Showing posts sorted by date for query Assassinate. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Assassinate. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Saturday, October 12, 2024

Ekpyrosis

Ekpyrosis (pronounced eck-pyh-row-sys)

(1) In modern cosmology, a speculative theory proposing the known universe originated in the collision of two other three-dimensional universes traveling in a hidden fourth dimension. This scenario does not require a singularity at the moment of the Big Bang.

(2) In the philosophy of the Stoic school in Antiquity, the idea that all existence is cyclical in nature and universe is the result of a recurring conflagration in which the all is destroyed and reborn in the same process.  Among the Stoics,

1590s (in English): From the Ancient Greek ἐκπύρωσις (ekpúrōsis) (conflagration, cyclically recurring conflagration in which the universe is destroyed and reborn according to some factions in Stoic philosophy), the construct being the Ancient Greek ἐκ (ek) (out of; from) + πύρωσις (pyrōsis), from πῦρ (pyr) (fire) + -ōsis (the suffix).  While there’s no direct relationship between the modern “big bang theory” and the Stoic’s notion of periodic cosmic conflagration (the idea the universe is periodically destroyed by fire and then recreated), the conceptual similarity is obvious.  The Stoic philosophy reflected the general Greek (and indeed Roman) view of fire representing both destruction and renewal.  In English, ekpyrosis first appeared in the late sixteenth century translations or descriptions of ancient Stoic philosophy, particularly in relation to their cosmological theories and it came to be used either as the Stoics applied it or in some analogous way.  It was one of a number of words which during the Renaissance came to the attention of scholars in the West, a period which saw a revival of interest in ancient Greek and Roman thought, art & architecture and for centuries many of the somewhat idealized descriptions and visions of the epoch were those constructed (sometimes rather imaginatively) during the Renaissance.  The alternative spelling was ecpyrosis.  Ekpyrosis is a noun and ekpyrotic is an adjective; the noun plural is ekpyroses.

In stoic philosophy, ekpyrosis was described sometimes as a recurring, unitary process (the periodic destruction & rebirth of the universe in a single conflagration) and sometimes and the final stage of one existence (destruction) which was the source of a palingenesis (the subsequent rebirth).  Palingenesis was almost certainly a variant of palingenesia (rebirth; regeneration) with the appending of the suffix -genesis (used to suggest “origin; production”).  Palingenesia was a learned borrowing from the Late Latin palingenesia (rebirth; regeneration), from the Koine Greek παλιγγενεσία (palingenesía) (rebirth), the construct being the Ancient Greek πᾰ́λῐν (pálin) (again, anew, once more), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European kwel (to turn (end-over-end); to revolve around; to dwell; a sojourn)) + γένεσις (genesis) (creation; manner of birth; origin, source).  The construct of the suffix was from the primitive Indo-European ǵenh- (to beget; to give birth; to produce”) + -ῐ́ᾱ (-íā) (the suffix used to form feminine abstract nouns).

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

In biology, the word was in the nineteenth century was adopted to describe “an apparent repetition, during the development of a single embryo, of changes that occurred previously in the evolution of its species) came directly from the German Palingenesis (the first papers published in Berlin).  In geology & vulcanology, it was used to mean “regeneration of magma by the melting of metamorphic rocks”) and came from the Swedish palingenes (which, like the German, came from the Greek).  In the study of history, palingenesis could be used to describe (often rather loosely) the recurrence of historical events in the same order, the implication being that was the natural pattern of history which would emerge if assessed over a sufficiently long time.  When such things used to be part of respectable philosophy, it was used to mean “a spiritual rebirth through the transmigration of the soul”, a notion which exists in some theological traditions and it has an inevitable attraction for the new-age set.

The Death of Seneca (1773), oil on canvas by Jacques-Louis David (1748–1825), Petit Palais, Musée Des Beaux-Arts, De La Ville De Paris, France.  Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Younger, (circa 4 BC–65 AD)) was one of the best known of the Roman Stoics and the painting is a classic example of the modern understanding of stoicism, Seneca calmly accepting being compelled to commit suicide, condenmed after being implicated in a conspiracy to assassinate the Nero (37-68; Roman emperor  54-68).  The consensus among historians is seems to be Seneca was likely “aware of but not involved in” the plot.  There are many paintings depicting the death of Seneca, most showing him affecting the same air of “resigned acceptance” to his fate.

The Stoics were a group of philosophers whose school of thought was for centuries among the most influential in Antiquity.  Although the word “stoic” is now most often used to refer to someone indifferent to pleasure or pain and who is able gracefully to handle the vicissitudes of life, that’s as misleading as suggesting the Ancient Epicureans were interested only in feasting.  What Stoicism emphasized was living a virtuous life, humans like any part of the universe created and governed by Logos and thus it was essential to at all times remain in harmony with the universe.  Interestingly, although the notion of ekpyrosis was one of the distinctive tenants of the school, there was a Stoic faction which thought devoting much energy to such thoughts was something of a waste of energy and that they should devote themselves to the best way to live, harmony with logos the key to avoiding suffering.  Their ideas live on in notions like “virtue is its own reward” and ultimately more rewarding than indulgence or worldly goods which are mere transitory vanities.

While the speculative theory of an ekpyrotic universe in modern cosmology and the ancient Stoic idea of ekpyrosis both revolve around a cyclical process of destruction and renewal, they differ significantly in detail and the phenomena they describe.  Most significantly, in modern cosmology there’s no conception of this having an underlying motivation, something of great matter in Antiquity.  The modern theory is an alternative to what is now the orthodoxy of the Big Bang theory; it contends the universe did not with a “big bang” (originally a term of derision but later adopted by all) begin from a singular point of infinite density in but rather emerged from the collision of two large, parallel branes (membranes) in higher-dimensional space.  In the mysterious brane cosmology, the universe is imagined as a three- dimensional “brane” within a higher-dimensional space (which tends to be called the “bulk”).  It’s the great, cataclysmic collision of two branes which triggers each defining event in the endless cycle of cosmic evolution.  In common with the Stoics, the process is described as cyclical and after each collusion, the universe undergoes a long period of contraction, followed by another collision that causes a new expansion.  Thus, elements are shared with the “Big Bang” & “Big Crunch” cycles but the critical variations are (1) there’s no conception of a singularity (2) although this isn’t entirely clear according to some, time never actually has to “begin” which critics have called a bit of a “fudge” because it avoids the implications of physical laws breaking down (inherent in the Big Bang’s singularity) and assumes cosmic events occur smoothly (in the sense of physics rather than violence) during brane collisions.

Bust of Marcus Aurelius (121–180; Roman emperor 161-180), Musée Saint-Raymond, Toulouse, France.

Something in the vein of the “philosopher kings” many imagine they’d like to live under (until finding the actual experience less pleasant than they’d hoped), Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic philosopher who has always been admired for his admirable brevity of expression, the stoic world-view encapsulated in his phases such as “Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be.  Be one.”, “The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts.” and “Our life is what our thoughts make it.  Marcus Aurelius was the last emperor of Pax Romana (Roman peace, 27 BC-180 AD), a golden age of Roman imperial power and prosperity.  

To the Stoics of Antiquity, ekpyrosis described the periodic destruction of the universe by a great cosmic fire, followed by its rebirth, fire in the Classical epoch a common symbol both of destruction and creation; the Stoic universe was a deterministic place.  In the metaphysics of the ancients, the notion of fire and the central event was not unreasonable because people for millennia had been watching conflagrations which seemed so destructive yet after which life emerged, endured and flourished and the idea was the same conflagration which wrote finis to all was the same primordial fire from which all that was new would be born.  More to the point however, it would be re-born, the Stoics idea always that the universe would re-emerge exactly as it had been before.  The notion of eternal recurrence doesn’t actually depend on the new being the same as the old but clearly, the Greeks liked things the way they were and didn’t want anything to change.  That too was deterministic because it was Logos which didn’t want anything to change.  The Stoics knew all that had been, all this is and all that would be were all governed by Logos (rational principle or divine reason) and it was this which ensured the balance, order and harmony of the universe, destruction and re-birth just parts of that.  Logos had motivation and that was to maintain the rational, natural order but in modern cosmology there’s no motivation in the laws of physics, stuff just happens by virtue of their operation.

Sunday, July 14, 2024

Response

Response (pronounced ri-spons (U) or ree-spons (non-U))

(1) The act of responding; a reply or reaction; a reaction to a stimulus or provocation.

(2) In the card game bridge, a bid based on an evaluation of one's hand relative to the previous bid of one's partner.

(3) In liturgical use in Christianity, a word, phrase or short sentence recited or sung by the choir or congregation in reply to the priest or officiant at a church service (usually in the plural and used (loosely) also of any versicle or anthem said or sung during or after a lection).

(4) In electronics the ratio of the output to the input level, at a particular frequency, of a transmission line or electrical device.

(5) In pathology, any pattern of glandular, muscular, or electrical reactions induced by stimulation of the nervous system.

(6) In biology, any behavior of a living organism that results from an external or internal stimulus.

(7) In engineering, the reaction of a mechanical device to changes in energy input.

(8) In legal proceedings (and other forms), reply to an objection.

(9) In the calculation of online advertising performance metrics, a measure representing one click-through from an online ad to its destination URL.

1250–1300: From the Latin respōnsum (answer), noun use of the neuter past participle of respondēre (to reply, respond, answer, the construct being re- (in the sense of “again”) + spondere (to pledge), nominal use of the neuter form of respōnsus, the perfect passive participle of respondeō, the construct being from re- + spondeō (promise).  It replaced the Middle English respounse & respons, from the Middle French respons, from the Old French respons, respuns & response (which endures in Modern French as réponse), from the same Latin source.  Response, responsion, responsure & responsiveness are nouns, responsal, responsory & responsorial are nouns & adjectives, responsive is an adjective and responsively is an adverb; the noun plural is resposes.

Depending on context, a response might also be called a feedback, reply or return and in science, medicine and engineering, derived forms such as responseless, counter-response, allergic response, autonomous response, host response etc are coined as required.  In law enforcement and military use, the coinings include armed response, artillery response, naval response etc.  The adjective responsive was an early fifteenth century form meaning “making answer, responding” and was from the Old French responsif and directly from Late Latin responsivus (answering), from the Classical Latin respons-, past-participle stem of respondere.  The use in the sense of “responding readily to influence or action, able or inclined to respond” was documented first in 1762, the adverb responsively & noun responsiveness both appearing within a decade.  In Christianity, the use to mean “a part of the liturgy said or sung by the congregation in reply to the priest” dates from the 1650s.  The transferred sense (adopted in literature, poetry and psychology) of feelings or actions was part of the Romantic movement early in the nineteenth century.  One of the best known “responses” was the adjectival “Pavlovian Response” which dates from 1911 and came from the experimental work of Russian physiologist Ivan Petrovich Pavlov (1849-1936), the best known example of which was the conditioned salivary reflexes of dogs in response to the mental stimulus of the sound of a bell being associated with food.  The term “response time” seems first to have been used in the US in 1958 and was associated with the increasingly precise measurements needed as transistors replaced vacuum tubes in electronics.

Boris Yeltsin, who got a bit of fun out of life.

The phrase “diplomatic response” isn’t really part of the study of international relations.  It’s used in general discourse to describe ways of communicating that are polite, tactful and intended to ensure reasonable relationships are maintained and the self-help sections in bookshops often contain titles which include guides on the topic, their advice on the matter probably usually suggesting the salient points are (1) Politeness (using courteous language to show respect), (2) Neutrality (avoiding taking sides or making definitive statements that might be thought controversial), (3) Constructiveness (focusing on solutions and positive outcomes), (4), Empathy (acknowledging the other person's feelings or perspectives) and (5) Caution (being careful with word choice to avoid misunderstandings or offense).  In diplomacy proper, there are examples such as when Boris Yeltsin (1931–2007; President of Russia 1991-1999) announced he would decline a Japanese offer of help in dealing with a natural disaster because they might use it as leverage in territorial disputes, the Japanese Foreign Ministry responded by saying: “He must have been misquoted”.  Lindsay Lohan in 2017 followed the example when asked about comments made by Donald Trump in 2004 when he said she was: “probably deeply troubled and therefore great in bed. How come the deeply troubled women, you know, deeply, deeply troubled, they're always the best in bed?  Her response was to say: “I wish him the best. We live in a world of societies that consistently find fault in people. I think it’s a really scary factor. Taking someone else down is never the answer, and I think we all know that.  It’s not believed Mr Trump responded.

Responses of some who survived political assassination attempts

That photograph.

The compositional elements of the photograph destined to become one of the classics of US political history are so perfect it would have been assumed to be an AI (artificial intelligence) meme had the moment it captured not been witnessed by so many:  Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021, fist raised in defiance, his blood staining his face, being hustled to safety by his Secret Service detail after an assassin’s bullet was a fraction of an inch to the left; one zephyr during its 125 metre (410 feet) travel and Trump would likely be dead.  The image, taken by AP (Associated Press) photographer Evan Vucci (b 1977) was a an extraordinary piece of serendipity for the Trump campaign, being almost entirely of red, white & blue with the Stars & Stripes flying as a backdrop, the whole thing recalling the famous photograph by AP’s Joe Rosenthal (1911–2006) which captured US Marines planting the flag atop Mount Suribachi during the Battle of Iwo Jima.  Quite how the incident will affect the election campaign can’t be assumed but it’s unlikely to be detrimental to the Trump cause and the photograph will help, the strident defiance of the stance exactly what appeals to the base and probably attractive to not a few of the undecided, the contrast with the less dynamic Biden obviously striking.  As a response from someone who has just cheated death, his presence of mind in having the Secret Service delay his evacuation from the stage by a few seconds so he could provide AP their photo-opportunity will guarantee publicity the Republican Party couldn’t buy no matter how many millions they spent.

Senator Marco Rubio (b 1971; senator (Republican) for Florida since 2011 and the "little Marco" of Mr Trump's 2016 nomination campaign) was quick to tweet "God protected" Mr Trump which was noted by those running the betting markets for the 2024 running mate on the Republican ticket.  On his own Truth social platform, Mr Trump said much the same thing and previously, there have been those who made much of being saved from assassination by "providence" and it's not impossible Mr Trump is now persuaded it was indeed "divine intervention".  In the last decade, Mr Trump has done well by pretending to be religious to court the Christian vote: they knew he was lying and he knew that they knew he knew but such was the political symbiosis that all involved ignored the facts and focused on outcomes.  Now, he may start believing his own publicity.          

The footage was viewed world-wide within minutes and almost immdeiately questions were asked including (1) why was a line-of-shot available within 150 m (500 feet) of the target and (2) why were Secret Service agents allocated who were not even tall enough to reach his shoulder (they are as a last resort, human body armor).  The photograph was political gold for the campaign but it should never have been allowed to happen; Mr Trump should have been smothered with Secret Service bodies and immediately taken from the stage.  Some agreed the presence of the shooter was an obvious lapse but that what happened on stage followed protocol and there's never been any policy (or practice) of allocating agents on the basis of their height matching that of the protectee.    

Portrait of Theodore Roosevelt (1903) by John Singer Sargent.

In October 1912, a man shot Theodore Roosevelt (TR, 1858–1919; US president 1901-1909) while he was on the campaign trail for that year’s presidential election.  What saved Roosevelt was the bullet having to pass through a metal spectacles case and, tellingly, a folded, 50 page copy of the speech he was about to deliver on behalf of his Progressive Party.  The enraged crowd were holding and threatening to lynch the shooter but Roosevelt intervened, ensuring he was handed to the safe custody of the Wisconsin police.  Roosevelt had spent much of his life hunting big game and, on the basis he was not coughing up blood, correctly concluded that bullet was lodged in his muscle and had not punctured the lung, the relative lack of external bleeding suggesting no vital artery or vein had been severed.  His response to what would have put most men into a state of shock was to proceed to the hall and deliver his speech as planned.  Lodged too precariously to extract, the bullet remained with him until, peacefully, he died in his sleep at Oyster Bay, New York.

Men in frock coats: The “Big Four” at the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920), outside the Foreign Ministry headquarters, Quai d'Orsay, Paris.  Left to right: David Lloyd George (1863–1945; UK prime-minister 1916-1922), Vittorio Orlando (1860–1952; Italian prime minister 1917-1919), Georges Clemenceau (1841–1929; French prime minister 1906-1909 & 1917-1920) and Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924; US president 1913-1921).

Georges Clemenceau (1841–1929; Prime Minister of France 1906-1909 & 1917-1920) was a physician who turned to politics via journalism, a not unfamiliar trajectory for many; at a time of national crisis, he undertook his second term as premier, providing the country’s politics with the stiffness needed to endure what was by then World War I (1914-1918); he was nick-named le tigre (the tiger) in honor of his ferociously combative political demeanour.  In February 1919, while travelling from his apartment a meeting associated with the Paris Peace Conference (1919-1920), he was shot several times, his assailant an anarchist carpenter & joiner, Émile Cottin (1896-1937) and two decades on, another leader would learn carpenters can be assassins. Le tigre was lucky, the bullets missing his vital organs although one which passed through the ribcage ending up lodged close to his heart; too close to that vital organ to risk surgery, like Roosevelt, there it remained until his death (from unrelated causes) ten years later.  Cottin’s death sentence was later commuted to a ten year sentence and he would die in battle, serving with the anarchist Durruti Column during the early days of the Spanish Civil War.  The Tiger’s response to his survival was to observe: “We have just won the most terrible war in history, yet here is a Frenchman who misses his target six out of seven times at point-blank range.  Of course this fellow must be punished for the careless use of a dangerous weapon and for poor marksmanship. I suggest that he be locked up for eight years, with intensive training in a shooting gallery.  In the circumstances, deploring the state of French marksmanship displayed a certain French sang froid.

Although the details of most at the time weren’t known, there were so many plots to kill Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) that books were written exploring the topic, the most comprehensive of which was Killing Hitler (b 2006) by British historian Roger Moorhouse (b 1968).  For a variety of reasons, none succeeded but the first to come close was in Munich in 1939 when a bomb (it would now be called an IED (improvised explosive device) was fabricated by German carpenter and joiner, Georg Elser (1903–1945) and secreted in a pillar directly behind where Hitler was scheduled to be standing while delivering to his old comrades one of his annual set-piece addresses.  However, on the night, because he wanted to return early to Berlin to resume planning his latest foreign policy adventure, he cut short his speech and the bomb detonated a quarter hour after he and his entourage had left; it killed eight and injured dozens.  Hitler’s response was to say his survival was “…proof to me that Providence wants me to reach my goal.  Surprisingly, Herr Elser, apprehended almost by chance, wasn’t executed, the fate of many who had done much less, but until 1945 was a “privileged prisoner” in relatively pleasant conditions; Hitler, who for years clung to the idea the man must have had some connection with the British secret service, ordered him hanged only when it was obvious he’d be of no use as a hostage.

Hitler again thanked providence when he survived the most celebrated of the attempts, the bomb in July 1944 planted by an army colonel and timed to explode during a military conference.  Hitler on that occasion avoided death because (1) a table’s heavy socle deflected much of the blast, (2) only one of the planned two charged was primed and (3) the conference was moved from an enclosed underground bunker to a building on the surface with walls and windows which were “blown-out” in the explosion, dissipating much energy.  Those details were lost on the Führer who chose again to attribute this life being spared to “providence”.  One of those convince was the visiting Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943), by then a much diminished puppet dictator of a puppet statelet sustained by the German military.  Dutifully the vassal Duce responded to Hitler: “Absolutely I agree with you, it’s a sign from providence”.  That decided, Hitler’s response to this “stab in the back” from his own army was savage, some 7000 rounded up, 5000-odd of which would be executed, the leading figures in the conspiracy dying in an especially gruesome manner, a event filmed although there are contradictory reports about whether it was something Hitler ever chose to view.  In the way of Nazi crack-downs, not all those executed were actually connected with this or any other plot, the security services using the operation as a pretext to dispose of those of one of their many lists of “undesirables”.

A prototype Humber Imperial fitted with a 273 cubic inch (4.5 litre) Chrysler LA V8.  By the mid 1960s the Humber Super Snipe (1964-1967) was essentially a mid-1950s US sedan being produced in England, a phenomenon which was emblematic of a malaise afflicting much of the UK's motor industry.  The Imperial was an up-market, better-appointed Super-Snipe and after Chrysler took a stake in the company, perhaps as many as six V8 prototypes were built but the advantages gained were few and the project never proceeded to general production.  When Chrysler in 1967 took over Rootes Group (the corporation of which Humber was a part) the Super Snipe range was discontinued, replaced in the UK market by Australian-produced Chrysler Valiants, chosen in preference to the US-built versions because they were available in right-hand drive configuration and the Commonwealth Preference scheme meant they attracted lower import tariffs.  Although only ever a niche product in the UK market and never approaching the sales volumes achieved by the big Humbers, the Valiants remained available until 1976.      

Arthur Augustus Calwell (1896-1973; Australian Labor Party (ALP) leader of the opposition 1960-1967) was a rare Australian target of an attempted political assassination.  Two years after being knighted by Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) (his Pontifical Equestrian Order of St. Gregory the Great (KCSG) apparent unrelated to the attempt on his life), Calwell was sitting in the front passenger seat (it’s an Australian tradition) of his official car when 19 year-old student Peter Kocan (b 1947), at point blank range, fired a shell from a sawn-off rifle, aimed directly at his target.  In 1966, the Commonwealth’s car fleet still included their last intake of British-built cars and Calwell was sitting in a Series V Humber Super Snipe (1964-1967), an outdated machine but one which was stately & roomy and thus enjoyed by politicians who found their replacement, the lower Ford Galaxie, less comfortable, especially the ingress and egress.  Fortunately for Calwell, the side glass in the old-fashioned Humber was thick and instead of penetrating the pane, it shattered, absorbing most of the bullet’s energy; it was spent by the time it had travelled those few feet, lodging harmlessly in the lapel of the target’s jacket, Mr Calwell's injuries limited to some minor cuts from the broken glass.  Kocan was found guilty of attempted murder and sentenced to life imprisonment, sent initially to Sydney's Long Bay Gaol before being transferred to Morriset Psychiatric Hospital for the criminally insane.  There he studied literature and after his release became a prize winning poet and novelist, eventually graduating from the University of Newcastle with a BA (Hons) & MA.  Calwell’s response to the man who tried to kill him was to pay a visit to the hospital and, although a great hater in the ALP tradition, he was also a good Catholic, sending a letter of forgiveness.

Arthur Calwell leaving hospital in his Humber Super Snipe, the presence in numbers of the New South Wales (NSW) Police suggesting they were going to make sure nothing more happened to him before he returned to Victoria.  The police cars are locally assembled Rambler Classics and in Australia, various AMCs were in small volumes assembled and sold under the Rambler name until 1977.

In an example of how difficult it can be for security services to monitor and intercept those who plan to kill political figures, the motive of the man who in March 1981 shot Ronald Reagan (1911-2004; US president 1981-1989) was to impress an actress with whom he’d become obsessed.  That was something even less likely to attract the attention of the authorities than the earlier case when a botched attempt had been made by a member of Charles Manson’s (1934-2017) “Family” cult to assassinate Gerald Ford (1913–2006; US president 1974-1977).  Mr Reagan’s injury was life-threatening and was saved only by surgical intervention.  When greeted by the surgeons who were to perform the operation, his response was to tell them he hoped they “…were all Republicans”.  In an example of good bedside manner they assured him he was in safe political hands although one later confessed to being a lifelong Democrat.  When his wife arrived at the hospital, he delivered the line “Honey, I forgot to duck”, borrowed from boxer Jack Dempsey (1895–1983) who said it to Mrs Dempsey on the night he'd lost a bout to Gene Tunney (1897–1978).

Thursday, November 2, 2023

Plausible

Plausible (pronounced plaw-zuh-buhl)

(1) Having an appearance of truth or reason; seemingly worthy of approval or acceptance; credible; believable; possibly or probably true.

(2) Well-spoken and apparently, but often deceptively, worthy of confidence or trust.  Obtaining approbation; specifically pleasing; apparently right; specious.

(3) Worthy of being applauded; praiseworthy; commendable; ready (obsolete).

1535–1545: From the Middle English, from the Latin plausibilis (deserving applause, praiseworthy, acceptable, pleasing), the construct being plausus (past participle of plaudere (to applaud)) + ibilis (ible) (the Latin adjectival suffix (now usually in a passive sense) which creates meanings "able to be, relevant or suitable to, in accordance with" or expressing capacity or worthiness in a passive sense). The meaning "having the appearance of truth" is noted from the 1560s.  The plausible has become nuanced (the comparative more plausible, the superlative most plausible) but synonyms (of the historic meaning) include credible, probable, persuasive, possible, logical, valid, conceivable, tenable, creditable, likely, presumable, sound & supposable.  Plausible is an adjective, plausibly is an adverb, plausibility is a noun; the noun plural is plausibilities (although the antonym implausibilities is probably the more often heard form.

Cynicism is nothing new and in English the meaning "having a specious or superficial appearance of trustworthiness" had been appended as early as the 1560s.  The noun has been documented since the 1590s in the sense of "quality of being worthy of praise or acceptance" although it too was soon co-opted and by at least the 1640s was also used to suggest "a specious or superficial appearance of being right or worthy of acceptance".  The adjective implausible (not having an appearance of truth or credibility) dates from the 1670s although as late as earlier in the century it was still being used in its original sense of "not worthy of applause".  There's a prejudice that "implausible" and related forms are used more often than "plausible" and its relations nut it may simply we we notice the former more and "plausible deniability" is really just a loaded way of saying "implausible".

Plausible Deniability

Plausible deniability is a construct of language to be used in situations where it’s possible to tell lies because it’s not possible for others to prove the truth.  In common law jurisdictions, it exists also as a legal concept given the evidential onus of proof falls (usually) not upon the defendant so if the opponent cannot offer evidence to support an allegation, variously beyond reasonable doubt or on the balance of probabilities, accusations can plausibly be denied regardless of the truth.  Most associated with politicians or public officials but practiced also by those in corporate chains of command, it’s used usually to deny knowledge of or responsibility for anything unlawful, immoral or in some way disreputable.  Depending on the circumstances, it can protect institutions from damage or, more typically, shift blame (and consequences) from someone senior to others lower in the hierarchy.  While the art & science of plausible deniability doubtlessly has been practiced since the origins of humanity, the phrase was coined within the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), apparently as early as the 1950s although it seems not to have appeared in any printed source available to the public until 1964 and became part of general use only during the Watergate crisis (1973-1974).  Some sources credit Allen Dulles (1893–1969; Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) 1953-1961) himself with the first public use but, like his brother (John Foster Dulles (1888–1959; US Secretary of State 1953-1959)), he's blamed for much.

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

Within the CIA, it described the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities became public knowledge.  This was a time when the CIA was lawfully permitted to assassinate people, especially uncooperative politicians in troublesome countries.  It's obviously a murky business but the consensus seems to be the CIA still kills people but never uses the word assassination and, dating from an executive order issued by Gerald Ford (1913–2006; US president 1974-1977), the agency is no longer allowed to kill heads of state.  This prohibition was presumably a kind of "professional courtesy" on the part of President Ford and one which he must have hoped would be reciprocated.  It's not difficult to guess which countries definitely have at least one executioner silently on the payroll and which almost certainly don't but most are in that grey area of uncertainty.

Alastair Campbell (b 1957; Downing Street Director of Communications & official spokesperson (1997–2003)) with Vladimir Putin (b 1952; Prime-Minister of Russia 1999-2000 & 2008-2012, President of Russia 1999-2008 & since 2012) and Tony Blair (b 1953; UK Prime Minister 1997-2007).  Mr Putin in recent years has stretched plausible deniability well beyond the point at which plausibility can be said to have become implausible. 

One fine practitioner of the art was one-time tabloid journalist Alastair Campbell, spokesman for the New Labour government during most of Tony Blair’s premiership.  Campbell added a post-modern twist in that he dealt mostly with journalists who knew when he was lying and they knew that he knew they knew.  Things evolved to the point where Campbell came to believe this was proof of his cleverness and some suspected he began to lie, even when the truth would have been harmless, just to show-off his cynical contempt for just about everyone else.  It worked for a while and certainly suited the New Labour zeitgeist but later, when employed as press officer for the British & Irish Lions on their 2005 tour of New Zealand, his effectiveness was limited because even when telling the truth, which, in fairness, he often did, the baggage of his past made everything sound like spin and lies.  The Lions lost the test series 3-0, the first time in 22 years they lost every test match on tour but nobody suggested Campbell was in anyway responsible for the on-field performance.  Still, plausibility deniability remains an essential skill in modern media management.  An example would be:

(1) You run a government in some country about which, for a variety of reasons, Western governments tend not to make tiresome complaints.  Here, you can do just about anything you wish.

(2) One of your people has run away to another country and is being really annoying.  You arrange to have him invited home for discussions over a cup of coffee.

(3) They crew sent to issue the invitation botch the job, murdering him in a quite gruesome manner (ie the method not far removed from how they dispatch them on home soil).

(4) You deny it was an execution, suggesting death happened when an argument about football or something became heated.  (Plausible denial #1).

(5) Didn’t work.  You now deny ordering any connection with the operation, saying it was an unauthorized rogue team.  (Plausible denial #2).

(6) The other country lists nineteen suspects involved in the murder and demands extradition for trial.

(7) You work out which of the suspects is most expendable and it's announced he had died in "an accident" (that and "natural causes" often a grey area you've noticed).  You hope the sacrifice will satisfy honor on both sides.  (Plausible denial #3).

(8) Problem isn’t going away, even though kind folks in many countries are helping you try to make it go away.  You have the remaining eighteen suspects arrested and locked-up somewhere reasonably pleasant and most secret.

(9) Other country is still being tiresome, maintaining people who kill others should be tried for murder in country where crime was committed.  You understand the legal point but still can't see what all the fuss is about.

(10) You arrange it to be announced the eighteen suspects are dead, all SWATE (shot while attempting to escape).  (Plausible denial #4).  The system works.

Saturday, October 7, 2023

Periphrasis

Periphrasis (pronounced puh-rif-ruh-sis)

(1) A roundabout way of expressing something; a kind of circumlocution (and often needlessly but deliberately long).

(2) An expression phrased in such fashion.

(3) In structural linguistics, expressing a grammatical meaning (such as a tense) using a syntactic construction rather than morphological marking.

(4) In rhetoric, (1) the substitution of a descriptive word or phrase for a proper name (technically a type of circumlocution) or (2) the use of a proper name as a shorthand to stand for qualities associated with it.

1525–1535: A borrowing in the sense of “a roundabout way of speaking; an instance of this” from the Latin periphrasis (circumlocution), from the Ancient Greek περίφρασις (periphrazein) (speak in a roundabout), the construct being peri- (from the Ancient Greek περί (perí) (about, around) + φράζειν (phrázein) (to declare; to express), the present active infinitive of φράζω (phrázō).The adjective periphrastic (having the character of or characterized by periphrasis) came into use in the mid eighteenth century and was from the French périphrastique or directly from the Ancient Greek periphrastikos, from periphrazein (to speak in a roundabout way).  The adjective periphrastical dates from the 1630s and the adverb periphrastically from several decades later.  The expression of disapproval “beating around the bush” applies more to circumlocution than the classic periphrasis which hints at why in linguistics “periphrasis” and “circumlocution” shouldn’t be treated as synonyms despite this being common.  The most helpful distinction between the two is that periphrasis generally is used of those cases where the figure is used with effect, while circumlocution refers to mere wordiness, sometimes to the point of obscuring meaning, thus the overlap with euphemism.  A classic periphrasis is the naming of a thing indirectly by means of some well-known attribute, or characteristic, or attendant circumstance.  A periphrastic conjugation is a conjugation formed by the use of the simple verb with one or more auxiliaries.  Periphrasis & periphrase are nouns, periphrastically is an adverb and periphrasic, periphrastical & periphrastic are adjectives; the noun plural is periphrases.

Periphrasis does have a long tradition in rhetorical as a device where a phrase is used to express a concept which could be conveyed by a single word, or where a longer expression replaces a shorter one, thus the association with descriptive or explanatory words and as well as euphemisms, there’s inevitably some overlap also with the cliché; a periphrasis can straddle the definitions and structural linguistics has a term for everything so someone particularly periphrastical might create periphrases which are also both a pleonasm and a tautology.  Constructions like “the king of the jungle” (lion), “the silver screen” (movies), the eternal city (Rome) or “the red planet” (Mars) are all periphrases but are also clichés.  At the margins it can be difficult but “they passed away” (they died) is probably just a clichéd euphemism.  To say of Lindsay Lohan she was “a former child star who suffered a turbulent youth” is a periphrasis whereas to mention she was prone also at times to seem “tired and emotional” is a euphemism for “too much drink”.

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

During one of the sessions at the League of Nations held in 1933 before Japan withdrew from the League in response to a report commissioned by the organization which labeled Japan as the unprovoked aggressor in what Tokyo referred to as “The Chinese Attack” or “The Mukden Incident”, one member of the Japanese delegation, when asked why his government’s communiqués contained so many periphrases, responded that they were little more frequent that those in documents issued by other countries but that the unique characteristics of the Japanese language made them appear more obvious.  He may have had a point and there was an understated charm to phrases like “The Manchurian Incident” (Japan’s invasion of China) and “The Emperor Disrespect Incident” (a thwarted 1932 plot by a Korean nationalist to assassinate the Emperor Shōwa (Hirohita, 1901–1989, emperor of Japan 1926-1989).

Henry Fowler (1858–1933) in his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926) saw little use for the periphrasis, dismissing it as the “putting of things in a round-about way”, noting the easiest way of identifying the linguistic sin was the use of abstract nouns such as “basis, case, character, connexion, dearth, description, duration, framework, lack, nature, reference, regard & respect”.  Fowler also pondered cause and effect, his theory being that because abstract thought was a “…mark of civilized man”, the use of the abstract noun was a way of advertising one’s refinement, thus the proliferation he noted in the appearances of periphrases.  He cited “the year’s penultimate month” as a silly alternative to “November” although one could imagine a paragraph in which “November” has unavoidably appeared to often to be elegant that an alternative might be a handy addition.  Generally though, as usual, Henry Fowler is right.

Wednesday, March 15, 2023

Valkyrie

Valkyrie (pronounced val-keer-ee, val-kahy-ree, vahl-kerr-ee or val-kuh-ree)

(1) Any of the twelve beautiful war-maidens attendant upon Odin who rode over battlefields, gathering the souls of slain warriors chosen by Odin or Tyr and taking them to Valhalla, there to wait upon them.

(2) Code name for the civil-military conspiracy against the Nazi German government, culminating in the attempt coup d'état of 20 July 1944 during which an attempt was made to assassinate Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945).

(3) A frequently used name for high performance machinery (eg Aston Martin Valkyrie, North American XB70 Valkyrie).

1768: From the Old Norse valkyrja (literally "chooser of the slain") and cognate with the Old English wælcyrie (witch).  The construct was valr (those who fell battle, slaughter (and cognate with Old English wæl)) + kyrja (chooser (and cognate with Old English cyrie)).  Kyrja was from the ablaut root of kjosa (to choose), from the Proto-Germanic keusan, from the primitive Indo-European root geus- (to taste; to choose).  The Old English form wælcyrie, strangely was less prevalent in Anglo-Saxon tales than in Scandinavian myths although linguistic anthropologists have suggested this may be a consequence of the better preservation of old texts.  Köri was an alternative Norse form of kyrjam, from the ablaut root of kjosa, from the Proto-Germanic keusan, the earlier form of which was geus (to taste; to choose) from which English ultimately gained gusto.  Richard Wagner's (1813–1883) modern German Walküre was directly from the Norse while the word was first noted in English as a proper noun (valkyries) in the 1770s and as a common noun (valkyries) since the 1880s. Valkyrie is a noun & valkyrian is an adjective; the noun plural is valkyries.

Rides of some Valkries

Valkyries Riding into Battle (1838) by Johan Gustaf Sandberg (1782–1854).

The Valkyries now get quite good press but in heathen times they were thought rather more sinister.  The literal translation of their name (choosers of the slain), referred to them choosing who gains admittance to Valhalla, the Norse resting place of fallen warriors, but in some tellings of the myth they decided also who died in battle and used their malicious magic to ensure their preferences were brought to fruition.  The tales of them writing their ledger of death are recounted in Edda, (an Old Norse term that refers to the collective of two Medieval Icelandic literary works: the Prose Edda and an older collection of poems now known as the Poetic Edda.  Assembled in Ireland during the thirteenth century and written in Icelandic, they comprise material reaching back to the Vikings and are the main sources of medieval skaldic tradition in Iceland and Norse mythology), their most gruesome side illustrated vividly in the Darraðarljóð, a poem contained within Njal’s Saga.  In the saga are depicted a dozen Valkyries prior to the Battle of Clontarf, sitting at a loom and weaving the tragic fate of the warriors using intestines for their thread, severed heads for weights, and swords and arrows for beaters, all the while chanting their intentions with ominous delight.  That might delight some radical feminists but part of the myths is also that having carried the fallen to Valhalla, there the twelve beauties waited upon them hand and foot, attending to their every whim.  Readers have always been able to take from mythology what they will.  The artists of the nineteenth century however were always evocatively romantic when depicting the Valkyries, perhaps recalling the  Nietzschean visions in the thirteenth century Norse Saga of the Volsungs in which beholding a Valkyrie is compared with staring into a flame.

Valkyrie and a Dying Hero (circa 1877) by Hans Makart (1840-1884).

The imagery exists also in the folklore of other Germanic peoples.  In the Anglo-Saxon tradition, the valkyries (wælcyrie in the Old English) were female spirits of carnage and the Celts, with whom the Norse and other Germanic peoples associated for centuries, had in their mythology similar beings such as the war goddesses Badb and the Morrígan.  Whether in their loving or bloodthirsty modalities, the valkyries are part of the complex of shamanism that permeates pre-Christian Germanic religion. Much like the ravens Hugin and Munin, they’re projections of parts of Odin, semi-distinct entities part of his larger being.

Hitler’s other Valkyrie

Unity Valkyrie Mitford (1914–1948) was one six daughters of a right-wing father from the English aristocracy, five of whom, had they lived in the modern era would have been among the most prolific on social media and staples of celebrity gossip sites; they were “content providers” and “click bait” before their time.  Diana (1910–2003) became the wife of Sir Oswald Mosley (1896–1980), founder and leader of the British Union of Fascists and the mother of Max Mosley (1940–2021; president of the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) 1993-2009); on the day she died she was the last person alive to have known both Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) and Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955).  Jessica (1917-1996) became a communist, Nancy (1904-1973 an author of note and Deborah (1920–2014) ended her life as Dowager Duchess of Devonshire.  Only Pamela (1907-1994) enjoyed what might be thought a “normal” rural life.  The only brother (Tom, 1909-1945) was killed while on active service with the British Army in Burma, one of several theatres in which he fought, declining to take up arms against Nazi Germany, his choice of deployment the sort of indulgence the establishment were extended.

Adolf Hitler & Unity Mitford taking tea during the annual Wagner Festival, Bayreuth, Germany, July 1936.

Unity became besotted with admiration for Hitler and although various theories have been offered to account for the attraction which seems to date from her attendance at the 1933 Nuremburg Rally, there’s no doubt about her methods.  While the legend was that after taking up residence in Munich in 1934, she stalked him, making her presence known at the restaurants & cafés where he was a habitué until she gained an invitation to his table, she was a socialite who knew how the system worked and actually gained a meeting by more traditional “networking.  Hitler was intrigued, not only by her obvious personal (the depth of her political knowledge is contested) devotion but also her family’s historic connections with notable figures of importance in German culture including the composer Richard Wagner (1813–1883) and the proto-Nazi author Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855–1927).  Telling one confidant that being next to Hitler was “like sitting next to the sun”, she became part of the court circle which surrounded Hitler where the Wagnerian touch of her middle name gained her the nickname “the Valkyrie” and some historians have speculated the second (and rather-half-hearted) of Eva Braun’s (1912–1945) two suicide attempts during the 1930s was at least partially motivated by her jealousy of Unity.

Perhaps already mentally unstable, Unity was distraught at the thought of Britain and Germany being at war and on 3 September 1939 (the day the British declaration of war was delivered), shot herself in the head.  She joined the surprisingly long list of those who survived such an act although, badly injured, she was never again the same; repatriated to the UK via Switzerland, she died in 1948 from complications related to the bullet which remained lodged in her brain.  Even in the 1940s conspiracy theories were a thing and there were several about the already strange tale of Unity Mitford, something encouraged by veil of secrecy her family draped around her.  The most bizarre was that shortly after returning to England she was admitted to a private maternity hospital in Oxford where she gave birth to Hitler’s child.  The origin of the claim was said to have been the sister of the hospital’s former manager who passed it on to her daughter, the niece revealing it some years later.  Unfortunately, it appears the hospital “neglected to register” babies born during the war, something quite unusual and another element onto which the conspiracy theorists latched.  Historians have dismissed the possibility Hitler had a child.

North American XB-70 Valkyrie.

Even while the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress (1952-1962) was in still in production, the Pentagon was planning its successor.  The North American XB-70 Valkyrie was nuclear-armed, long-range, deep-penetration strategic bomber, capable of cruising at Mach 3+ (circa 2000 mph (3,200 km/h)) at an altitude of 70,000 feet (circa 24 km), performance which would have rendered it close to invulnerable to both ground-based anti-aircraft fire and short-range fighter interceptors.  However, by the late 1950s, while the XB-70 was still in the prototype stage, the introduction of surface-to-air missiles put this near-invulnerability in doubt and this, coupled with the advent of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) meant the brief era of dominance by the big strategic bomber was over although the platforms, re-purposed, remain in use to this day.  In 1961, after two Valkyries had been built (one of which was lost in an accident), the project was cancelled, viewed as a flying dreadnought overtaken by technology.  President Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969; US president 1953-1961), a practical military man who had over the decades seen many weapons rendered obsolete by advances in technology, thought the Valkyrie was like "bows and arrows in the gunpowder age".  The end of the dominance of the big strategic bomber had earlier been predicted by the man who more than any remains associated with the once often-expressed advocacy of the platform which alone could win wars: Marshal of the Royal Air Force Sir Arthur "Bomber" Harris (1892–1984; head of RAF Bomber Command 1942-1945) noted during World War II (1939-1945) the "...day of the heavy bomber will pass as it did for the cavalry charge and soon will for the battleship".  The admirals weren't best pleased to hear that but he was right although, seventy-odd years on, the B-52, much updated, remains in service but it has been re-purposed, no longer envisaged as something to fly over Russian or Chinese targets, dropping gravity bombs.     

North American XB-70 Valkyrie Specifications

Length: 189 ft 0 in (57.6 m)

Wingspan: 105 ft 0 in (32 m)

Height: 30 ft 0 in (9.1 m)

Wing area: 6,297 ft2 (585 m2)

Airfoil: Hexagonal; 0.30 Hex modified root, 0.70 Hex modified tip

Empty weight: 253,600 lb (115,030 kg; operating empty weight)

Loaded weight: 534,700 lb (242,500 kg)

Take-off weight: 542,000 lb (246,000 kg)

Fuel capacity: 300,000 pounds (140,000 kg) or 46,745 US gallons (177,000 L)

Powerplant: 6 × General Electric YJ93-GE-3 afterburning turbojets

Dry thrust: 19,900 lbf (84 kN) each

With afterburner: 28,800 lbf (128 kN) each

North American XB-70 Valkyrie Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 3.1 (2,056 mph (3,309 km/h))

Cruise speed: Mach 3.0 (2,000 mph (3,200 km/h))

Range: 3,725 nautical miles (4,288 mi (6,901 km)) on combat mission

Service ceiling: 77,350 ft (23,600 m)

Wing loading: 84.93 lb/ft2 (414.7 kg/m2)

Lift-to-drag: About 6 at Mach 2[116]

Thrust/weight: 0.314

End of an era: The Aston Martin Valkyrie

The days of such things may be numbered but the manufacturers of petrol-fueled hypercars are hastening, while they still can, to offer the rich a way amusingly (and given the aftermarket, often profitably) to spend the quantitatively-eased cash governments have given them this past decade.  In August 2021, Aston Martin unveiled the Valkyrie Spider, an open-roof version of the Formula One-inspired hybrid hypercar, the coupés produced in 2022, the Spiders the following year.  Revealed at the Pebble Beach Concours d’Elegance in California, the Valkyrie Spider differs from the coupé in having a removable carbon-fibre roof panel, two hinged polycarbonate side windows and front-hinged dihedral doors rather than the closed version’s gull-wings.

The powertrain of both is essentially the same, combining a 6.5 litre (397 cubic inch), Cosworth-designed, naturally-aspirated V12 and a single electric motor for a total output of 1160 bhp (865 kW) in the coupé and 20 bhp (15 kW) less in the spider, Aston Martin not commenting on the difference.  Drive is to the rear wheels through what’s described as a seven-speed “automated manual” transmission and though the coupé is slightly lighter, performance for both is said to be similar with a 0-60 mph (100 km) time around 2.5 seconds and a top speed around 217 mph (350 km/h) although it’s noted removing the roof sacrifices about 12 mph (20 km/h).  Eighty-five Valkyrie Spiders will be built, these in addition to one-hundred and fifty coupés and twenty-five race-track only specials and while pricing hasn’t been announced, leaks from the factory suggest something over US$3 million.  Interest is said to be strong although the loss of the lucrative Russian market presumably saw some adjustments in national allocations.  On the car's webpage, the factory summed up its estimate of the performance by concluding "Any faster and it would fly."


Less is more: Underside of the Aston Martin Valkyrie. 

Actually, even were it able to go faster it still might not leave the ground.  While the aerodynamic techniques visible in the bodywork are orthodox by contemporary standards, the Valkyrie also generates much "virtual downforce" by the sculpturing of the underside, significant parts of which are effectively "hollow", the channels using the fluid dynamics of the air-flow to "suck the car to the ground".  The technique has been used for decades but the Valkyrie is the most extreme implementation yet seen on a road car.