Pouch

Pouch (pronounced pouch)

(1) A bag, sack or similar receptacle, especially one for small articles or quantities and historically closed with a drawstring although in modern use zips and other fasteners are common.

(2) A small, purse-like container, used to carry small quantities of cash.

(3) A bag for carrying mail.

(4) In the jargon of household textiles (Manchester), as “pillow pouch”, an alternative name for a pillowslip or pillowcase (archaic).

(5) As “diplomatic pouch”, a sealed container (anything from an envelope to a shipping container) notionally containing diplomatic correspondence that is sent free of inspection between a foreign office and its diplomatic or consular posts abroad or between such posts.

(6) As “posing pouch”, a skimpy thong (G-string) worn by male strippers, bodybuilders and such (known also as the “posing strap”, in certain circles, it's now an essential accessory).

(7) In the industrial production of food, as retort pouch, a food packaging resistant to heat sterilization in a retort, often made from a laminate of flexible plastic and metal foils.

(8) In military use, a container (historically of leather) in the form of either a bag or case), used by soldiers to carry ammunition.

(9) Something shaped like or resembling a bag or pocket.

(10) In physics, as “Faraday pouch”, a container with the properties of a Faraday cage (a conductive enclosure that blocks external static and non-static EMFs (electromagnetic field) by redistributing electric charges to the outer surface, preventing them affecting the interior; it was named after the inventor, the English physicist & chemist Michael Faraday (1791–1867)).

(11) A pocket in a garment (originally in Scots English but of late widely used by garment manufacturers).

(12) In nautical design, a bulkhead in the hold of a vessel, to prevent bulk goods (grain, sand etc) from shifting (a specialized form of baffle).

(13) A baggy fold of flesh under the eye (more commonly as “bags under the eyes”).

(14) In zoological anatomy, a bag-like or pocket-like part; a sac or cyst, as the sac beneath the bill of pelicans, the saclike dilation of the cheeks of gophers, or the abdominal receptacle for the young of marsupials.

(15) In pathology, an internal structure with certain qualities (use restricted to those fulfilling some functional purpose): any sac or cyst (usually containing fluid), pocket, bag-like cavity or space in an organ or body part (the types including laryngeal pouch, Morison's pouch, Pavlov's pouch & Rathke's pouch).

(16) In botany, a bag-like cavity, a silicle, or short pod, as of the “shepherd's purse”.

(17) In slang, a protuberant belly; a paunch (archaic and probably extinct).

(18) In slang, to pout (archaic and probably extinct).

(19) In slang, to put up with (something or someone) (archaic and probably extinct).

(20) To put into or enclose in a pouch, bag, or pocket; pocket.

(21) To transport a pouch (used especially of a diplomatic pouch).

(22) To arrange in the form of a pouch.

(23) To form a pouch or a cavity resembling a pouch.

(24) In zoology, of a fish or bird, to swallow.

1350–1400: From the Middle English pouche & poche, from the Old Northern French pouche, from the Old French poche & puche (from which French gained poche (the Anglo-Norman variant was poke which spread in Old French as “poque bag”), from the Frankish poka (pouch) (similar forms including the Middle Dutch poke, the Old English pohha & pocca (bag) and the dialectal German Pfoch).  Although documented since only the fourteenth century, parish records confirm the surnames “Pouch” & “Pouche” were in use by at least the late twelfth and because both names (like Poucher (one whose trade is the “making of pouches”)) are regarded by genealogists as “occupational”, it’s at least possible small leather bags were thus describe earlier.  In the 1300s, a pouche was “a bag worn on one's person for carrying things” and late in the century it was used especially of something used to carry money (what would later come to be called a “coin purse” or “purse”).  The use to describe the sac-like cavities in animal bodies began in the domestic science of animal husbandry from circa 1400, the idea adopted unchanged when human anatomy became documented.  The verb use began in the 1560s in the sense of “put in a pouch”, extended by the 1670s to mean “to form a pouch, swell or protrude, both directly from the noun.  The Norman feminine noun pouchette (which existed also as poutchette) was from the Old French pochete (small bag).  Surprisingly, it wasn’t picked up in English (a language which is a shameless adopter of anything useful) but does endure on the Channel Island of Jersey where it means (1) a pocket (in clothing) and (2) in ornithology the Slavonian grebe, horned grebe (Podiceps auritus).  The organic pocket in which a marsupial carries its young is known also as both the marsupium & brood pouch, the latter term also used of the cavity which is some creatures is where eggs develop and hatch.  Pouch is a noun & verb, pouchful & poucher are nouns, pounching is a verb, pouchy is an adjective and pouched is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is pouches.

Diplomatic pencil pouch.

The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (UNVCDR; United Nations (UN) Treaty Series, volume 500, p 95) was executed in Vienna on 18 April 1961, entering into force on 24 April 1964.  Although the terminology and rules governing diplomatic relations between sovereign states had evolved over thousands of years, there had been no systematic attempt at codification until the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), held to formalize the political and dynastic arrangements for post-Napoleonic Europe.  There were also later, ad-hoc meetings which dealt with administrative detail (some necessitated by improvements in communication technology) but it was the 1961 convention that built the framework that continues to underpin the diplomatic element of international relations; little changed from its original form, it's perhaps the UN’s most successful legal instrument.  With two exceptions, all UN member states have ratified the UNVCDR; the two non-signatories are the republics of Palau and South Sudan.  It’s believed the micro-state of Palau remains outside the framework because it has been independent only since 1994 and constitutionally has an unusual “Compact of Free Association” arrangement with the US which results in it maintaining a limited international diplomatic presence.  The troubled West African state of South Sudan gained independence only in 2011 and has yet to achieve a stable state infrastructure, remaining beset by internal conflict; its immediate priorities therefore remain elsewhere. The two entities with “observer status” at the UN (the State of Palestine and the Holy See) are not parties to the UNVCDR but the Holy See gained in Vienna a diplomatic protocol which functionally is substantially the same as that of a ratification state.  Indeed, the Vatican’s diplomats are actually granted a particular distinction in that states may (at their own election), grant the papal nuncio (a rank equivalent to ambassador or high commissioner) seniority of precedence, thus making him (there’s never been a female nuncio), ex officio, Doyen du Corps Diplomatique (Dean of the Diplomatic Corps).

Lindsay Lohan in SCRAM bracelet (left), the SCRAM (centre) and Chanel's response from their Spring 2007 collection (right).

A very twenty-first century pouch: Before Lindsay Lohan began her “descent into respectability” (a quote from the equally admirable Mandy Rice-Davies (1944-2004) of MRDA fame), Lindsay Lohan inadvertently became of the internet’s early influencers when she for a time wore a court-ordered ankle monitor (often called “bracelets” which by convention of use is dubious but rarely has English been noted for its purity).  At the time, many subject to such orders concealed them under clothing but Ms Lohan made her SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor) a fashion statement, something that compelled the paparazzi to adjust their focal length to ensure her ankle of interest appeared in shots.  The industry responded with its usual alacrity and “ankle monitor” pouches were soon being strutted down the catwalks.

Chanel's boot-mounted ankle pouch in matching quilted black leather.

In one of several examples of this instance of Lohanic influence on design, in their Spring 2007 collection, Chanel included a range of ankle pouches.  Functional to the extent of affording the wearing a hands-free experience and storage for perhaps a lipstick, gloss and credit card (other than a phone the modern young spinster should seldom need to carry more), the range was said quickly to "sell-out" although the concept hasn't been seen in subsequent collections so analysts of such things should make of that what they will.  Chanel offered the same idea in a boot, a design borrowed from the use by military although they tended to be more commodious and, being often used by aircrew, easily accessible while in a seated position, the sealable flap on the outer calf, close to the knee.   

The origin of the special status of diplomats dates from Antiquity when such envoys were the only conduit of communication between emperors, kings, princes, dukes and such.  They thus needed their emissaries to be granted safe passage in what could be hostile territory, negotiations (including threats & ultimata) often conducted between warring tribes & states: the preamble to the UNVCDR captures the spirit of these traditions:

THE STATES PARTIES TO THE PRESENT CONVENTION,

RECALLING that peoples of all nations from ancient times have recognized the status of diplomatic agents,

HAVING IN MIND the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations concerning the sovereign equality of States, the maintenance of international peace and security, and the promotion of friendly relations among nations,

BELIEVING that an international convention on diplomatic intercourse, privileges and immunities would contribute to the development of friendly relations among nations, irrespective of their differing constitutional and social systems,

REALIZING that the purpose of such privileges and immunities is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performance of the functions of diplomatic missions as representing States,

AFFIRMING that the rules of customary international law should continue to govern questions not expressly regulated by the provisions of the present Convention have agreed as follows…

US Department of State diplomatic pouch tag.

The diplomatic pouch (known also, less attractively, as the “diplomatic bag”) is granted essentially the same protection as the diplomat.  Historically, the diplomatic pouch was exactly that: a leather pouch containing an emissary’s documents, carried usually on horseback and in the modern age it may be anything from an envelope to a shipping container.  What distinguishes it from other containers is (1) clear markings asserting status and (2) usually some sort of locking mechanism (the origin of which was an envelope’s wax seal and if appropriately marked, a diplomatic pouch should be exempt from any sort of inspection by the receiving country.  Strictly speaking, the pouch should contain only official documents but there have been many cases of other stuff being “smuggled in” including gold, weapons subsequently used in murders, foreign currency, narcotics, bottles of alcohol and various illicit items including components of this and that subject to UN (or other) sanctions.  For that reason, there are limited circumstances in which a state may intersect or inspect the contents of a diplomatic pouch.  The protocols relating to the diplomatic pouch are listed in Article 27 of the UNVCDR:

(1) The receiving State shall permit and protect free communication on the part of the mission for all official purposes. In communicating with the Government and the other missions and consulates of the sending State, wherever situated, the mission may employ all appropriate means, including diplomatic couriers and messages in code or cipher. However, the mission may install and use a wireless transmitter only with the consent of the receiving State.

(2) The official correspondence of the mission shall be inviolable. Official correspondence means all correspondence relating to the mission and its functions.

(3) The diplomatic bag shall not be opened or detained.

(4) The packages constituting the diplomatic bag must bear visible external marks of their character and may contain only diplomatic documents or articles intended for official use.

(5) The diplomatic courier, who shall be provided with an official document indicating his status and the number of packages constituting the diplomatic bag, shall be protected by the receiving State in the performance of his functions. He shall enjoy person inviolability and shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention.

(6) The sending State or the mission may designate diplomatic couriers ad hoc. In such cases the provisions of paragraph 5 of this article shall also apply, except that the immunities therein mentioned shall cease to apply when such a courier has delivered to the consignee the diplomatic bag in his charge.

(7) A diplomatic bag may be entrusted to the captain of a commercial aircraft scheduled to land at an authorized port of entry. He shall be provided with an official document indicating the number of packages constituting the bag but he shall not be considered to be a diplomatic courier. The mission may send one of its members to take possession of the diplomatic bag directly and freely from the captain of the aircraft.

Former US Ambassador to Pretoria, Lana Marks (b 1953).

Some ambassadors have been more prepared than most for handing the diplomatic bag, notably Ms Lana Marks, the South African-born US business executive who founded her eponymous company specializing in designer handbags.  In 2018, Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2021) nominated Ms Marks as US ambassador to South Africa, a role in which she served between January 2020 and January 2021 when, under the convention observed by political appointees, she resigned her office.  Although Ms Marks had no background in international relations, such appointments are not unusual and certainly not exclusive to US presidents.  Indeed, although professional diplomats may undergo decades of preparation for ambassadorial roles, there are many cases where the host nation greatly has valued a political appointee because of the not unreasonable assumption they’re more likely to have the “ear of the president” than a Foggy Bottom (a metronym for the State Department, the reference to the department's headquarters in the Harry S Truman Building which sits in the Foggy Bottom neighborhood of Washington DC) apparatchik who typically would be restricted to dealing with the secretary of state.  That was apparently the case when Robert Nesen (1918–2005, a Californian Cadillac dealer), was appointed US ambassador to Australia (1981-1985), by Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; US president 1981-1989), a reward (if that’s how being sent to live in Canberra can be described) for long service to the Republican Party fundraising rather than a reflection of Mr Reagan’s fondness for Cadillacs (Mr Nesen’s dealership also held other franchises) although it was Mr Reagan who "arranged" for Cadillac to replace Lincoln as supplier of the White House limousine fleet.

The Princess Diana by Lana Marks is sold out in emerald green but remains available in gold, black and chocolate brown.

Uniquely, South Africa has three cities designated as capitals: Pretoria (administrative/executive), Cape Town (legislative, parliament), and Bloemfontein (judicial, Supreme Court of Appeal).  In diplomatic protocol, ambassadors are accredited to the Republic of South Africa and present their credentials to the president and in practice this is done in Pretoria (Tshwane).  Ms Marks’ connection to the Trump administration’s conduct of foreign policy came through her membership of Mr Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club (annual membership fee US$200,000, the "world-renowned Trump International Golf Club, West Palm Beach" a five minute drive), an institution which also produced the country’s ambassador to the Dominican Republic.  Ms Marks seems to have fitted in well at Mar-a-Lago, telling South Africa's Business Live: “It's the most exclusive part of the US, a small enclave, an island north of Miami.  One-third of the world's wealth passes through Palm Beach in season. The crème de la crème of the world lives there.”  One trusts the people of South Africa were impressed and perhaps even grateful.

Osphresiolagnia

Osphresiolagnia (pronounced aus-free-see-a-lan-gee-ah)

A paraphilia characterized by recurrent sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviour involving smells.

Early-mid twentieth century: A coining in clinical psychiatry the construct being osphres(is) + lagina.  Osphresis was from the Ancient Greek ὀσφρῆσις (osphrēsis) (sense of smell; olfaction).  Lagina was from the Ancient Greek λαγνεία (lagina) (lust; sexual desire), from λᾰγνός (lagnos) (lustful; sexually aroused).  Osphresiolagnia thus translated literally as “lust or sexual arousal related to or induced by one’s sense of smell”. Osphresiolagnia & Osphresiolagnism are nouns and osphresiolagnic is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is Osphresiolagnias.

The synonym is olfactophilia (sexual arousal caused by smells or odors, especially from the human body) and in modern clinical use, that’s seems now the accepted form.  Although now rare, in clinical use a renifleur was paraphiliac who derived sexual pleasure from certain smells.  Renifleur was from the French noun renifleur (the feminine renifleuse, the plural renifleurs), the construct being renifler +‎ -eur.  The construct of the verb renifler was re- (used in the sense of “to do; to perform the function”) + nifler (to irritate, to annoy); it was from the same Germanic root as the Italian niffo & niffa (snout) and related to the Low German Niff (nose, mouth, bill), the Dutch neb (nose, beak) and the English neb (nose, beak, face).  The French suffix -eur was from the Middle French, from the Old French -eor or -or, from the Latin -ātōrem & -tor and a doublet of -ateur.  It was used to form masculine agent nouns from verbs (some of which were used also as adjectives).

Pioneering Austrian psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) never developed his hypothesis of osphresiolagnia into a fully-developed theory and in his papers it’s mentioned only as an aspect of the psychoanalytic exploration of human sexuality, specifically focusing on the role of olfactory stimuli (sense of smell) in sexual arousal.  It was part of a body of work in which he explored his concept of fetishism and infantile sexuality.  In psychoanalysis, osphresiolagnia described the condition (“the state” might now be thought a better way of putting it) where certain smells become associated with sexual pleasure or arousal and to Freud these naturally were those related to bodily functions, such as sweat, skin, or other natural odors because he believed different sensory experiences, including smell, could become a focus of sexual fixation, particularly if something in early psychosexual development caused this association.  The tie-in with fetishism was that an obsessive focus on the sense of can form as a way of displacing or substituting more normative sexual interests.  Freud spoke also of the significance of the senses (including smell) in early childhood development and linked them to psychosexual stages, where early experiences with stimuli can influence later adult sexuality and while he didn’t use the word, he believed a smell associated with some significant childhood experience, could, even decades later, act as a “trigger”.  Although it’s been in the literature for more than a century, osmophresiolagnia (also now sometimes called “olfactory stimulation”) seems to have aroused more clinical and academic interest in the last fifteen years and while the psychological and physiological responses to certain smells have been well-documented, it was usually in the context of revulsion and the way this response could influence the decision-making processes.  However, positive responses can also be influential, thus the renewed interest.

In medicine and the study of human and animal sexuality, the significance of “olfactory attraction” has been researched and appears to be well understood.  At its most, the idea of olfactory attraction is that animals (including humans) can be attracted to someone based on scent; in the patients seen by psychiatrists, they can also be attracted to objects based on their smell, either because of their inherent quality or by their association with someone (either someone specific or “anyone”.  The best known aspect of the science is the study of pheromones (in biology A chemical secreted by an animal which acts to affects the development or behavior of other members of the same species, functioning often as a means of attracting a member of the opposite sex).  Human pheromones have been synthesised and are available commercially in convenient spray-packs for those who wish to enhance their desirability with a chemical additive.  More generally, there is also the notion of “fragrance attraction” which describes the allure another’s smell (either natural or the scent they wear) exerts and this can manifest in “objective transference” (keeping close during periods of absence a lover’s article of clothing or inhaling from the bottle of perfume they wear.

The opposite of being attracted to a smell is finding one repellent.  What is known in the profession technically as ORS (olfactory reference syndrome) has never been classified as a separate disorder in either the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Classification of Diseases (ICD).  The DSM-III-R (1987) did mention ORS in the context of “aversion”, noting “convictions that the person emits a foul odor…are one of the most common types of delusional disorder, somatic type”, the idea extended in DSM-IV (1994) which referred to the concept as a type of delusional disorder, somatic type, although the term “olfactory reference syndrome” was not mentioned.

In October 2024, it was reported by Greek news services that a court in Thessaloniki (the capital of the Macedonia region and Greece's second city) in the north of the country had imposed a suspended one-month prison sentence on a man convicted of “…disturbing his neighbors by repeatedly sneaking into their properties to smell their shoes.”  According to the AP (Associated Press), the 28-year-old man was unable to explain his behaviour although he did tell the court he was “embarrassed by it”, adding that he had “…no intention of breaking the law or harming anybody…” and his neighbours did testify he never displayed any signs of aggression during his nocturnal visits to the shoes, left outside the door to air.  The offences were committed in the village of Sindos, some 15 kilometres (9 miles) west of Thessaloniki and the police were called only after the man had ignored requests sent to his family that his conduct stop.  According to the neighbours, there had in the last six months been at least three prior instances of shoe sniffing.  In addition to the suspended sentence, the defendant was ordered to attend therapy sessions.

The postman always sniffs twice, Balnagask Circle, Torry, Aberdeen, Scotland, August 2024.  Helpfully, the video clip was posted by the Daily Mail and from his grave of a hundred-odd years, old Lord Northcliffe (Alfred Harmsworth, 1865–1922) would be delighted.

Osphresiolagnia is however not culturally specific and in August 2024, a postman delivering mail to an address on Balnagask Circle in the Torry area of South Aberdeen, Scotland was captured on a doorbell camera, pausing to “to sniff a girl's shoes.”  All appeared normal until the osphresiolagnic servant of the Royal Mail had put the letters in the slot but then he turned and, after a brief glance at the shoe rack, bent down and picked up a white trainer which he sniffed before leaving to resume his round (and possibly his sniffing).  The mother of the girl whose shoes fell victim to the postman posted the video on social media, tagging the entry: “I would just like to let everyone know just to watch out for this postman; he sniffed my daughter's shoes; what an absolute creep.”  The clip came to the attention of the Scottish police which issued a statement: “We received a report of a man acting suspiciously in the Balnagask Circle area of Aberdeen.  Enquiries were carried out and no criminality was established. Suitable advice was given.”  It wasn’t made clear what that advice was or to whom it was delivered but presumably the constabulary’s attitude was: no shoe being harmed during this sniffing, all’s well that ends well.

Shoe-sniffing should not be confused with Podophilia (a paraphilia describing the sexualized objectification of feet (and sometimes footwear), commonly called foot fetishism although the correct clinical description is now “foot partialism”).  The construct was podo- +‎ -philia.  Podo- (pertaining to a foot or a foot-like part) was from the Ancient Greek πούς (poús), from the primitive Indo-European pṓds.  It was cognate with the Mycenaean Greek po, the Latin pēs, the Sanskrit पद् (pad), the Old Armenian ոտն (otn) & հետ (het), the Gothic fōtus and the Old English fōt (from which Modern English gained “foot”).  It was Sigmund Freud who admitted that, lawfulness aside, as animals, the only truly aberrant sexual behavior in humans could be said to be its absence (something which the modern asexual movement re-defines rather than disproves).  It seemed to be in that spirit the DSM-5 (2013) was revised to treat podophila 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 clinicians agree with the new permissiveness isn’t known but there's nothing in the DSM-5-TR (2022) to suggest podophiles will soon again be labeled deviants.

Point of vulnerability to osphresiolagnism: Lindsay Lohan taking off her shoes and putting them on the shoe rack.  The photo shoot featured Ms Lohan as a nueva embajadora de Allbirds (new Allbirds ambassador), in a promotion for Allbirds (Comfortable, Sustainable Shoes & Apparel) and the shoes are the Tree Flyer in Lux Pink which include “no plastics” in their construction.  The photo session may have been shot on a Wednesday.

Shoe sniffing is different and clinicians define it as an instance of “intimacy by proxy” in a similar class to those who steal women’s underwear from their clothes lines; an attempt to in some way be associated with the wearer (or just "women" generally).  This differs from those with an interest in the shoes or garments as objects because, conveniently & lawfully they can fulfil their desires by buying what they want from a shop.  How prevalent are such proclivities isn’t known because, the fetish being pursued in a lawful (and in most cases presumably secret) manner, unless self-reported, clinicians would never become aware of the activity.

Bedint

Bedint (pronounced buh-dent (U) or bed-ent (non-U))

(1) Something which suggests a bourgeois aspiration to the tastes or habits of the upper classes.

(2) A generalized expression of disapproval of anyone or anything not in accord with the social standards or expectation of the upper classes.

(3) Any behavior thought inappropriate (ie something of which one for whatever reason disapproves).

1920s:  A coining attributed to variously to (1) English writer and diplomat Harold Nicolson (1886–1968), (2) his wife, the writer Vita Sackville-West (1892–1962) or (3) speculatively, Vita Sackville-West’s family.  The word is of Germanic origin and although there are variants, the source of all was the Middle Dutch bedienen, the construct being be- +‎ dienen.  The Middle Dutch be- was from the Old Dutch bi- & be-, from the Middle High German be-, from the Old High German bi-, from the Proto-Germanic bi-, from the primitive Indo-European hepi and was used to indicate a verb is acting on a direct object.  Dienen was from the Middle Dutch dienen, from the Old Dutch thienon, from the Proto-Germanic þewanōną and meant "to be of assistance to, to serve; to serve (at a tavern or restaurant); to operate (a device)".  In the rituals of the Roman Catholic Church, it has the specific technical meaning "to administer the last sacraments (the last rites)".  A bedient (the second third-person singular present indicative of bedienen) was thus a servant, a waiter etc.  The acceptable pronunciation is buh-dent while bed-int, be-dit or anything else is the depth of bedintism.  Bedint is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is bedints.  As a non-standard word, there are no derived forms but, for humorous effect, some have appeared including the nouns, bedintism bedinity & bedintism and the adjectives bedinted, bedintish & bedintesque.  Caution must be exercised because the very use of the word can be judged bedint.

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

The idea thus is exemplified by a maître d'hôtel (head waiter) who, well dressed and well mannered, appears superficially not dissimilar to someone from the upper classes but of course is someone from a lower class, adopting for professional reasons, some of their characteristics (dress, manner, speech (and sometimes snobbery) etc).  Whoever coined the word, it was certainly popularized by Harold Nicholson and Vita Sackville-West, neither of whom were much reticent in finding fault in others.  It seems initially to have been their shared code for discussing such things but soon became common currency amongst the smart set in which they moved and from there, eventually entered the language although not all dictionaries acknowledge its existence and it should probably be thought non-standard.  It one of those words which need not be taken too seriously and is most fun to use if played with a bit (bedintish, bedintesque, bedintingly bedinded, bedintism, bedintology etc).  As a word, although from day one weaponized, bedint was subject to mission-creep to the point where, as Lewis Carroll's (pen name of Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (1832–1898) Humpty Dumpty "in rather a scornful tone" explained to Alice in Alice Through the Looking-Glass (1871): "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

Figures from the lost, pre-1914 world: Harold Nicolson & Vita-Sackville West, London, 1913.

As originally used by Nicolson & Sackville-West, bedint was one the many linguistic tools of exclusion and snobbery; these devices exist among all social classes, some of which, when part of “working-class consciousness” or similar constructs are classified as “inverted snobbery”.  Bedint was used to refer to anyone not from the layers of the upper class (royalty, the aristocracy, the gentry) in some way aping the behavior or manners of “their betters”; the behavior need not be gauche or inappropriate, just that of someone “not one of us”.  Nicolson didn’t exclude himself from his own critique and, as one who “married up” into the socially superior Sackville family, was his whole life acutely aware of what behaviors of his might be thought bedint, self-labelling as he thought he deserved.  His marriage he never thought at all bedint although many of those he condemned as bedint would have found it scandalously odd, however happy the diaries of both parties suggest that for almost fifty years it was.

Harold Nicolson & Vita-Sackville West, Sissinghurst Castle Garden, Kent, 1932.

Bedint as a word proved so useful however that it came to be applied to members of the upper classes (even royalty) were they thought guilty of some transgression (like dullness) or hobbies thought insufficiently aristocratic (ie "a bit middle class" which was about as bad as insults got).  The idea of some behavior not befitting one’s social status was thus still a thread but by the post-war years, when bedint had entered vocabulary of the middle-class (a bedint thing in itself one presumes Nicolson and Sackville-West would have thought), it was sometimes little more than a synonym for bad behavior (poor form as they might have said), just an expression of disapproval.  That didn't mean all "non-typical" behavior was bedint because certain eccentricities or a bohemian lifestyle might be tolerated or even admired.  Bedint-tagging can thus be thought as something within the rubric of labeling theory.  

Harold Nicolson & Vita-Sackville West, Sissinghurst Castle Garden, Kent, 1960.

The biographical work on Nicolson reveals a not especially likable snob but, in common with many fine and sharp-eyed diarists, he seems to have been good company though perhaps best enjoyed in small doses.  One of those figures (with which English political life is studded) remembered principally for having been almost a successful politician, almost a great writer or almost a viceroy, he even managed to be almost a lord but, despite switching party allegiances to curry favor with the Labour government (1945-1951), the longed-for peerage was never offered and he was compelled to accept a knighthood.  His KCVO (Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order, an honor in the personal gift of the sovereign) was granted in 1953 in thanks for his generous (though well-reviewed and received) biography of the stamp-collecting George V (1865-1936, King of England 1910-1936) although those who could read between the lines found it not hard to work out which of the monarch’s activities the author thought bedint.  As it was, Nicolson took his KCVO, several rungs down the ladder of the Order of Precedence, accepting it only "faute de mieux" (in the absence of anything better) and describing it “a bedint knighthood”, wondering if, given the shame, he should resign from his clubs.

Wedding day: Duff Cooper & Lady Diana Manners, St Margaret's Church, London, 2 June 1919.

So a knighthood, a thing which many have craved, can be bedint if it's not the right knighthood.  When the Tory politician Duff Cooper (1890–1954) ended his term (1944-1948) as the UK's ambassador to France, the Labor government (which had kept him on) granted a GCMG (Knight Grand Commander of the order of St Michael & St George) and although he thought his years as a cabinet minister might have warranted a peerage, he accepted while wryly noting in his diary it was hardly something for which he should  be congratulated because: "No ambassador in Paris has ever failed to acquire the it since the order was invented and the Foreign Office has shown how much importance they attach to it by conferring it simultaneously on my successor Oliver Harvey (1893-1968), who is, I suppose, the least distinguished man who has ever been appointed to the post".  Still, Cooper took his "bedint" GCMG and when a Tory government returned to office, he was, shortly before his death, raised to the peerage, choosing to be styled Viscount Norwich of Aldwick.  His wife (Lady Diana Cooper (1892–1986) didn't fancy becoming "Lady Norwich" because she though it "sounded like porridge" (additionally, she had good "brand recognition") and took the precaution of placing notices in The Times and Daily Telegraph telling all who mattered she would continue to be styled "Lady Diana Cooper".  They had a "modern marriage" so differences between them were not unusual.

Ultracrepidarian

Ultracrepidarian (pronounced uhl-truh-krep-i-dair-ee-uhn)

Of or pertaining to a person who criticizes, judges, or gives advice outside their area of expertise

1819: An English adaptation of the historic words sūtor, ne ultra crepidam, uttered by the Greek artist Apelles and reported by the Pliny the Elder.  Translating literally as “let the shoemaker venture no further” and sometimes cited as ne supra crepidam sūtor judicare, the translation something like “a cobbler should stick to shoes”.  From the Latin, ultra is beyond, sūtor is cobbler and crepidam is accusative singular of crepida (from the Ancient Greek κρηπίς (krēpís)) and means sandal or sole of a shoe.  Ultracrepidarian is a noun & verb and ultracrepidarianism is a noun; the noun plural is ultracrepidarians.  For humorous purposes, forms such as ultracrepidarist, ultracrepidarianish, ultracrepidarianize & ultracrepidarianesque have been coined; all are non-standard.

Ultracrepidarianism describes the tendency among some to offer opinions and advice on matters beyond their competence.  The word entered English in 1819 when used by English literary critic and self-described “good hater”, William Hazlitt (1778–1830), in an open letter to William Gifford (1756–1826), editor of the Quarterly Review, a letter described by one critic as “one of the finest works of invective in the language” although another suggested it was "one of his more moderate castigations" a hint that though now neglected, for students of especially waspish invective, he can be entertaining; the odd quote from him would certainly lend a varnish of erudition to trolling.  Ultracrepidarian comes from a classical allusion, Pliny the Elder (circa 24-79) recording the habit of the famous Greek painter Apelles (a fourth century BC contemporary of Alexander the Great (Alexander III of Macedon, 356-323 BC)), to display his work in public view, then conceal himself close by to listen to the comments of those passing.  One day, a cobbler paused and picked fault with Apelles’ rendering of sandals and the artist immediately took his brushes and pallet and touched-up the errant straps.  Encouraged, the amateur critic then let his eye wander above the ankle and suggested how the leg might be improved but this Apelles rejected, telling him to speak only of shoes and otherwise maintain a deferential silence.  Pliny hinted the artist's words of dismissal may not have been polite.

So critics should comment only on that about which they know.  The phrase in English is usually “cobbler, stick to your last” (a last a shoemaker’s pattern, ultimately from a Germanic root meaning “to follow a track'' hence footstep) and exists in many European languages: zapatero a tus zapatos is the Spanish, schoenmaker, blijf bij je leest the Dutch, skomager, bliv ved din læst the Danish and schuster, bleib bei deinen leisten, the German.  Pliny’s actual words were ne supra crepidam judicaret, (crepidam a sandal or the sole of a shoe), but the idea is conveyed is in several ways in Latin tags, such as Ne sutor ultra crepidam (sutor means “cobbler”, a word which survives in Scotland in the spelling souter).  The best-known version is the abbreviated tag ultra crepidam (beyond the sole), and it’s that which Hazlitt used to construct ultracrepidarian.  Crepidam is from the Ancient Greek κρηπίς (krēpís) and has no link with words like decrepit or crepitation (which are from the Classical Latin crepare (to creak, rattle, or make a noise)) or crepuscular (from the Latin word for twilight); crepidarian is an adjective rare perhaps to the point of extinction meaning “pertaining to a shoemaker”.

The related terms are "Nobel disease" & "Nobel syndrome" which are used to describe some of the opinions offered by Nobel laureates on subjects beyond their specialization.  In some cases this is "demand" rather than "supply" driven because, once a prize winner is added to a media outlet's "list of those who comment on X", if they turn out to give answers which generate audience numbers, controversy or clicks, they become "talent" and may be asked questions about matters of which they know little.  This happens because some laureates in the three "hard" prizes (physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine) operate in esoteric corners of their discipline; asking a particle physicist something about plasma physics on the basis of their having won the physics prize may not elicit useful information.  Of course those who have won the economics gong or one of what are now the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) prizes (peace & literature) may be assumed to have helpful opinions on everything.

Jackson Pollock (1912-1956): Blue Poles

Number 11 (Blue poles, 1952), oil, enamel and aluminum paint with glass on canvas.

In 1973, when a million dollars was a still lot of money, the NGA (National Gallery of Australia), a little controversially, paid Aus$1.3 million for Jackson Pollock’s (1912-1956) Number 11, 1952, popularly known as Blue Poles since it was first exhibited in 1954, the new name reputedly chosen by the artist.  It was some years ago said to be valued at up to US$100 million but, given the increase in the money supply (among the rich who trade this stuff) over the last two decades odd, that estimate may now be conservative although the suggestion in 2016 the value may have inflated to as much as US$350 million was though to be "on the high side".  Blue Poles emerged during Pollock’s "drip period" (1947-1950), a method which involved techniques such throwing paint at a canvas spread across the floor.  The art industry liked these (often preferring the more evocative term "action painting") and they remain his most popular works, although at this point, he abandoned the dripping and moved to his “black porings phase” a darker, simpler style which didn’t attract the same commercial interest.  He later returned to more colorful ways but his madness and alcoholism worsened; he died in a drink-driving accident.

Alchemy (1947), oil, aluminum, alkyd enamel paint with sand, pebbles, fibres, and broken wooden sticks on canvas.

Although the general public remained uninterested (except in the price tags) or sceptical, there were critics, always drawn to a “troubled genius”, who praised Pollock’s work and the industry approves of any artist who (1) had the decency to die young and (2) produced lots of stuff which can sell for millions.  US historian of art, curator & author Helen A Harrison (b 1943; director (1990-2024) of the Pollock-Krasner House and Study Center, the former home and studio of the Abstract Expressionist artists Jackson Pollock and Lee Krasner in East Hampton, New York) is an admirer, noting the “pioneering drip technique…” which “…introduced the notion of action painting", where the canvas became the space with which the artist actively would engage”.  As a thumbnail sketch she offered:

Number 14: Gray (1948), enamel over gesso on paper.

“Reminiscent of the Surrealist notions of the subconscious and automatic painting, Pollock's abstract works cemented his reputation as the most critically championed proponent of Abstract Expressionism. His visceral engagement with emotions, thoughts and other intangibles gives his abstract imagery extraordinary immediacy, while his skillful use of fluid pigment, applied with dance-like movements and sweeping gestures that seldom actually touched the surface, broke decisively with tradition. At first sight, Pollock's vigorous method appears to create chaotic labyrinths, but upon close inspection his strong rhythmic structures become evident, revealing a fascinating complexity and deeper significance.  Far from being calculated to shock, Pollock's liquid medium was crucial to his pictorial aims.  It proved the ideal vehicle for the mercurial content that he sought to communicate 'energy and motion made visible - memories arrested in space'.”

Number 13A: Arabesque (1948), oil and enamel on canvas.

Critics either less visionary or more fastidious seemed often as appalled by Pollock’s violence of technique as they were by the finished work (or “products” as some labelled the drip paintings), questioning whether any artistic skill or vision even existed, one finding them “…mere unorganized explosions of random energy, and therefore meaningless.”  The detractors used the language of academic criticism but meant the same thing as the frequent phrase of an unimpressed public: “That’s not art, anyone could do that.”

Number 1, 1949 (1949), enamel and metallic paint on canvas. 

There have been famous responses to  “That’s not art, anyone could do that” but Ms Harrison's was practical, offering people the opportunity to try.  To the view that “…people thought it was arbitrary, that anyone can fling paint around”, Ms Harrison conceded it was true anybody could “fling paint around” but that was her point, anybody could, but having flung, they wouldn’t “…necessarily come up with anything” by which she meant the wouldn't necessarily come up with anything of which the critical establishment (a kind of freemasonry of the art business) would approve (ie could put a price tag on).

Helen A Harrison, The Jackson Pollock Box (Cider Mill Press, 96pp, ISBN-10:1604331860, ISBN-13:978-1604331868).

In 2010, Ms Harrison released The Jackson Pollock Box, a kit which, in addition to an introductory text, included paint brushes, drip bottles and canvases so people could do their own flinging and compare the result against a Pollock.  After that, they may agree with collector Peggy Guggenheim (1898-1979) that Pollock was “...the greatest painter since Picasso” or remain unrepentant ultracrepidarians.  Of course, many who thought their own eye for art quite well-trained didn't agree with Ms Guggenheim.  In 1945, just after the war, Duff Cooper (1890–1954), then serving as Britain's ambassador to France, came across Pablo Picasso (1881–1973) leaving an exhibition of paintings by English children aged 5-10 and in his diary noted the great cubist saying he "had been much impressed".  "No wonder" added the ambassador, "the pictures are just as good as his".

Dresses & drips: Three photographs by Cecil Beaton (1904-1980), shot for a three-page feature in Vogue (March 1951) titled American Fashion: The New Soft Look which juxtaposed Pollock’s paintings hung in New York’s Betty Parsons Gallery with the season’s haute couture by Irene (1872-1951) & Henri Bendel (1868-1936).

Beaton choose the combinations of fashion and painting; pairing Lavender Mist (1950, left) with a short black ball gown of silk paper taffeta with large pink bow at one shoulder and an asymmetrical hooped skirt best illustrates the value of his trained eye.  Critics and social commentators have always liked these three pages, relishing the opportunity to comment on the interplay of so many of the clashing forces of modernity: the avant-garde and fashion, production and consumption, abstraction and representation, painting and photography, autonomy and decoration, masculinity and femininity, art and commerce.  Historians of art note it too because it was the abstract expressionism of the 1940s which was both uniquely an American movement and the one which in the post-war years saw the New York supplant Paris as the centre of Western art.  There have been interesting discussions about when last it could be said Western art had a "centre".

Blue Poles, upside down.

Although the suggestion might offend the trained and discerning eyes of art critics, it’s doubtful that for ultracrepidarians the experience of viewing Blue Poles would much be different were it to be hung upside down.  Fortunately, the world does have a goodly stock of art critics who can explain that while Pollock did more than once say his works should be interpreted “subjectively”, their intended orientation is a part of the whole and an inversion would change the visual dynamics and gravitational illusions upon which the abstraction effects depend would be changed.  It would still be a painting but, in a sense, not the one the artist painted.  Because the drip technique involved “flinging and poring paint” onto a canvas spread across a studio’s floor, there was not exactly a randomness in where the paint landed but physics did mean gravity exerted some pull (in flight and on the ground), lending layers and rivulets what must be a specific downward orientation.  Thus, were the work to be hung inverted, what was in the creative process a downward flow would be seen as “flowing uphill” as it were.  The compositional elements which lent the work its name were course the quasi-vertical “poles” placed at slight angles and its these which are the superstructure which “anchor” the rest of the drips and, being intrinsically “directional”, they too have a “right way up”.  There is in the assessment of art the “eye of the beholder” but although it may be something they leave unstated, most critics will be of the “some eyes are more equal than others” school.

Mondrian’s 1941 New York City 1 as it (presumably correctly) sat in the artist's studio in 1944 (left) and as it was since 1945 exhibited (upside-down) in New York and Düsseldorf (right).  Spot the difference.

So although ultracrepidarians may not “get it” (even after digesting the critics’ explanations) and wouldn’t be able to tell whether or not it was hung correctly, that’s because they’re philistines.  In the world of abstract art however, even the critics can be fooled: in 2022, it was revealed a work in Piet Mondrian’s (1872-1944) 1941 New York City 1 series had for 77 years been hanging upside down.  First in exhibited in 1945 in New York’s MOMA (Museum of Modern Art), the piece was created with multi-colored adhesive paper tape and, in an incorrect orientation, it has since 1980 hung in the Düsseldorf Museum as part of the Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen’s collection.  The decades-long, trans-Atlantic mistake came to light during a press conference held to announce the Kunstsammlung’s new Mondrian exhibition and the conclusion was the error may have been caused by something as simple as the packing-crate being overturned or misleading instructions being given to the staff.  1941 New York City 1 will remain upside because of the condition of the adhesive strips.  “The adhesive tapes are already extremely loose and hanging by a thread” a curator was quoted as saying, adding that if it were now to be turned-over, “…gravity would pull it into another direction.  And it’s now part of the work’s story.”  Mondrian was one of the more significant theorists of abstract art and its withdrawal from nature and natural subjects.  “Denaturalization” he proclaimed to be a milestone in human progress, adding: “The power of neo-plastic painting lies in having shown the necessity of this denaturalization in painterly terms... to denaturalize is to abstract... to abstract is to deepen.”  Now even ultracrepidarians can understand.

Eye of the beholder: Portrait of Lindsay Lohan in the style of Claude Monet (1840–1926) at craiyon.com and available at US$26 on an organic cotton T-shirt made in a factory powered by renewable energy.

Whether the arguments about what deserves to be called “art” began among prehistoric “artists” and their critics in caves long ago isn’t known but it’s certainly a dispute with a long history.  In the sense it’s a subjective judgment the matter was doubtless often resolved by a potential buyer declining to purchase but during the twentieth century it became a contested topic and there were celebrated exhibits and squabbles which for decades played out before, in the post modern age, the final answer appeared to be something was art if variously (1) the creator said it was or (2) an art critic said it was or (3) it was in an art gallery or (4) the price tag was sufficiently impressive.

So what constitutes “art” is a construct of time, place & context which evolves, shaped by historical, cultural, social, economic, political & personal influences, factors which in recent years have had to be cognizant of the rise of cultural equivalency, the recognition that Western concepts such as the distinction between “high” (or “fine”) art and “folk” (or “popular”) art can’t be applied to work from other traditions where cultural objects are not classified by a graduated hierarchy.  In other words, everybody’s definition is equally valid.  That doesn’t mean there are no longer gatekeepers because the curators in institutions such as museums, galleries & academies all discriminate and thus play a significant role in deciding what gets exhibited, studied & promoted, even though few would now dare to suggest what is art and what is not: that would be cultural imperialism.

Eye of the prompt 1.0: An AI (artificial intelligence) generated portrait of Lindsay Lohan by ChatGPT imagined in "drip painting style", this one using an interpretation which overlaid "curated drips" over "flung paint".  This could be rendered using Ms Harrison's Jackson Pollock Box but would demand some talent.

In the twentieth century, it seemed to depend on artistic intent, something which transcended a traditional measure such as aesthetic value but as the graphic art in advertising and that with a political purpose such as agitprop became bigger, brighter and more intrusive, such forms also came to be regarded as art or at least worth of being studied or exhibited on the same basis, in the same spaces as oil on canvas portraits & landscapes.  Once though, an unfamiliar object in such places could shock as French painter & sculptor Marcel Duchamp (1887-1968) managed in 1917 when he submitted a porcelain urinal as his piece for an exhibition in New York, his rationale being “…everyday objects raised to the dignity of a work of art by the artist's act of choice.”  Even then it wasn’t a wholly original approach but the art establishment has never quite recovered and from that urinal to Dadaism, to soup cans to unmade beds, it became accepted that “anything goes” and people should be left to make of it what they will.  Probably the last remaining reliable guide to what really is "art" remains the price tag.

Eye of the prompt 1.1: An AI (artificial intelligence) generated portrait of Lindsay Lohan by ChatGPT imagined in "drip painting style", this one closer to Pollock’s “action painting” technique.

His drip period wholly non-representational, Pollock didn’t produce recognizable portraiture so applying the technique for this purpose demands guesswork.  As AI illustrates, it can be done but, in blending two incompatible modes, whether it looks much like what Pollock would have produced had he accepted a “paint Lindsay Lohan” commission, is wholly speculative.  What is more likely is that even if some sort of hybrid, a portrait by Pollock would have been an abstraction altogether more chaotic and owing little to the structure on which such works usually depend in that there probably would have been no central focal point, fewer hints of symmetry and a use of shading producing a face not lineal in its composition.  That’s what his sense of “continuous motion” dictated: no single form becoming privileged over the rest.  So, this too is not for the literalists schooled in the tradition of photo-realism but as a work it’s also an example of how most armed with Ms Harrison's Jackson Pollock Box could with "drip & fling" produce this but not necessarily would produce this, chaos on canvas needing talent too.

1948 Cisitalia 202 GT (left; 1947-1952) and 1962 Jaguar E-Type (1961-1974; right), Museum of Modern Art (MoMA), New York City.

Urinals tend not to be admired for their aesthetic qualities but there are those who find beauty in stuff as diverse as math equations and battleships.  Certain cars have long been objects which can exert an emotional pull on those with a feeling for such things and if the lines are sufficiently pleasing, many flaws in execution or engineering can be forgiven, sometimes to the point they become part of the charm.  New York’s MoMA in 1972 acknowledged such creations can be treated as works of art when they added a 1948 Cisitalia 202 GT finished in “Cisitalia Red” (MoMA object number 409.1972) to their collection, the press release noting it was “…the first time that an art museum in the U.S. put a car into its collection.”  Others appeared from time-to-time and while the 1953 Willys-Overland Jeep M-38A1 Utility Truck (MoMA object number 261.2002) perhaps is not conventionally beautiful, its brutish functionalism has a certain simplicity of form and in the exhibition notes MoMA clarified somewhat by describing it as a “rolling sculpture”, presumably in the spirit of a urinal being a “static sculpture”, both to be admired as pieces of design perfectly suited to their intended purpose, something of an art in itself.  Of the 1962 Jaguar E-Type (informally sometimes as XKE or XK-E in the US) open two seater (OTS, better known as a roadster and acquired as MoMA object number 113.996), there was no need to explain because it’s one of the most seductive shapes ever rendered in metal.  Enzo Ferrari (1898-1988) attended the 1961 Geneva International Motor Show (now defunct but, on much the same basis as manufacturers east of Suez buying brand-names such as MG, Jaguar and such, the name has been purchased for use by an event in staged in Qatar) when the E-Type made its stunning debut and part of folklore is he called it “the most beautiful car in the world”.  Whether those words ever passed his lips isn’t certain because the sources vary slightly in detail and il Commendatore apparently never confirmed or denied the sentiment but it’s easy to believe and to this day many agree just looking at the thing can be a visceral experience.  The MoMA car is finished in "Opalescent Dark Blue" with a grey interior and blue soft-top (there are those who would prefer it in BRG (British Racing Green) over tan leather) and although as a piece of design it's not flawless, anyone who can't see the beauty in a Series 1 E-Type OTS truly is an ultracrepidarian.