Tchotchke

Tchotchke (pronounced chahch-kuh or chotch-kee)

(1) In Yiddish, an inexpensive, often showy trinket

(2) By adoption in English slang, an inexpensive souvenir, trinket, or ornament.

(3) In Yiddish, an attractive young woman (with variants).

(4) By adoption in English slang, an attractive young woman (now rare).

(5) In slang, objects of inferior quality (now rare US use of the word as a kind of alternative to schwag or swag (trinkets or promotional items given away at an event)) and used also of marijuana of low potency.

1950s: From the Yiddish טשאַטשקע (tshatshke) (ornament; trinket; toy and (figuratively) attractive girl or woman), from a Slavic language, perhaps the Russian цацка (tsatska) (toy or small ornamental object) or Ukrainian цяцька (tsatska (toy or trinket) but many etymologists think the Polish czaczko (trinket; knickknack) the most likely source and probably ultimately imitative of a baby’s utterances.  The Polish czaczko is long obsolete; the modern cacko exists in the same sense (originally dialect, of expressive origin).  Tchotchke is a noun; the noun plural is tchotchkes.

Classic tchotchke: Lindsay Lohan fridge magnet.  In US “tourist spots”, there are “tchotchke shops” (functionally equivalent to souvenirs shops in other places).

Quite what was tchotchke’s path through Slavic languages is not certain; no single root has ever been identified.  The sense of “a small ornament of minor value; a knick-knack, a trinket” seems first to have appeared in the 1950s while the figurative meaning “attractive girl or woman” had come into use by at least 1964.  Both are thought to have origins in Jewish communities in the north-eastern US (almost certainly New York City) from which use spread to cities in south-east Canada.  The time-line of the assumption of meanings (trinket: 1950s & attractive young woman: 1960s) are vague because tchotchke was circulating in oral use for some time before appearing in the written record; in the pre-online era, years could elapse between lexicographers acknowledging a word’s existence and its appearance in a printed volume of a dictionary (or one of the “supplements” issued between releases of revised editions).  That the transferred sense of “pretty girl” is listed as dating from 1964 reflects the publication date; not a verified first use.  With an origin in the Middle Ages, Yiddish is best imagined as beginning as a “concept”, assembled (variously and eventually) from over-lapping dialects, influenced mostly by West Germanic and Middle-Eastern languages.  Although by the 1950s (when tchotchke entered the lexicon) Yiddish was more codified, alternative spellings still were being listed, including chatchka, chachka, chatchke, chotchke, tsatske, tshatshke, tsotchke and tchotchkeleh.  The spelling tchotchke is an English transliteration of the Yiddish, not a form that follows ordinary English phonetic conventions although the OED (Oxford English Dictionary) notes consonant cluster “tch-” sometimes is used in English for “ch” (especially in foreign words) so the adaptation (with the silent “T”) is not unusual).

The dual meanings have survived despite the use to describe women being obviously sexist and sometimes derogatory (ie the latter sense transferred from “cheap trinket”) but it’s said now to be used with an emphasis on the “attractive” or “amusing” rather than any hint of “intellectually unsubstantial” with at least two Yiddish dictionaries adding “sometimes used affectionately”.  However, in many languages, with descriptors of women, there have been those who re-purpose even complimentary terms as pejoratives and documented uses of tchotchke have extended to what would in English be understood as “a kept woman”, “a manipulative minx” and “a bimbo”.  There can also be confusion with the Yiddish tsatskele (either “young woman who exploits her attractiveness to achieve her ends” or “one’s favourite daughter”, an explanatory note in Leo Rosten’s (1908–1997) The Joys of Yiddish (1968) explaining the meaning shift being effected by a change in the tone of voice).  In Yiddish, context matters much, regional uses also including “bruise”, “nobody”, “misfit” and “brat”.  That variety is emblematic of Yiddish because, unlike formal, structured Hebrew, Yiddish long grew without any sense of a “standard canon” and words used in one city district could convey a different meaning than those heard no more remotely than a few suburbs or blocks away.  Even today, not all entries in Yiddish dictionaries are necessarily comprehensive; the language varied by region and community with not every recorded sense universally understood.  If ever the term “melting pot” could be applied to languages, it was of the way Yiddish forms in the nineteenth & twentieth centuries swirled around New York City, entering (sometimes adapted but usually not) US English and the spreading.

Conservatory of Hitler's country house, Berchtesgaden: note wicker chair's incorporated swastika below armrest, “AH” in the embroidered throw and cushions in a variety of colors and designs, all gifts to the Führer from grateful German women.

There are those who inherit their tchotchkes, others acquire them while some have the thrust upon them.  Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945) had the typical upper-middle class distaste for kitschy stuff and in his (sometimes reliable) memoir Erinnerungen (Memories or Reminiscences; published in English as Inside the Third Reich (1969)) the presence of not a few tchotchkes in Adolf Hitler’s (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) country house, on Obersalzberg of the Bavarian Alps, some years before it was enlarged in the sprawling complex centred on the Berghof: “After Berchtesgaden came the steep mountain road full of potholes, until we arrived at Hitler's small, pleasant wooden house on Obersalzberg.  It had a wide overhanging roof and modest interior: a dining room, a small living room, and three bedrooms. The furniture was bogus old-German peasant style and gave the house a comfortable petit-bourgeois look.  A brass canary cage, a cactus, and a rubber plant intensified this impression. There were swastikas on knickknacks and pillows embroidered by admiring women, combined with, say, a rising sun or a vow of ‘eternal loyalty.’  Hitler commented to me with some embarrassment: ‘I know these are not beautiful things, but many of them are presents.  I shouldn't like to part with them.’”

US three-piece band Tchotchke (Anastasia Sanchez (b 1999, drums, lead vocals), Eva Chambers (b 1999, bass, keyboards, backing vocals) and Emily Tooraen (b 1996, guitar, backing vocals).

Anastasia Sanchez and Eva Chambers had been members of a number of musical aggregations and had released some material before in 2020 recruiting Emily Tooraen as lead guitarist, the trio adopting the name Tchotchke.  Most tracks on their eponymous album (2022) had been recorded prior to Tooraen’s arrival but their second release (Playin' Dumb) in 2025 included contributions from all three.  Working in what’s described as a “retro blend” of 1960s “pure pop” and sometimes formulaic “playlist-friendly power pop”, the band often collaborates with fellow New York outfit the Lemon Twigs, both in packaged recordings and undertaking tours.  Tchotchke’s emphasis on the use of harmonies (a nod to the “girl groups” of the 1960s) and analogue recording techniques produce a “vintage sonic aesthetic” (always, their material concurrently is available on vinyl) and reviewers have noted it works as well with a touch of “old time static” as it does in the crystal-clear digital version.  Despite the obvious commercial appeal of their “candy-coated” sound, definitely the trio belong somewhere in the “art house” genre.

Wish You Were a Girl (2022), official music video.

While tempting (for men at least) to assume the band’s name was chosen as an allusion to the photogenic qualities of the members, Ms Sanchez said the origin lay in the fondness she and Ms Chambers have for tchotchkes: “We like tchotchkes and have collections that are constantly growing.  Emily is more of a minimalist, which has been healing to our hoarding tendencies.”  Pleasingly though, an element of nominative determinism appeared in the in official music video of Wish You Were a Girl (2022) with many tchotchkes included as  verisimilitude.

Tchotchke with Volvo 240.  There may be a subliminal message or maybe the girls just like Volvos (sometimes, “a Volvo is just a Volvo”).

The Volvo 200 series, in production between 1974 and 1993, was the famously robust machine that more than any established the brand in the US; some 2.8 million were built.  Available mostly as two & four doors sedans and a five-door station wagon, there were some low-volume variants including LWB (long wheelbase) limousines (supplied mostly to the GDR (Deutsche Demokratische Republik (German Democratic Republic; the old East Germany, 1949-1990)) and a distinctive two-door PLC (person luxury coupé) with a lowered roofline (the “chop-top” 262C (1978-1980)).  The 262C, designed in-house, was built by in Turin, Italy by Carrozzeria Bertone and although fewer than 7,000 were made, the expensive model was always intended as an exclusive range-topper and was throughout its run a success, demand greatly exceeding the original projections.  Visually, the lowered roof-line atop the otherwise brick-like structure made the 262C something of a caricature but the look was less pronounced than the way it was implemented on some of the US PLCs of the 1970s, Imperials and full-sized machines from Chrysler's other divisions featuring the most exaggerated expression of the motif.

Factory publicity shot for 1981 Volvo 262C (left) and 1972 Imperial LeBaron Two-door Hardtop (right).  The 262C's “small greenhouse atop large body” was not wholly “un-Volvo like” because the look had been seen on the earlier 1800 coupés (1961-1972) and it reflected the design language of the US PLCs of the 1970s that at times approached absurdity, the ratio of cabin to what lay fore & aft as inefficient as it looked.  By comparison with them, the Volvo was better balanced, the most desirable of the 262Cs made in the final season with the unfortunate vinyl roof receiving an overdue banishment.  Alone among the 260 range, only the 262C attracts much interest but although of its genre a “minor classic” with many cachets (two doors, lavish interior, limited production, built by a storied Italian coach-building house), the collector market still prices it in the lower range.    

Unusually, although among collectors, as a general principle, desirability tends to rise as cylinder-count and displacement increases, it’s the cars powered by Volvo’s (reputedly indestructible) four-cylinder engines that are preferred to those with the PRV (Peugeot-Renault-Volvo) “Douvrin” V6 that gained a reputation for thirst, sluggishness and fragility, even before it appeared in the tail of the stainless steel fiasco that was the doomed DMC DeLorean (1981–1983); production of the V6 260 ended in 1984 and in that aspect, the long-running 200 series differed from its predecessor.  The 140 Series was produced exclusively in four-cylinder form between 1966 and 1974 but in 1969 the companion 164 appeared, powered by Volvo’s 3.0 litre (182 cubic inch) straight-six.  The 164 was highly regarded (a lack of power one of the few complaints about the 140), the robust engine (used also in marine, military, industrial and other applications) a paragon of reliability.  Unexpectedly, the 164 remained in (limited) production for a season beyond the retirement of the 140, batches needed for certain markets (notably the US and Japan) while the PRV V6 was made compliant with their more onerous emission rules.  That made those PRVs less toxic to the environment but further compromised its dubious reputation, the anti-emission plumbing sapping more of the anyway modest power, the only metrics to increase being fuel consumption and complaints.  While to this day the 240 enjoys a cult following, few lamented the demise of the 260 and even at the highest reaches of the company, the PRV seems not to have been admired.  Pehr Gyllenhammar (1935–2024) between 1970-1994 served as Volvo’s CEO (chief executive officer) & chairman and his 262C company car was a genuine one-off, fitted not with the PRV but a more vibrant B21ET (a 2.1 litre (130 cubic inch) turbocharged version of the faithful in-line four).  In the years since, some owners have followed the chairman’s lead and re-powered their own 262Cs; predictably, several have received a US V8 of some flavor.

Tchotchke (while enjoying bananas) with Volvo 240.

The NNN designation system (N=Series; N=Cylinders; N=Doors) was in 1983 simplified so 242, 264, 245 etc was replaced by 240 & 260.  The predecessor of the 200 series is a footnote in diplomatic history as what Volvo calls the “biggest car heist in history”.  In 1974, a thousand Volvo 144s were ordered by the government of the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)) and duly supplied, along with an invoice than went unpaid.  The factory got paid by the Swedish state because the transaction had been underwritten by SECA (Swedish Export Credit Agency) but, despite SECA periodically sending “reminder notices” to Kim Il-Sung (Kim I, 1912–1994; Great Leader of DPRK 1948-1994), Kim Jong-Il (Kim II, 1941-2011; Dear Leader of DPRK  1994-2011) and Kim Jong-Un (Kim III, b 1982; Supreme Leader of DPRK since 2011), the invoice remains in SECA’s BD (bad debts) ledger and not even the ownership of Volvo in 2010 passing to the Chinese Geely Group seems to have assisted in extracting money from Pyongyang (Beijing among the few “friends” of the “Hermit Kingdom”).  Adding insult to injury, some of the 144s are still in use and the Great Leader, Dear Leader & Supreme Leader never contested the bill; they just ignored the letters of demand.

Supreme Daughter (left) and Supreme Leader (right) inspecting an exhibit of women’s clothes, Pyongyang, October 2026.  The Supreme Leader seemed much taken with a pair of pink sneakers which closely he examined.

With interest accumulated over a half-century odd, the total owed is now some US$455 million but despite hacker operation TraderTraitor (known also as the Lazarus Group and allegedly the 414 Liason Office within the DPRK state apparatus) recently stealing a reputed US$6.4 billion in cryptocurrency from the Binance exchange, it’s unlikely the anyone at SECA is expecting a cheque in the mail.  Apart from all else, the Supreme Leader has other demands on his purse, photos published by the KCNA (Korean Central News Agency, the DPRK's energetic and highly productive propaganda arm) suggesting Supreme Daughter (Kim Ju Ae, (b circa 2013), by Kim Jong-Un out of Ri Sol-ju (b circa 1988)) has very expensive tastes in clothes, shoes, handbags and such.  Still, the DPRK’s in-house hacking operation is making progress, cybersecurity company Elliptic revealing their analysis suggested TraderTraitor was taking a recently emerged approach to cyber-laundering, minting worthless meme tokens simply as “pass-through devices” to move stolen cryptoassets through decentralized exchange liquidity pools, meaning there’s no direct path from wallets holding stolen assets to wallets intended as ultimate recipients.  The method’s attraction is its low cost (the tokens created as “throw-aways”) and the convolutions created on the blockchain, the latter making more time-consuming the task of those investigating the heist.  The DPRK’s foreign ministry has denied the state engages in any form of hacking and certainly had nothing to do with the “Binance incident” but, just as rule during the Cold War (1948-1911) was “nothing can be confirmed as true until denied by the Kremlin”, the industry seems assured it has found the culprit, the DPRK having “a bit of previous”: An outfit that would steal a thousand Volvos would not be squeamish about pickpocketing Bitcoins.

Monica Lewinsky, pleased to see “big schmuck” Bill Clinton, 1996.

Yiddish has enriched English, the words often a “highlight” of the sentence in which they appear.  Former White House intern Monica Lewinsky (b 1973, with whom Bill Clinton (b 1946; POTUS 1993-2001) “did not have sexual relations") was a good Jewish girl (who got led astray) and one of her emails (discussing gifts Mr Clinton had purchased from The Black Dog at Martha’s Vineyard and sent her through the office of his secretary Betty Currie (b 1939)) to college friend Catherine Davis (b 1973) was published in the “Starr report” (Referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr in Conformity with the Requirement of Title 28, United States Code, Section 595(c) (1998) by Ken Starr (1946–2022; independent counsel investigating the Clinton-era Whitewater(gate) affair and other matters).  “Well, I found out from Betty yesterday that he not only brought me a t-shirt, he got me 2 t-shirts, a hat and a dress!!!!  Even though he's a big schmuck, that is surprisingly sweet – even that he remembered!”  Some other Yiddish words most frequently used in English include:

Bupkis (or bubkes): Emphatically nothing or a worthless amount (as a Jewish mother telling her daughter: “Your new boyfriend isn't worth bupkis”).

Chutzpah (pronounced hutz-pah): Impudent nerve, supreme self-confidence, or audacity.

Glitch: A minor technical malfunction or sudden error (as in “a glitch in the matrix”).

Klutz: A clumsy, uncoordinated person (from the Yiddish word for a wooden block or beam).

Kvell: To beam with pride and joy, especially over a child or family member.

Kvetch: To whine, complain, or squeeze out a grievance (a word that might have been coined for crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013).

Mensch: A good, honorable, and decent person of integrity (rarely used by most people).

Meshuggah (or meshugener): Crazy or senseless.

Nebbish: A timid, ineffectual, or unfortunate simpleton.

Nosh: To snack or nibble on food.

Oy vey: An interjection expressing dismay, exhaustion, or grief.

Plotz: To collapse, burst, or explode from overwhelming emotion (laughter, stress, or anger).

Schlemiel: A clumsy or chronically incompetent person.

Schlep: To drag, haul, or travel with great difficulty or heavy effort.

Schlimazel: A chronically unlucky person (often used in conjunction with “schlemiel”: “The schlemiel spills the soup; the schlimazel is the one on whom it lands”).

Schmaltz: Excessive sentimentality or melodrama (most of the reading list for women’s book clubs).

Schmooze: To chat in a friendly, conversational way, often to make social connections or gain an advantage.

Schmuck: A foolish, obnoxious, or contemptible person (although sometimes used affectionately of one loved despite their flaws).

Schmutz: Dirt, grime, or a smudge of filth.

Spiel: An elaborate, rehearsed, or persuasive sales pitch or story.

Verklempt: Choked up or overcome with emotion.

Yenta: A nosy, gossipy person or busybody.

Teaspoons: Functional when stirring one's coffee, tchotchkes when displayed in arrays.

There are words that can be synonyms of tchotchke including “trinket”, “ornament”, “kitsch”, “souvenir”, “knick-knack”, “gewgaw” and “bric-à-brac” but the significance of the Yiddish word is it’s so specific in meaning “small & inexpensive”.  In that, it differs from “ornament”, “kitsch”, “souvenir”, all terms that can be applied to stuff that can be large and costly (sometimes inexplicably expensive) and differs from “trinket” because there's not the same sense of the dismissive; a trinket intrinsically is “useless” while a tchotchke might fulfil some purpose, even if abstract.  Souvenirs, by definition, tended to be “location or event specific” and while tchotchkes certainly could be souvenirs, not all were.  In the US, tchotchke also entered the jargon of business, the small toys in breakfast cereal boxes and the stuff in bags handed out in conferences also described thus.  So, of all these words there’s a definite “evaluative undertone” and while none are exactly positive, as terms of derision all are fairly mild although “ornament” is an outlier in that ornaments can be both exquisite and expensive so are more like bibelots (by convention, used of stuff both beautiful and expensive).  Depending on the context (and item(s)), the term can have a connotation of worthlessness or disposability as well as tackiness: To say: “She’s a collector of porcelain figurines” is neutral whereas: “She collects tchotchkes” probably in the minds of most summons visions of clutter, perhaps a room full of lovingly curated teaspoon collections, all in wall-mounted display cabinets.

Inflammable & Flammable

Inflammable (pronounced in-flam-uh-buhl)

(1) Easily set on fire; combustible; incendiary, combustible, inflammable, burnable, ignitable (recommended only for figurative use).

(2) Easily aroused or excited, as to passion or anger; irascible; fiery; volatile, choleric.

1595–1605: From the Medieval Latin inflammābilis, the construct being the Classical Latin inflammā(re) (to set on fire) + -bilis (from the Proto-Italic -ðlis, from the primitive Indo-European i-stem form -dhli- of -dhlom (instrumental suffix).  Akin to –bulum, the suffix -bilis is added to a verb to form an adjectival noun of relationship to that verb (indicating a capacity or worth of being acted upon).  The construct of the Classical Latin inflammare (to set on fire) was -in (in, on) + flamma (flame).  As an indication of shifts in use, the verb inflame & noun inflammation are now most commonly used in clinical medicine to describe swellings, a site especially "reddish" often called "angry".  Inflammable is a noun & adjective, inflammation, inflammableness & inflammasome & inflammability are nouns, inflammatory is an adjective and inflammably is an adverb; the noun plural is inflammables. 

Flammable (pronounced flam-uh-buhl)

Easily set on fire; combustible; incendiary, combustible, inflammable, burnable, ignitable (technically a back-formation from inflammable).

1805–1815: From the Classical Latin flammā(re) (to set on fire) + -ble (the Latin suffix forming adjectives and means “capable or worthy of”).  Flammable is an adjective, flammability is a noun and flammably is an adverb; the noun plural is flammabilities.

Google ngram (a quantitative and not qualitative measure): Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

Need for standardization

Flammable and inflammable came to the same thing.  English, a mongrel vacuum-cleaner of a language, has many anomalies born of the haphazard adoption of words from other tongues but the interchangeability of flammable and inflammable is unfortunate because of the use in signs to warn people of potentially fatal danger.

Using flammable and inflammable to mean the same thing is confusing and at least potentially dangerous and the recommended use is flammable (things prone to catching fire) and non-flammable (things not).  To add another layer of meaning less language-dependent, borrowing from semiotics, danger should be indicated with red, safety with green.

In- often is used as a prefix with adjectives and nouns to indicate the opposite of the word it precedes (eg inaction, indecisive, inexpensive etc).  Given that, it would seem reasonable to assume inflammable is the opposite of flammable and the reason for the potentially deadly duplication is historic.  Inflammable actually pre-dates flammable, the word derived from the Latin verb inflammare (to set on fire), this verb also the origin of the modern meaning “to swell or to provoke angry feelings”, hence the link between setting something on fire and rousing strong feelings in someone.  So, at a time when Latin was more influential, inflammable made sense.  However, as the pull of Latin receded, words with in- (as a negative prefix) became a bigger part of the lexicon and the confusion was created; by early in the 1800s, flammable increasingly came to be used and in the next century, as the use and storage of flammable substances grew, use was widespread.  The modern convention is (or should be) to use flammable literally (to refer to things which catch fire) and inflammable figuratively (to describe the arousal of passions, the swelling of tissue etc.  Surprisingly, the rules applying to warning signs have yet to adopt this standardization.

The Mean Girls (2004) Burn Book (left) and Lindsay Lohan burning an “inflammatory” tabloid magazine, Lindsay Lohan: The Obsession, GQ Magazine, October 2006.

Uses figurative and literal: In Mean Girls, the Burn Book gained its notoriety from being packed with inflammatory comments.  Lindsay Lohan in 2006 picked up the concept in a photo-shoot by Terry Richardson (b 1965) for GQ (Gentlemen's Quarterly) magazine.  Titled Lindsay Lohan: The Obsession, the theme was her as a case-study of the way “tabloid publications” handled celebrity culture, the joke being a magazine with “inflammatory content about her” being literally set aflame, the glossy paper of course being flammable.  It’s appears a consensus in the “media studies” crew that this aspect of “tabloid culture” peaked in the first dozen-odd years of the twenty-first century, the reasons for that including (1) the period having an exceptionally large cast of suitable subjects, (2) smart phones with HD (high-definition) cameras becoming consumer items meaning potential content proliferated (ie what once would not have been photographed now became available to editors as low cost images) and (3) social media sites not having attained critical mass, all factors which at the time enabled the lower-end glossies to flourish.  Of course, what's not certain is the math of the "cause & effect".  Was what at the time seemed an "exceptionally large cast of suitable subjects" a fluke of history which encouraged the taking of photographs and their subsequent publication or did the growth in number of down-market glossies mean more "celebrities" had to be "manufactured" to provide the content?   

1972 Ford Ranchero 500 (left) and a circa 1972 Ford Pinto (right).

“Hot Rod Flames” first became popular when the West Coast hot rod community began adding them to their modified machines.  Rendered usually in red, orange and yellow to emulate actual flames, in the decades since they’ve appeared in many colors, sometimes in hues which would never be seen in nature and they’re now a commodity with templates and adhesives widely available; the motif was also picked up by the tattoo community.  Traditionally, when applied to a hot rod or other modified vehicle, the placement of the lick of the flames was quasi-realistic in that the effect was intended to be that of a flaming car in motion.  One widely circulated image however was of a Ford Pinto (1970-1980) with the flames travelling “the other way”: from the back towards the passengers.  The artwork was a sardonic comment on the Pinto’s reputation for bursting aflame if struck from behind by another vehicle, the allegation being Pintos were unusually flammable (the media tended to prefer the more dramatic “explosive”) in such cases because of the placement of the gas (petrol) tank and design of the fuel system.  In truth the Pinto’s susceptibility probably was little different from that of many other vehicles with a similar layout but what gained the modest machine notoriety was the discovery of “inflammatory” comments in internal corporate memoranda in which executives discussed the relative costs of rectifying the problem compared with the likely costs of legal settlements compensating incinerated victims and their families.

Combustibles magazine (4 December, 1972).

The troubling duplicity of meaning was explored by the editors of Combustibles magazine in their edition of 4 December, 1972.  There never was a Combustibles magazine (which may suggest a gap in the market for the entrepreneurial) but an archive of the (factitious) covers is maintained in the Lillian Virginia Mountweazel Research Collection.  Ms Mountweasel (1942-1973) was a creation of Karen Tweedy-Holmes (b 1942), then an editor at the New Columbia Encyclopedia who, for the publication's 1975 edition, needed a bogus entry to be inserted as a "copyright trap", the idea being that were the "facts" included to appear in any other publication, they'd obviously been plagiarized because the sad tale of Ms Mountweazel's life and demise appeared nowhere else.  The entry read: “Mountweazel, Lillian Virginia, 1942–1973, American photographer, b. Bangs, Ohio.  Turning from fountain design to photography in 1963, Mountweazel produced her celebrated portraits of the South Sierra Miwok in 1964.  She was awarded government grants to make a series of photo-essays of unusual subject matter, including New York City buses, the cemeteries of Paris and rural American mailboxes.  The last group was exhibited extensively abroad and published as Flags Up! (1972).  Mountweazel died at 31 in an explosion while on assignment for Combustibles magazine.”  That same year, writing in The New Yorker, Henry Alford (b 1962) suggested "mountweasel" as a term to be used for copyright traps and dictionaries agreed; to this day it remains the preferred generic form and for this purpose, (unlike when used of the doomed heroine), mountweasel is used without an initial capital.

Combustibles magazine (Special Issue, 4 June, 1973).

Impressed by Ms Tweedy-Holmes' (there can have been few finer names for a lexicographer) creation, the curators of the Lillian Virginia Mountweazel Research Collection fleshed-out the tale of the life and death of the tragic American fountain designer turned photographer, most noted for her Flags Up! project, a commissioned series of images of the mailboxes of rural America.  Her other assignments included “The Cemeteries of Paris”, “The Whimsical History of Fireworks” and “Disturbing Revelations” about Nazi rocket scientist Wernher von Braun (1912–1977) who in 1945 had been employed by the US government, suddenly rather more interested in the missiles the German could help them build rather than his wartime use of slave labor.  A darker side also was revealed: Flags Up!, although promoted as the USPS (US Postal Service) using “captivating imagery” to demonstrate how the new ZIP codes enhanced “the efficiency and modernization of the postal system”, actually was funded by the CCF (Congress for Cultural Freedom), a CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) “front organization” used during the Cold War to produce anti-Soviet propaganda.  The “messaging” in Flags Up! was to show the way freedom of thought and the expression of ideas was allowed freely to flow between Americans, however remote they might be.  Of course, also included is the “special issue” of Combustibles (4 June, 1973) in which was announced the death the previous day of Ms Mountweazel, killed in the crash of a Soviet Tupolev Tu-144 SST (supersonic transport) passenger airliner during the 1973 Paris Air Show at Le Bourget Airport.  In the accident, all six crew members died along with eight in the nearby village of Goussainville, Val-d'Oise where Ms Mountweasel had been researching “the negative health effects of sound pollution in communities near major international airports.”  After her death, photojournalism scholar Pierre Menard, acknowledged Ms Mountweazel as “one of the most important in the world of pyromaniac publishing.”  Pierre Menard was also factitious, the name borrowed from Pierre Menard, autor del Quijote (Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote (1939)), a short story by the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges (1899-1986).

Fake & Faux

Fake (pronounced feyk)

(1) To prepare or make something specious, deceptive, or fraudulent.

(2) To conceal the defects of or make appear more attractive, interesting, valuable etc, usually in an attempt to deceive.

(3) To pretend; simulate; emulate.

(4) To accomplish by trial and error or by improvising:

(5) To trick or deceive.

(6) In jazz music, to improvise (non pejorative).

(7) To play music without reading from a score (usually non pejorative).

(8) Anything made to appear otherwise than it actually is; counterfeit.

(9) A person who fakes; faker.

(10) To lay (a rope) in a coil or series of long loops so as to allow to run freely without fouling or kinking (often followed by down).

(11) Any complete turn of a rope that has been faked down; any of the various ways in which a rope may be faked down.

(12) In German, a male given name.

1350–1400: From the Middle English faken (to coil a rope) of unknown origin.  The nautical adoption fake (one of the windings of a cable or hawser in a coil) was from the Swedish veck (a fold) and probably entered English from exchanges between English and Scandinavian sailors.  The more familiar modern meaning is documented from 1775 as an adjective meaning “to counterfeit”.  It’s attested from 1812 as vagrants' slang meaning “to do for, rob or kill someone” but was also, in an echo of the earlier form, used to mean “shape something”.  It’s thought to have been either (1) a variant of the obsolete feak & feague (to beat), akin to Dutch veeg (a slap) & vegen (to sweep, wipe) or (2), a part of the lingua franca via Polari from the Italian facciare (to make or do).  Fake is a noun, verb & adjective, faked is a verb, fakement is a noun, faking is a noun & verb and faker is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is fakes.

The rarely convivial Hjalmar Schacht, standing right behind Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945).  Dr Schacht was a confessed Freemason.

It’s documented from 1851 as a noun (a swindle) and from 1888 was applied to a person (a swindler), but most etymologists assume it had for some time been in oral use.  The most likely source is thought to have been feague (to spruce up by artificial means), from the German fegen (polish, sweep) which, in colloquial use was used to mean "to clear out, to plunder".  In English, much of the early slang of thieves is from German or Dutch sources, dating from that great linguistic melting pot, the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) and until the nineteenth century, was largely un-documented although the fragmentary evidence available does suggest use was constantly shifting.  While preparations were being made for the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946), the defendants had been interviewed by a number of specialists including a psychologist who, among a battery of tests, included relatively simple mental arithmetic and one who might have been expected to display great proficiency with numbers was confessed Freemason Horace Greeley Hjalmar Schacht (1877–1970; president of the Reichsbank 1923-1930 & 1933-1939, general plenipotentiary for war economy 1935–1937 and reichsminister without portfolio 1937-1943).  However, the tester was “amazed at Schacht’s inability to do mental arithmetic; he had expected great things from a financial wizard.”  This Schacht explained as a virtue rather than an inadequacy, claiming: “Any financial wizard who is good at arithmetic is probably a swindler.”  Schacht was acquitted by the IMT (International Military Tribunal) though that didn't stop the German courts subsequently sentencing him to eight years in prison (essentially on the basis of "being a Nazi").  On appeal, he was released in 1948.

Fake news (journalism deliberately misleading), although popularized in the 2016 US presidential campaign (and following the lead of Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2025) subsequently applied used by just about anyone to describe any source of which they disapprove), was actually first attested in 1894 although, as a device, fake news is probably about as old as news itself.  Faker as an agent noun from faker the verb is from 1846 and the noun fakement (forgery) is from 1811.  To “fake (someone) out” is a description of applied gamesmanship in sport and noted from 1941.  To jazz musicians, “to fake” was merely oral slang for improvising and the “fake book” is attested from 1951.  Interestingly, the adjective "jivey" was sometimes used as a pejorative (phony, fake) unlike "jive" which, in a musical context, was always purely descriptive.  Synonyms include ersatz, fake, false, imitation, imitative, unreal, counterfeit, fabricated, factitious, spurious, substitute, affected, contrived, feigned, insincere, plastic, synthetic, unnatural, bogus, affected, forged, fraudulent, mock, phony, spurious, deception, forgery, hoax, scam, sham, trick, put on, assumed, fraud, impostor, quack, charlatan, deceiver, substitute, contrived, feigned, insincere, & unnatural.

Faux (pronounced foh)

Artificial or imitation and admitted or understood to be so.

1676: from the twelfth century French faux (feminine singular fausse, masculine plural faux, feminine plural fausses), from the Old French fals, from the Latin falsus (false), perfect passive participle from fallō (deceive, trick; mistake).  The origin of fallō is uncertain.  It’s thought either from the Proto-Italic falsō, from the primitive Indo-European (s)whzel (to stumble) or from the primitive Indo-European ǵhwel- (to lie, deceive) but etymologists note structural problems with the latter.  A doublet of false.  The word fake almost always carries negative connotations, the idea of something that is not real, an imitation designed to trick someone into thinking it is real or original.  A fake might be a forgery or copy which is (certainly with many digital fakes) indistinguishable from whatever is the real or original thing it imitates, indeed it might even be an improvement but it remains fake.  Faux is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is fauces.

Lindsay Lohan in faux fur, amfAR gala, New York City, 2013.

Faux has since the 1980s been used in English (with French pronunciation) to describe anything that is imitative without attempting to deceive.  Prior to this, the only frequent use in English was the faux pas (breach of good manners, any act that compromises one's reputation (literally "false step")), noted since the 1670s.  Faux tends not to convey the negative association of fake because it so blatantly an alternative rather than an attempt to deceive, indeed, it can be positioned as having positive connotations, such as was was done with faux fur.  Faux fur is still at least quasi-respectable and in certain circles, there’s long been a micro-industry devoted to turning into social pariahs anyone wearing the real thing.  Sometimes, supporters of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) use direct action, the flinging of red paint onto the offending coat or stole a favorite tactic.  In the twenty-first century, it’s probably not possible to “announce something” without some sort of adverse reaction on social media, the objections (often condemnations) including environment impact, cultural appropriation, microaggressions, racial or gender stereotyping, cultural insensitivity, the carbon footprint, various phobias and other transgressions.  It’s just the way what’s deemed “acceptable” and what’s not is now thrashed out.  Historically, because faux fur was a product of the petro-chemical industry (by any standards a dirty business) the criticism for faux fur centred on the environmental impacts but there were also concerns about the ethics of “deceptive” supply chains and the perpetuation of fur as a desirable fashion item.

While it’s true no animal usually directly is harmed in the production of faux fur, critics maintain wildlife has nevertheless suffered because of the industry’s environmental impact and although the methods used in the argument do sometimes seem abstract with some remoteness between cause and effect, the case is not without foundation, the reliance of on plastics obviously not without cascading costs.  Even now, most faux fur is made from synthetic polymers like acrylic, modacrylic, and polyester, all from non-renewable fossil fuels and emerging from processes with a significant carbon footprint.  Of increasing concern too is the heighted awareness that merely by existing (and especially when being laundered), faux fur garments shed tiny plastic particles into the environment including waterways, contributing to marine pollution (and entering the human-food chain) in a way once underestimated.  Unlike natural animal pelts, plastics can take at least hundreds of years to decompose and some include “forever chemicals”; they do what’s on the tin.  There’s also in commerce some cheating with products labelled “faux fur” found to contain natural product (including that of domestic cats & dogs), an approach tempting because the mass-production of even cheap synthetic fur can be more expensive than that obtained from animals slaughtered in unregulated “factory farms”.  PETA objects to the sale and use of faux fur because it “normalizes the aesthetic” of wearing animal pelts, something that can contribute to sustaining demand for real fur and that critique applies to more recent innovations such as faux fur produced from a plant-base using material like hemp or wool (harvested without slaughtering the creature).

Actor Pamela Anderson (b 1967), mostly real.

People do however seem unforgiving of fake boobs which, even if admitted (apparently sometimes even "boasted of") as being fake (which really should make them faux), seem forever doomed to be called fake.  The preferred form appears to be "fake tits".

Faux also blends well; there are "fauxhemians" (an individual who affects a Bohemian lifestyle while staying within social conventions), "fauxmances" (bogus romances, conducted for reasons good & bad), "fauxgasms" (simulated orgasms (often in the form "she's faking it")), "fauxlanthropists" (individuals who engage in charitable activities out of self-interest), "fauxpologies" (a non-apology), "fauxminists" (an individual presenting as a feminist but judged insincere), "fauxmosexuals" (heterosexual individuals who adopts fashion and mannerisms traditionally associated with the "L" & "G" factions in the LGBTQQIAAOP aggregation in order to gain social and/or financial advantage) & "fauxtatoes" (low-carb, keto-friendly alternatives to traditional mashed potatoes, typically made by blending steamed or roasted cauliflower).  Donald Trump dubbed Elizabeth Warren (b 1949; US senator (Democrat) for Massachusetts since 2013) Pocahontas because her claim to Native American ancestry proved dubious but allies of her predecessor (Scott Brown (b 1959; US senator (Republican) for Massachusetts 2010–2013)), referred to her as Fauxcahontas.  That was an incorrect use necessitated by the need of rhyme and word formation; technically she was a "Fakecahontas" but as a word it didn't work as well.  People anyway seemed to get the point: as a Native American, she was fake, bogus, phoney.

Christ with the Woman Taken in Adultery by Han van Meegeren (1889–1947) following Vermeer (1632-1675).

In May 1945, immediately after the liberation from Nazi occupation of the Netherlands, the authorities arrested Dutch national Han van Meegeren (1889–1947) and charged him with collaborating with the enemy, a capital crime.  Evidence had emerged that van Meegeren had during World War II (1939-1945) sold Vermeer's Christ with the Woman Taken in Adultery to Hermann Göring (1893–1946; leading Nazi 1922-1945, Hitler's designated successor & Reichsmarschall 1940-1945).  His defense strategy was as novel as it was unexpected: He claimed the painting was not a Vermeer but rather a forgery by his own hand, pointing out that because he had traded the fake for over a hundred other Dutch paintings seized earlier by the Reich Marshal, he was thus a national hero rather than a Nazi collaborator.  With a practical demonstration (a canvas and paints brought into the courtroom) of his skill, added to his admission of having forged five other fake "Vermeers" during the 1930s, as well as two "Pieter de Hoochs" (1629-1684) all of which had shown up on European art markets since 1937, he convinced the judges and was acquitted but was then, as he expected, charged with forgery for which he received a one year sentence, half the maximum available to the court.  He died in prison of heart failure, brought on by years of drug and alcohol abuse. 

Justice might better have been served by the judges imposing a small, symbolic fine and requesting Mr van Meegeren to undertake not again to forge the work of others because, in the circumstances, swindling Hermann Göring seems more a community service than a crime.  His skills with brush and paint aside, Van Meegeren was able successfully to pass off his 1930s fakes as those of the seventeenth century painter of the Dutch baroque, Johannes Vermeer (1632–1675), because of the four years he spent meticulously testing the techniques by which a recent painting could be made to appear appropriately aged.  The breakthrough was getting paints thoroughly to harden, a process that in an oil-based mix occurs naturally over 50-odd years; his solution was to mix the pigments not with oil but the synthetic resin Bakelite.  For his canvas, he used a genuine but worthless seventeenth-century painting and removed as much of the picture as possible, scrubbing carefully with pumice and water, taking the utmost care not to lose the network of cracks, the existence of which would play a role in convincing many expert appraisers they were authentic Vermeers.  Once dry, he baked the canvas and rubbed a carefully measured mix of ink and dust into the edges of the cracks, emulating the dirt that over centuries would have accumulated.

Guilty as sin: A slimmed-down Hermann Göring in the dock, Nuremberg, 1946.

Modern x-ray techniques and chemical analysis mean such tricks can no longer succeed but, at the time, so convincing were his fakes that no doubts were expressed and the dubious Christ with the Woman Taken in Adultery became Göring's most prized acquisition, quite something considering the literally thousands of pieces of art he looted from occupied Europe.  One of the Allied officers who interrogated Göring in Nuremberg prison prior to his trial before the IMT (International Military Tribunal, 1945-1946) recorded the expression on his face when told "his Vermeer" was a fake suggested that "...for the first time Göring realized there really was evil in this world".  For his crimes, Göring was sentenced to be hanged, a fate doubtless he believed the forger deserved to share.

Where demand exceeds supply, the market will respond: 2013 Mercedes-AMG G 63 6×6 (left) and 2014 Brabus B63S (right).

Aimed at the Middle East market and manufactured between 2013-2015, a run of 100 units was planned for the Mercedes-AMG G 63 6×6 and it was advertised on that basis, exclusivity part of the attraction.  However, such was the interest that dealers prevailed on behalf of a few influential "good customers" so some additional units were built but not many and within months, used models were selling for well above the US$550,000 (€379,000) list price.  That encouraged imitations and probably not since the DEMAG Sd.Kfz half-tracks of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel's (1891–1944) Africa Corps ranged across Cyrenaica in 1941-1942 has there been a vehicle so suited to the open desert although progress meant the experience was able to be enjoyed at higher speed while listening to hi-fidelity recordings in air-conditioned comfort.  Of course the gas (petrol) consumption was, by twenty-first century standards, epic but for the demographic in the Middle East attracted by such things, fuel is a minor cost of their hobbies.  The German tuning house Brabus, noted for catering to the small but lucrative market of those who like the AMG cars but think they need more power, released the B63S, its 700 horsepower quite a chunk above the 536 offered by AMG.  In the narrow technical sense the B63S certainly was imitative but few would call was Brabus does "faux or a fake; being in some sense a manufacturer lends the brand a certain validity although Greta Thunberg (b 2003) would not have been impressed, thinking distinctions between terms like "real", "faux" & "imitation" tiresome distractions from the issue of "environmental thuggery".

1938 Mercedes-Benz G4 (W31, left) and an after-market conversion (right) of 2017 Mercedes-AMG G63 (W463) to a 6×6 configuration.

The factory's G63 6x6 anyway had its own hint of the imitative.  Although making much of its status as having produced the world's "first car" and maintaining in Stuttgart a museum with exhibits stretching back to the company's roots in 1886, Mercedes-Benz prefers to not much to dwell on the details of its activities between 1933-1945 but some of the output during those troubled years was remarkable, including the triple-axle G4.  The factory had developed similar cross-country vehicles for military use during the 1920s but, after testing a number of the prototype G1s, the army declined to place an order, finding them too big, too expensive and too heavy for their intended purpose.  Adolf Hitler however, as drawn to big, impressive machines as he was to monumentalist, representational architecture, ordered them adopted as parade vehicles and the army soon acquired a fleet of the updated G4, used eventually not only on ceremonial occasions but also as staff and command vehicles, two even specially configured, one as a baggage car and the other a mobile communications centre, packed with radio-telephony.

1937 Mercedes-Benz G4.

Hitler’s entry in Vienna following the Anschluss (the absorption of Austria into the Reich), 14 March, 1938 was "warmly welcomed" by the assembled crowds.  It was in the post-war years the project to recast Austria's image as "the Nazi's first victim" rather than "willing companion" was undertaken by the government; elsewhere in Western Europe, eyes anxiously looking east, governments were anxious to lend their support.  The statue in the background is of the Archduke Charles Louis John Joseph Laurentius of Austria, Duke of Teschen (1771–1847) and often referred to as “Archduke Karl”, mounted on the Heldenplatz.

Eventually, between 1934-1939, 57 G4s were built, originally exclusively for the OKW (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (Armed Forces High Command)) and OKH (Oberkommando des Heeres (Army High Command)) but one was gift from Hitler to Generalissimo Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975).  The Spanish G4, one of few which still exists, was restored and remains in the royal garage in Madrid.  According to factory records, all were built with 5.0, 5.3 & 5.4 litre straight-eight engines but there is an unverified report of interview with Hitler’s long-time chauffeur, Erich Kempka (1910-1975), suggesting one for the Führer’s exclusive use was built with the 7.7 litre straight-eight used in the 770K Grosser (W07 (1930–1938) & W150 (1938–1943)).  Some of the 770s were supercharged so, if true, it's a tantalizing prospect but the story is widely thought apocryphal, no evidence of such a one-off ever having been sighted.

The white G63 6x6 (above) was a “conversion” of a 2017 G63 by G Wagon Car Technology GmbH (Austria), a operation with a high-reputation, derived at least in part from their work being undertaken wherever possible with the use of factory part-numbers.  Given their high standards, "fake" or "faux would seem harsh and all but the most obsessive of the originality police likely would settle on "clone", "replica" or "recreation".  One thing that tends to set the factory’s original G63 6x6’s apart from most of the after-market conversions is the latter tend to use the standard G63’s axles while the former were built with more expensive portal axels.  Portal axles include at each wheel hub an off-set gearbox, raising the axle tube above the wheel centre-line, increasing the ground clearance under the differentials (vulnerable to damage in extreme conditions) without incurring the disadvantages (higher centre of gravity, additional structural stress) induced by conventional suspension-lift techniques.  Portal axles provide also built-in gear reduction, reducing stress on drive-trains and off-setting power losses if larger tyres are fitted.  Because of what they do internally, there are also weight-saving benefits because with the “twisting effect” on axle shafts and CV (constant-velocity) joints reduced, components need not be so heavy.  While not a simple installation, portal axles also allow the suspension’s original geometry to be maintained, even if larger wheels and tyres are used.  However, for everything one does there’s a price to be paid and in engineering that’s expressed as “trade-offs”, the advantages gained by the use of portal axles accompanied by the drawbacks of increased complexity and higher maintenance, each unit requiring regular oil-changes.

Walmart chic for a half-million-odd US$.

In places like Turin or Cannes, there wouldn’t have been many who thought Chrysler’s RAM TRX was “too small” but Texas-based operation Hennessey knew there was in the US sufficient demand to schedule an annual production of 12 Mammoth 1000 6×6 TRX trucks, the base price listed at US$449,950 (before options).  Rated at 1,012 HP and measuring some 23½ feet (7.2 metres) end-to-end, in addition to the usual specifications sheet, the company provided a succinct explanatory paragraph: “Everything we do at Hennessey Performance is turned up to 11, but the Mammoth 1000 6×6 is definitely turned up to 12!  Everything on the Mammoth 6×6 is bigger, badder, and more imposing – plus, it’s still super-fast, while being a total powerhouse off-road. It’s the undisputed king of the road.”

Amusingly whether or not fitted with the portal axles making them more suited to use off-road, most of the G63 6x6s were bought not for their rough terrain capabilities but as status symbols, few drivers ever venturing far from the smooth surfaces of urban life that, paradoxically, proved their native environment.  Additionally, the fate of many seems to be as "collectables" carefully to be stored in a climate-controlled garage, awaiting the next venture onto the auction circuit, owners hoping to "flip" their investment for a profit.  Because all that can be guaranteed about the market is that "it will fluctuate", as might have been predicted for such a niche item, results have been mixed.  The concept is though a niche with obvious appeal because in the US a number of suppliers have entered the market to offer similar three-axle conversions on the platforms of the big Chevrolet, Ford and RAM pick-up trucks; impressionistically, most of these also seem to have been purchased for urban use and although their sheer size would seem to mitigate against use in cities, in the US the size differential between them and much else of what's on the roads is not so stark as in other places and for those who really do value functionality, their load-carrying and towing capabilities would be appreciated.  Additionally, among the MAGA (Make America Great Again) crew, such machines have become political statements; that's an abstract kind of functionally.

Ferrari GTO production numbers 1961-1964.  The most fastidious insist only what happened in 1962-1963 counts and there are thus 36 Ferrari 250 GTOs.

There are however fake cars and they're considered bogus if represented as a factory original but are really a modified version of something else.  Even if a functionally exact copy indistinguishable from what the factory did, without disclosure that’s fake because it's not "authentic" yet exactly the same machine modified in the same way is instead a “clone”, “tribute”, “recreation” or “replica” if represented as such; it's all in the transparency of the disclosure.  Clone, recreation & replica do imply a exact copy but some leeway does seem to be granted given mechanical exactitude is sometimes simply not possible.  A vehicle substantially a replica of something but includes modifications to improve safety, performance or some other aspect of the dynamics is usually styled a “tribute” or “restomod” (a portmanteau word, the construct being resto(red) + mod(ified)).  The improvements can be transformative and, in certain cases, increase value but in others, the changes might detract.  Whether clone, replica or tribute, if what’s being referenced is something rare and desirable, the difference in value can be a factor of more than fifty-fold.  Originality can trump improvement.  The differential exists even if what’s created is for all practical purposes an exact a copy of something such as the various replications (the best word) of 1930s Bugattis, Mercedes-Benz and such by Pur Sang of Argentina.  While a common approach by those making “replicas” of things like the Ferrari 250 GTO is to take the chassis and drive-train of a mechanically similar but less valuable Ferrari of the era and “modify as required”, what Pur Sang does is, with exquisite attention detail, craft just about every part from scratch.  Nuts & bolts they buy “off the shelf” but not much else.  The result is extraordinary and, for what one gets, their prices seem reasonable.

1962 Ferrari 250 GTO recreation by Tempero of New Zealand.

As an extreme example there is the fabled Ferrari 250 GTO, of which usually it's accepted 36 were built although those prepared to cast the definitional net a little further claim there were 41: (2 x (1961) prototypes; 32 x (1962–63) Series I 250 GTO; 3 x (1962–1963) “330 GTO”; 1 x (1963) 250 GTO with LM Berlinetta-style body & 3 x (1964) Series II 250 GTO).  The GTOs in the hands of collectors command extraordinary prices, chassis 4153GT in June 2018 realizing US$70 million in a private sale whereas an immaculately crafted replica of a 1962 version by Tempero (New Zealand) was listed for sale at US$1.3 million (no NFT required).  The Tempero cars are acknowledged to be better built than any original GTO although that is damning with faint praise, those who restore pre-modern Ferraris wryly noting that while the tough drive-trains were built with exquisite care, the assembly of the coachwork could verge on "shoddy".  Indeed, when the head of one restoration company was asked if a vintage Ferrari exactly could be replicated the answer was it was doubtful "...because none of our staff can weld that badly.",   Even less exalted machinery, though actually more rare still, like the 1971 Plymouth Hemi Cuda convertible (only 12 of which were built) also illustrate the difference for there are now considerably more clones / replicas / recreations etc than ever there were originals with the price difference typically a factor of ten or more.