil” can be both an act of dehumanizing and something which reinforces a behavioral predilection, thereby justifying punitive punishment rather than attempting rehabilitation.  Politically, it’s argued, the “evil” label permits authorities to ignore or even deny allegedly causative factors of behavior such as poverty, mental illness, discrimination or prior trauma.

There are also the associative traditions of the word, the linkages to religion and the supernatural an important part of the West’s cultural and literary inheritance but not one universally treated as “intellectually respectable”.  Nihilists of course usually ignore the notion of evil and to the post-modernists it was just another of those “lazy” words which ascribed values of right & wrong which they knew were something wholly subjective, evil as context-dependent as anything else.  Interestingly, in the language of the polarized world of US politics, while the notional “right” (conservatives, MAGA, some of what’s left of the Republican Party) tends to label the notional “left” (liberals, progressives, the radical factions of the Democratic Party) as evil, the left seems to depict their enemies (they’re no longer “opponents”) less as “evil” and more as “stupid”.

The POTUS & the Pope: Francis & Donald Trump (aka the lesser of two evils), the Vatican, May 2017.

Between the pontificates of Pius XI (1857–1939; pope 1922-1939) and  Francis (b 1936; pope since 2013), all that seems to have changed in the Holy See’s world view is that civilization has moved from being threatened by communism, homosexuality and Freemasony to being menaced by Islam, homosexuality and Freemasony.  It therefore piqued the interest of journalists accompanying the pope on his recent 12-day journey across Southeast Asia when they were told by a Vatican press secretary his Holiness would, during the scheduled press conference, discuss the upcoming US presidential election: duly, the scribes assembled in their places on the papal plane. The pope didn’t explicitly tell people for whom they should vote nor even make his preference obvious as Taylor Swift (b 1989) would in her endorsement mobilizing the childless cat lady vote but he did speak in an oracular way, critiquing both Kamala Harris (b 1964; US vice president since 2021) and Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) as “against life”, urging Catholic voters to choose the “lesser of two evils.”  That would have been a good prelude had he gone further but there he stopped: “One must choose the lesser of two evils. Who is the lesser of two evils?  That lady or that gentleman? I don’t know.”

Socks (1989-2009; FCOTUS (First Cat of the United States 1993-2001) was Chelsea Clinton's (b 1980) cat.

The lesser of two evils: Australian-born US political cartoonist Pat Oliphant’s (b 1935) take on the campaign tactics of Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) who was the Democratic Party nominee in the 1996 US presidential election against Republican Bob Dole (1923–2021).  President Clinton won by a wide margin which would have been more handsome still, had there not been a third-party candidate.  Oliphant’s cartoons are now held in the collection of the National Library of Congress.  It’s not unusual for the task presented to voters in US presidential elections to be reduced to finding “the lesser of two evils”.  In 1964 when the Democrats nominated Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) to run against the Republican's Barry Goldwater (1909–1998), the conclusion of many was it was either “a crook or a kook”.  On the day, the lesser of the two evils proved to be crooked old Lyndon who won in a landslide over crazy old Barry.

Francis has some history in criticizing Mr Trump’s handling of immigration but the tone of his language has tended to suggest he’s more disturbed by politicians who support the provision of abortion services although he did make clear he sees both issues in stark moral terms: “To send migrants away, to leave them wherever you want, to leave them… it’s something terrible, there is evil there. To send away a child from the womb of the mother is an assassination, because there is life. We must speak about these things clearly.”  Francis has in the past labelled abortion a “plague” and a “crime” akin to “mafia” behavior, although he did resist suggestions the US bishops should deny Holy Communion to “pro-choice” politicians (which would have included Joe Biden (b 1942; US president 2021-2025), conscious no doubt that accusations of being an “agent of foreign interference” in the US electoral process would be of no benefit.  Despite that, he didn’t seek to prevent the bishops calling abortion is “our preeminent priority” in Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship, the 2024 edition of their quadrennial document on voting.  Some 20% of the US electorate describe themselves as Catholics, their vote in 2020 splitting 52/47% Biden/Trump but that was during the Roe v Wade (1973) era and abortion wasn’t quite the issue it's since become and a majority of the faith in the believe it should be available with only around 10% absolutist right-to-lifers.  Analysts concluded Francis regards Mr Trump as less evil than Ms Harris and will be pleased if his flock votes accordingly; while he refrained from being explicit, he did conclude: “Not voting is ugly.  It is not good.  You must vote.”

Talisman

Talisman (pronounced tal-is-muhn or tal-iz-muhn)

(1) A stone, ring, or other object, usually engraved with figures or characters supposed to possess occult powers and worn as an amulet or charm; believed to protect the wearer from evil influences

(2) Any amulet or charm.

(3) Anything or anyone, the presence of which exercises a remarkable or powerful influence on human feelings or actions.

(4) A trim option offered on the Cadillac Fleetwood (1974-1976).

1630–1640: From the French or Spanish talisman, partly from Arabic طِلَسْم‎ (ṭilasm), from the Late Greek télesmon (completion, performance, consecrated object), and partly directly from the Byzantine Greek τέλεσμα (télesma) (talisman, religious rite, completion), from τελέω (teléō), (to perform religious rites, to complete), from τέλος (télos) (end, fulfillment, accomplishment, consummation, completion”).  The Arabic word was also borrowed by Turkish, Persian & Hindi and the only explanation for the -n in western European languages is replicated error.  Derived forms are the adjectives talismanic & talismanical and the adverb talismanically.  The correct noun plural is talismans (talismen is non-standard).

Lindsay Lohan wearing "Evil Eye" talisman, Los Angeles, March 2011.

The Evil Eye is a talisman (or amulet), or talisman which is said to afford the wear protection against the forces of evil.  Examples of Evil Eye talismans have for some three-thousand years existed in many cultures and are documented in early examples of the art of Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and Christianity, the forms including the Hebrew Ayin Ha’ra, the Turkish Nazar Boncugu, the Italian Mal Occhio, the Farsi Bla Band, the Arabic Ayin Harsha, the Scots Droch Shuil, the Spanish Mal Ojo (or El Oja), the French Mauvais Oeil, the German Busen Blick and the Roman Oculus Malus.  The imagery is particularly ingrained in the Republic of Türkiye where the symbolism is visible on symbol on currency, in architecture and interior design and one is often hung from the necks of new-born children and even farm animals.

Freemason Evil Eye talisman.

Also known as the “Eye of Providence”, the symbol is not only part of Masonic ritualism but it appears on both the reverse of the US dollar bill (in a pyramid’s top cap) and the nation’s Great Seal.  Although many of the founding fathers of the US were confessed Freemasons, the official line is the unfinished pyramid was intended to symbolise “strength and duration”, with the 13 levels representing the original states which formed the US while the eye was there to acknowledge God’s sympathetic oversight of the fledgling nation.  It’s claimed the Freemasons had no involvement in these choices and that they didn’t even begin publicly to display the evil eye until well into the eighteenth century.  Whether prior to that they used it in secret is of course unknown and also a mystery is whether every member of the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d’Or is required to wear a concealed Masonic talisman.  It’s never been denied and unless there’s a defection from the cult, that too may remain a secret.

The Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman, 1974-1976

1971-1976 Cadillac Fleetwood

Even by the standards of the American automobile of the time, the 1971 Cadillac was big.  Replacing the previous range which had run from 1965-1970, engineering innovations were limited and the changes were mostly cosmetic, much of the manufacturer’s attentions now devoted to conforming with the onrush of safety and pollution control legislation being imposed by governments.  In 1971 however, although somewhat detuned, the 472 cubic inch (7.7 litre) V8 was still rated at 365 gross horsepower and, with the emission controls still only rudimentary, retained the characteristics which by the early 1960s marked Detroit’s full-sized cars as having the world’s finest engine-transmission combinations.  Even though typically weighing over 5000 lbs (2300 KG) and built with few concessions to aerodynamic efficiency, Cadillacs had power enough for performance to be described usually as effortless.  Production volumes dropped in 1971 but that was because of difficulties in industrial relations and once new agreements were in place, sales quickly rebounded, records set in 1972 and again in 1973, Cadillac for the first time, producing more than three-hundred thousand cars.  There were however warning signs on the 1973 cars.  Although not yet the battering-rams which would later be bolted on, the bumper bars had grown bigger and heavier and for the first time, the emission controls began to become intrusive, drivability suffering, power down and fuel consumption up.  The typical Cadillac owner might not have much noticed the additional fuel cost but they certainly noted, and complained about, the loss of power and occasionally stuttering engines.  Much worse was to come.

1973 would be the last good year for the “old” American economy which, sustained by the unusual circumstances of the post-war boom had, with the odd minor glitch, maintained an unprecedented general prosperity for over twenty years.  A generation now existed which knew no other world but the world shifted on 17 October 1973 when the first oil embargo was imposed, ending the boom which had been fed by cheap, limitless energy.  Suddenly, in the US, not only was gas (petrol) more expensive, the cost of a barrel of oil having quadrupled overnight, but there were genuine shortages.  Even Cadillac owners with money enough to pay for a tank of gas found themselves in long queues, sometimes even unable to find some for sale.

1972 Oldsmobile 98 Regency interior in tufted, loose pillow style

It was a short, sharp shock.  Oil supplies began again to flow within months but prices remained high.  Cadillac sales fell twenty-odd percent in 1974 but it was actually a good result, the company continuing to dominate its market sector, its results better than many.  The performance of the cars was less impressive, the bumpers ever bigger, the power lower and the driveability issues caused by the emission control devices worse.  At the time, there wasn’t much Cadillac could (or was prepared) to do about these things but resources were found to add even more luxury.  For years, the industry had been creating ever fancier versions of its lines, even the lower-priced being augmented with luxury versions, sometimes called “Brougham”, a moniker which came to be attached to the whole era.  Cadillac had long faced competition from Lincoln and Imperial but what must have been galling was the threat from within.  Oldsmobile, two notches down the GM pecking list from Cadillac, in 1972 introduced their “Regency” option, a package which essentially out-did Cadillac’s interiors with not just tufted velour upholstery but finished in a loose pillow style.  Cadillac had nothing like it but scrambled to respond, offering in 1973 the d'Elegance package, a US$750 option which included pillow-style velour seating as well as a more plush carpeting and bundled a few of the otherwise optional features.

1974 Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman rear compartment in Medium Saddle leather

However, all the d'Elegance stuff did was match what others were doing and there was still the corporate memory of the Cadillac mystique, a hankering for the time when Cadillac had been the “standard of the world”, a reputation built in the 1930s on basic engineering such as unique sixteen cylinder engines and maintained a generation later with cars such as the Eldorado Brougham, times when the name stood for something truly impressive.  But the world had changed and such extravagances were no longer possible.  What could still be done was to add more gingerbread and for 1974, Cadillac announced the Talisman package.  Much more expensive than the d'Elegance and consequently more exclusive, the Talisman included an extended centre console, the front section housing an illumined writing tablet, the rear a storage compartment.  This had been done before but never with this opulence although it had the effect of reducing the huge car, a size which historically been a six-seater, into something strictly for four.  The interior was available in four colors in "Medici" crushed velour at US$1800 or in two shades in leather at US$2450 at a time when the Chevrolet Vega, GM’s entry-level automobile of the era cost US$2087.  The Talisman additionally gained matching deep-pile interior carpeting and floor-mats, a fully padded elk grain vinyl roof, exterior badge identifications, a stand-up, full-colour wreath and crest hood ornament and unique wheel-covers.  For those who needed more, for an additional US$85, a matching pillow and robe was available although the robe unfortunately wasn't cut in leather.  Optioned with the leather package, a 1974 Cadillac Talisman cost about US$13,200, matching what the company charged for the even bigger Fleetwood Seventy-Five limousines.  The additional gingerbread wasn’t all that expensive to produce; what Cadillac was selling was exclusivity and the market responded, 1898 Talismans coming off the production line that year, all sold at a most impressive profit.  Most prized today are the relative handful trimmed in leather, the urban legend being all were in medium saddle with none in the dark blue which was listed on the option list.  If any were sold with the blue leather, none appear now to exist and Cadillac’s records don’t record the breakdown.

1975 Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman front compartment in rosewood velour

The leather in either color didn’t anyway survive to the new model year, four colors of velour the only Talisman choices in 1975 and gone too was the rear-console extension, reportedly because of feedback from owners who either didn’t see the point or would have preferred the flexibility to carry an additional passenger.  It was an era of high inflation so the deletion of the hardware secured only a two-dollar reduction in price and in the gloomy economic climate of 1975, 1238 were sold.  The cars themselves were in their last days, huge dinosaurs unable to adapt to the shock of the new world they found around them though there were minor improvements.  Although engine size had been increased to 500 cubic inches (8.2 litres), output was down to 190 horsepower (although this was less of a drop from the 365 of 1971 because of the change in quoting power from gross to net) but the addition of catalytic convertors and later in the year, fuel injection, did allow some retuning, improving drivability.  The bumpers were the biggest yet and fuel economy, although improved, remained dire.

1976 Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman rear compartment in light smoke grey velour

The end of the line came in 1976, the final year for the big Cadillacs which had evolved over three quarters of a century.  With so much corporate energy devoted to the new, smaller cars, little time was devoted to the dinosaurs, changes restricted to trim and details although the newly-legal rectangular headlights, adopted throughout the industry to permit lower bonnet lines and thereby slipperier aerodynamics, were spliced in.  Inside, new interior colors were offered and fake Rosewood replaced the simulated distressed pecan vinyl appliqués on the instrument panel, doors, and rear quarter trim.  Inspired by the Oldsmobile Regency which had caused such a stir in 1972, soft, thickly pillowed seats were now standard and the d'Elegance package with its accoutrements could still be added but bowing out after 1976 would be both the 500 cubic inch V8 and the Talisman package, available for its swansong in five colors at US$1813.  GM made no secret this was the last year of the big Cadillacs and sales spiked, a new record of 309,139 cars of which 1200 were Talismans.

Naughty

Naughty (pronounced naw-tee)

(1) Disobedient; mischievous; wilful; wayward; misbehaving (used especially in speaking to or about children or pets).

(2) Improper, tasteless, indecorous, or indecent.

(3) Wicked; evil (obsolete).

(4) Sexually provocative; usually in a weakened playful sense, risqué or cheeky.

(5) Bad, worthless, sub-standard (obsolete).

1375-1400: From the Middle English naughty, nauȝty, nauȝti, naȝti, nowghty & noughti (needy, having nothing, also (also evil, immoral, corrupt, unclean)), from nought & naught (evil, an evil act; nothingness; a trifle; insignificant person; the number zero), from the Old English nawiht (nothing).  In the seventeenth century, as words like “bad” and “evil” came to be the preferred descriptors of the more extreme, naughty became something milder, used to describe the mischievous or those with a tendency to misbehave or act badly and this soon became most associated with children, a linguistic acknowledgment that bad behaviour unacceptable by an adult was excusable by in youth, This mitigated sense of "disobedient, bad in conduct or speech, improper, mischievous" to describe the delinquencies of children is attested from the 1630s.  The sense of "sexually promiscuous" is from 1869 but between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries, a woman of bad character (which might include but was not limited to lose virtue) might be called “a naughty pack” and there is evidence this was occasionally extended also to men and later an especially recalcitrant child.  Naughty, naughtier & naughtiest are adjectives; naughtily is an adverb and naughtiness a noun.  The alternative spelling noughty is archaic and obsolete.

The construct was naught + -y.  Naught in the mid-fourteen century meant "evil, an evil act" and also " a trifle"; by circa 1400 it had come to mean "nothingness", hence the adoption by mathematicians in the early fifteenth century as “the number zero" (from noht & naht (nothing) both of which had existed since the twelfth century, from the Old English nawiht (nothing, literally "no whit" from the primitive Indo-European root ne- (not) + wiht (thing, creature, being).  It was cognate with the Old Saxon neowiht (nothing), the Old High German niwiht, the Gothic ni waihts, the Dutch niet, and the German nicht. In the Old English, it became and adjectival form meaning "good for nothing" which endured to evolve by the mid-sixteenth century to the more focused "morally bad, wicked", softened over the years to the way the modern adjective naughty is now variously applied.  Naughty is an adjective & verb, naughtiness is a noun and naughtily an adverb; naughty has been used as a (non-standard) noun, usually as a euphemism for something related to sex so the noun plural there would be naughties (on the model of nasties).

It certainly had a long gestation to get to the point where “naughty” now is used  to describe mischievous kittens, vegan restaurants, sex shops and patisseries.  The primitive Indo European roots ne (not) & wekti (thing) both date back almost seven thousand years and, at the time of Antiquity, proceeded through the Proto-Germanic to become the Old English word nawiht (not a thing; nothing).  With the same meaning the word existed in the Middle English as naht, nought & naught, the last spelling, though now quite rare, enduring to this day.  Naughty was a fourteenth century fork, with the addition of the –y it was used to convey the same quality but with a new meaning (poor, literally "having nothing").  In the way class systems work by association, the rich (and perhaps even more so, the less-poor) extended the definition to include lazy, lawless, dirty, malignant etc (as required) because of a perception of correlation between poverty and crime.  Naughty however mellowed somewhat and society adapted, finding many other words with which to demonise the poor.

Naughty and Nice

Before mobile bandwidth and faster hardware drove them extinct, there were free afternoon newspapers, handed to commuters to read on the bus, tram or train journey home.  They were a welcome replacement for the afternoon papers (for which people had to pay) which, years or even decades earlier had been killed off by television.

mX Newspaper 2012 London Olympics medal table, 2 August 2012.

During the 2012 London Olympic Games, Melbourne’s mX commuter daily noted North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; the DPRK) and South Korea (Republic of Korea; the ROK) coincidently were running respectively fourth and fifth in the medal count so causing the ROK directly to sit atop the DPRK on their medal table.  Fearing confusion among readers not well acquainted with the peninsula’s geopolitics, mX decided to help, labelling the South “Nice Korea” and the North “Naughty Korea”.

In Pyongyang, the DPRK’s official Korean Central News Agency was quick to respond, accusing capitalist lackey mX of "…sordid behavior…" and “…a bullying act little short of insulting the Olympic spirit of solidarity, friendship and progress and politicising sports.”  The news media, it added, was “…obliged to lead the public in today's highly-civilised world where [the] mental and cultural level of mankind is being displayed at the highest level.”  Warming to the topic, the agency damned mX’s editors a being “…so incompetent as to tarnish the reputation of the paper…" which will remain a “…symbol of a rogue paper which will long be cursed in Olympic history."

DPRK Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un (b 1983) inspecting the North Korean pastry production line.

In response, mX ran the agency's attack on the next day’s front page under the headline Pyongyang Goes Ballistic Over mX Tally, claiming the table was “…not intended to be offensive” and just a “…humorous but harmless way…” for readers easily to differentiate between two countries with similar names.  It’s presumed Pyongyang was more upset at being labelled “naughty” than it was at the rogue state in the south being called “nice”.  Although nice has had many meanings, the agency probably well understood mX’s implication and acted appropriately against the imperialist propaganda.  The newspaper’s explanation was apparently accepted as an apology, the Supreme Leader not ordering any retaliatory missile strikes on the editorial office.

Naughty but Nice Patisserie, 39 Ilsham Road, Wellswood, Torquay, TQ1 2JG, UK.  Cakes, pastries, pies & rolls etc; it’s thought The Supreme Leader approves of pastry shops.

Naughty or Nice sex shop, 836 Main St, Lewiston, 83501 Idaho, USA.  Lingerie, toys, devices & accessories etc; it’s not known if The Supreme Leader approves of sex shops.

In December 2022, as a holiday season promotion, the Pepsi Corporation teamed with Lindsay Lohan to promote Pilk.  A Pilk is a mix of Pepsi Cola and milk, one of a class of dirty sodas created by PepsiCo which includes the Naughty & Ice, the Chocolate Extreme, the Cherry on Top, the Snow Float and the Nutty Cracker.  All are intended to be served with cookies (biscuits) and although Ms Lohan confessed to being “…a bit sceptical when first I heard of this pairing”, she was quickly converted, noting that “…after my first sip I was amazed at how delicious it was, so I’m very excited for the rest of the world to try it.”  

PepsiCo provided the instructions for mixing a Naughty & Ice: "For a pure milk taste that's infused with notes of vanilla, measure and combine 1 cup of whole milk, 1 tbsp of heavy cream and 1 tbsp of vanilla creamer.  From there, pour the mixture slowly into 1 cup of Pepsi and serve with a chocolate chip cookie."

Naughty and nice: Lindsay Lohan promotes Pilk.

Demon

Demon (pronounced dee-muhn (U) or dee-mon (non-U))

(1) An evil supernatural spirit; devil or fiend; an evil spirit resident in or working for Hell; a devil; a false god or idol; a Satanic divinity.

(2) An evil passion or influence.

(3) A most wicked, cruel or malevolent person; also (in weakened sense) a mischievous person, especially a child.

(4) A person who is extremely skillful in, energetic at, or devoted to a given activity, especially a sport.

(5) Of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or noting a demon.

(6) In computing, a part of a computer program, such as a help facility, that can run in the background behind the current task or application, and which will only begin to work when certain conditions are met or when it is specifically invoked; often styled daemon.

(7) A person's fears or anxieties (always in the plural and usually in the form “haunted by their demons” or “facing their demons”).

(8) In Greek mythology, a tutelary deity or spirit intermediate between the major Olympian gods and mankind, especially a deified hero or the entity which supposedly guided Socrates, telling him what not to do.

(9) In the thought experiments of both physics and philosophy, a hypothetical entity with special abilities postulated for the purposes required.

(10) A person's inner spirit or genius; a guiding or creative impulse (archaic).

(11) In card games, a type of patience or solitaire played in the UK & US.

(12) Any of various hesperiid butterflies of the genera Notocrypta and Udaspes.

Circa 1200-1250: From the Middle English demon (an evil spirit, malignant supernatural being, an incubus, a devil), from the Medieval Latin dēmōn, daemōn & daemoniumm (lar, familiar spirit, guardian spirit), from the Ancient Greek daimónion (thing of divine nature (though when used by Jewish and Christian writers: “evil spirit”)), neuter of daimónios, from δαίμων (daímōn) (deity, divine power; lesser god; guiding spirit, tutelary deity) and in both the Greek and Latin, the meanings sometime extended to souls of the dead and “one's genius, lot, or fortune”.  Ultimate root was the primitive Indo-European dai-mon (divider, provider (of fortunes or destinies)) from the root da (to divide).  The alternative spellings daemon & daimon was used in specialized senses and remain a favourite of the modern gaming industry; daimon was a transliteration of the Greek daimōn which was deployed to avoid the post-classical associations of demon (often in the adjectival form daimonic).  The demoness (female demon) dates from the 1630s.  Demon is a noun; the noun plural is demons.

Crooked Hillary Clinton depicted as a demon (believed to be digitally-altered image).

The malignant sense existed in English from the start because the Greek word was used (with daimonion) in Christian Greek translations and the Vulgate (the principal Latin version of the Bible, prepared mainly by the theologian Saint Jerome (circa 344-Circa 420) in the late fourth century, and (as revised in 1592) adopted as the official text for the Roman Catholic Church) for "god of the heathen, heathen idol" and also for "unclean spirit".  This was also part of the Jewish tradition where authors had used the Greek word in this sense, using it to render shedim (lords, idols) in the Septuagint and in Matthew 8:31 there appears daimones, translated as deofol in the Old English & feend or deuil in the Middle English.  A more evocative word in the Old English word was hellcniht (literally "hell-knight").  The inherited sense from the Ancient Greek (supernatural agent or intelligence lower than a god; a ministering spirit) appeared in English from the 1560s, written variously as daemon or daimon.  The meaning "destructive or hideous person" is from the 1610s and as "an evil agency personified" (ie the demon drink), from 1712.  In another sense in late fourteenth century English, the “Demon of Socrates” was a daimonion (a divine principle or inward oracle) although his accusers (and later the Church Fathers) represented this otherwise.  The Demon Star (1895) is Algol (variable star (Beta Persei)) in the constellation Perseus, documented in the late fourteenth century, which translates literally as "the Demon" from the Arabic al-ghul (the demon), from which is derived the modern ghoul.  It corresponds, in modern representations of the constellation, to the gorgon's head Perseus holds, but probably it was so called because it visibly varies in brightness every three days, which sets it apart from other bright stars.  In one of the most famous fragments of English verse, Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s (1772-1834) Kubla Khan (1798), there are the lines:

A savage place! as holy and enchanted

As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted

By woman wailing for her demon-lover!

The noun demonarchy (rule or dominion of demons) first appeared in the 1640s while the noun demonology (the study of demons or beliefs about demons) had appeared in both secular and church documents as early as the 1590s, the related terms of the discipline being demonologer & demonological.  The adjective demonic (also daemonic) (devilish, of the nature of or pertaining to a demon), from the Latin daemonicus dates from the 1660s while demonical (from the Old English glossed daemonicus with deofelseoc (devil-sick) was from later in the century.  The adjective demoniac (possessed by a demon, insane) was from circa 1400 but several decades earlier there had been the noun demoniak, (one who is possessed, a lunatic), from the Late Latin daemoniacus, from the Greek daimoniakos (possessed by a demon), from diamond.  From the 1640s the adjective was used in the sense of "of or pertaining to demons or spirits" while by 1820 this had extended to a rather softened "devilish"; the related forms were demoniacal & demoniacally.

Lindsay Lohan in demonic pose to celebrate her twenty-third birthday, 2009.

The verb demonize (also demonise) (to make into a demon (literally or figuratively)) dates from 1778, either as a construct built from the noun or from the Medieval Latin daemonizare, all influenced by the Greek daimonizesthai (to be under the power of a tutelary deity) and the sense in the New Testament of "to be possessed by a demon”, the related forms demonized, demonizing & demonization all in use by the late eighteenth century.  The noun Pandæmonium (pandemonium the modern form) was in 1667 coined by John Milton (1608-1674) in Paradise Lost as the name of the palace built in the middle of Hell (the high capital of Satan and all his peers and the abode of all the demons), the construct being the Greek pan- (all) + the Late Latin daemonium (evil spirit) from the Greek daimonion (inferior divine power) from daimōn (in the sense of lesser god).

The Dodge Demons

The 1969 Dodge Swinger 340 (left), a platform familiar in Australia where it was produced (1969-1971) in a variety of configurations including a two-door hardtop (a 1971 VG Regal 770 (centre)) and four-door sedans (a 1971 long-wheelbase VIP (right)).

The Dodge Dart of the mid 1960s was a compact (in US terms) economy car which fulfilled its role well, lasting indeed until the late 1970s when it turned out to be in many ways superior to its ill-fated replacements.  However, an unusual conjunction of economic, legislative and demographic factors in the late 1960s made the Dart an ideal platform for a cheap muscle car which could easily and quickly be built from the corporate parts bin.  Its humble origins were never entirely disguised and it always lurked behind the sturm und drang of the bigger, more illustrious models like the Charger, Challenger and Daytona but as a bargain-priced muscle car, it deserved success.  Dodge had tentatively dipped the Dart’s toe into the muscle car waters in 1967 when it introduced the Dart GTS which, fitted with a 273 cubic inch (4.4 litre) V8 performed admirably given its modest specification but it the next year it became available with a new 340 cubic inch (5.5 litre) V8 which, thought under-rated at 275 (gross) horsepower, was one of the best units of the era.  Able in most cases to match the performance offered by much of the bigger-engined competition, reviews were positive and in 1969 a separate line called the Swinger 340 was released, a package which convinced Dodge to abandon its brief flirtation with overkill, not renewing the availability of the 383 & 440 cubic inch (6.3 & 7.2 litre) V8 engines in the platform.  The big-block engines were really suitable only for a drag strip, the lighter 340 a better idea.

1971 Dodge Demon 340.

Demon decal with demonic pitchfork.

In 1971, the Dart received an additional body style, borrowed from their corporate companion Plymouth which had added the Duster coupé as a stylish addition to the Valiant line, their equivalent of the compact Dart.  However, Dodge’s marketing people in the early 1970s either smoked too much weed or didn’t get out enough because shortly after flirting with the idea of adding statutory grape to their paint colour charts, they decided to call their new high-performance compact the Demon.  That upset the Christian lobby, influential even then but remarkably, the marketing department was going to use the name Beaver until more worldly types told them about its use in slang.  The churches weren’t best pleased about Demon but, given the scriptural basis, they relented despite the cartoon devil on a decal stuck to the fenders.  The churches, not impressed with a marketing strategy which seemed to support the Antichrist weren’t convinced by the explanation that it was all about a play on words (Come in for a Demon-stration) and continued to protest.  Dodge persisted and although denied statutory grape, buyers could choose lurid colors like Go-Green and Citron Yella while for those intent on building the quickest version possible, there was the Demon Sizzler package which bundled a number of dress-up and high performance options.  It was a good combination at a low price but it was out-sold by the mechanically identical Plymouth Duster 340s possibly because the Christian lobby had actually organized the preaching of sermons condemning Dodge as doing the Devil’s work so in 1973 the Demon nomenclature (and the offending cartoon) was dropped, the thing re-branded to the bland Dart Sport, a line which ran for three years (although the once virile 340 would be detuned and then replaced with a much milder 360 cubic inch (5.9 litre) unit.  The Christian lobby thus claimed the demon’s scalp although they never managed to veto Dodge’s use of Swinger and today, the 1971 & 1972 Demon 340s are sought-after.  Production numbers were never high (10,098 & 8,700 respectively) and give its cheap, disposable nature, and the buyers attracted to such things over the decades, attrition rates were high and survivors are few although, as just about everywhere in the muscle car ecosystem, there’s a minor industry in creating clones.

Demon redux: 2018 Dodge Challenger Demon.  The yellow plastic guard on the leading edge of the front splitter was attached at the factory to deter damage during transport to dealerships.  The instruction was to remove them prior to sale but they picked up a cult following and many buyers insisted they be retained.

Chrysler reprised the Dodge Demon name in 2018 (and Swinger in 2022) apparently with little theological opposition.  The engine used in the new Demon was an evolution of the 376 cubic inch (6.2 litre) Hemi V8 which, in 2017’s Challenger Hellcat, was rated at 707 horsepower.  With production limited to 3300 units, the 2018 Demon used a supercharged Hemi which produced 808 hp but an optional package boosted that to 840.  So equipped, the Demon would cover a standing quarter-mile (400m) in 9.65 seconds at 140 mph (225 km/h) and cost was a remarkably modest US$86,091 including the optional package which, while not entirely suitable for driving on public roads, was completely street-legal.  It included a number of features which hinted at its real purpose, including the passenger and rear seats being no-cost options and, most intriguingly, a high-output mode which both increased power and disabled the cabin air-conditioning, routing its cooling flow instead to the induction system, a device that lowered the intake temperature by 18-odd degrees, thereby gaining a few more horsepower.  Although tuned for quarter-mile sprints and thus limiting top-speed to about 170 mph (270 km/h), it could be geared for top end performance and would easily exceed 200 mph (320 km/h).