Palinode (pronounced pal-uh-nohd)
(1) A poem
in which the poet retracts something said in an earlier poem.
(2) A
recantation (used loosely and now rare).
(3) In
Scots law, a recantation of a defamatory statement.
1590–1600: From
the sixteenth century French palinode
(poetical recantation, poem in which the poet retracts invective contained in a
former satire), from the Middle French palinode,
from the Late Latin palinōdia
(palinode, recantation), from the Ancient Greek παλινῳδία (palinōidía) (poetic retraction), the construct being πάλιν (pálin) (again, back) + ᾠδή (ōidḗ) (ode, song) + -ia (from the Latin -ia
and the Ancient Greek -ία (-ía) &
-εια (-eia), which form abstract
nouns of feminine gender. It was used
when names of countries, diseases, species etc and occasionally collections of stuff). The
alternative form palinody is
obsolete. Palinode & palinodist are
nouns, palinodial, palinodical & palinodic are adjectives and palinodically
is a (non-standard) adverb; the noun plural is palinodes).
Although
the palinode is now usually defined as meaning “a poem in which the palinodist
(ie the poet) retracts something said in an earlier poem”, the French in the
sixteenth century seem mostly to have use the word of works in which the writer
“retracts invective contained in a former satire”. It thus had an obviously political slant and
it seems likely at least some palinodes were penned to stave of threats of
legal action (or something worse).
Although it endures in literary use (and among political scientists with
a feeling for classical forms), the word has long been obscure and the OED
(Oxford English Dictionary) lists the adjective palinodical as obsolete with its only known instance of use dating
from 1602 when it appeared in a work by the English poet, playwright and
pamphleteer Thomas Dekker (circa 1572-1632).
The palinode
became associated with poetry because verse (in one form or another) was once a
more common form of written expression.
It has however been applied to any retraction or recantation (formal or
otherwise), especially one that publicly withdraws an earlier statement, belief
or work. For reasons of ecclesiastical
practice, theological palinodes tended to be in verse but there were exceptions
including by John Milton (1608–1674) who in The
Reason of Church-Government (1642) retracted his earlier advocacy of
episcopacy (the bishops and their role), acknowledging his views had changed; for
years it remained a rare example of its type.
Beyond poetry proper, use has been quite loose and memorable palinodes
have been political, scientific and literary, some especially of the latter described
variously as “insincere”, “back-handed” or “bitchy”. Much of their charm lies in some retractions becoming famous while the original text doubtlessly would have been forgotten were it not for the palinode.
The archetypal palinode dates from the sixth century BC and it set the template. According to legend, the Greek lyric poet Stesichorus (Στησίχορος, circa 630–555 BC) blamed Helen of Troy for the Trojan War and almost at once was struck blind. He then composed a (“it was not true…”) palinode absolving Helen of guilt, the words of the encomium (praise, eulogy) said to have come to him in a dream. His sight was restored, thus the understanding the use of the device as a means of undoing moral or divine offense. The texts from Antiquity have of course survived only in fragmentary form but clearly there were palinodes, Plato (circa 427-348 BC) in his Phaedrus (a dialogue between Socrates (circa 470–399 BC) and Phaedrus (circa 444–393 BC)) he recounted how Socrates first delivers a speech condemning love, then explicitly retracts it with a second passage praising divine madness and erotic love. Plato explicitly called the second speech “a palinode”, making it one of philosophy’s earliest known self-conscious retractions and, it has to be admitted, only those for whom martyrdom is a calling would think it not preferable to taking hemlock.
Geoffrey Chaucer (circa 1344-1400), right at the end of The Canterbury Tales (1387-1400), as a formal retraction, disowns the earlier passages he has come to think sinful or frivolous and begs forgiveness for having written them. It’s considered one of medieval literature’s most explicit and sincere palinodes and presumably he also asked God and at least one priest for absolution for these unworthy thoughts. The tradition (transgress in youth; reform as one contemplates mortality) has of course became familiar and there are those whose later lives are presented as something palinodic including (1) the English journalist Malcolm Muggeridge (1903–1990) who wrote long pieces disavowing earlier having welcomed communism and opposed censorship and (2) George W Bush (George XLIII, b 1946; POTUS 2001-2009) who abandoned whiskey and much else; as he might have put it in a “Bushism”: “I spent my youth misunfortunatistically”. The whole “born-again” movement in Christianity seems often something of a life lived palinodically.
Some palinodes have become among the more famous statements made by an accused before a court. Under courts run by the Nazis and the Soviet Union they were of course legion (the scripts often written by the prosecutors) but the most famous was probably the retraction the Roman Inquisition in 1633 extracted from the Italian physicist and pioneering astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564–1642); under threat of torture (words to be taken seriously if from the lips of an inquisitor), he abjured his support for heliocentrism; the defendant's legendary mutter: “Eppur si muove” (although it does move) almost certainly apocryphal. After that, palinodes came thick and fast, the Swiss philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) in Les Confessions (Confessions of Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1770, published 1782)) not only his retracted many of his earlier stances (especially in matters of religion and education) but did so repeatedly, sometimes in the same chapter. More than a decade in the writing, Les Confessions functions as something of a “rolling palinode”, his intellectual past constantly revised. More nuanced in this approach was the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882) who, in later editions of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1859), toned down or even withdrew some claims regarding human evolution and teleology. These revisions can be considered “partial palinodes” but they were really merely a reflection of the modern scientific method which updates theories as new evidence emerges; a matter of correct intellectual caution.
Agitprop poster of comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953, left) greeting comrade Trofim Lysenko (1898-1976, right). The Russian slogan (РАБОТАТЬ ТАК, ЧТОБЫ ТОВАРИЩ СТАЛИН СПАСИБО СКАЗАЛ!) translates best as “Work in such a way that comrade Stalin will say ‘thank you.’” In comrade Stalin’s Soviet Union, wise comrades followed this sound advice. For students of the techniques used in the propaganda of personality cults, it should be noted comrade Stalin stood around 1.65 metres (5 foot, 5 inches) tall.
In the matter of scientific and intellectual palinodes, others can do the retractions which can be thought of as palinodes by proxy or (more flippantly) Munchausen palinodes by proxy. To avoid damage to his reputation, Sir Isaac Newton’s (1642–1727) executors and later editors suppressed and implicitly retracted his alchemical writings and similar judicious editing has excised from the records of some their embrace of the once intellectually respectable field of astrology. Actually, Newton wasn’t wholly wrong on the science; at the molecular level there is little difference between lead and gold and although traditional chemical alchemy seems impossible, recent experiments have, atom-by-atom, transformed lead into gold, the problem being that to transform a few atoms (and even these often short-lived radioactive isotopes rather than stable Au-197) demanded the use of a huge and expensive particle accelerator; unless there’s some unanticipated breakthrough, the process cannot be scaled up so gold must continue to be dug up. Communism systems too belatedly made something of an art of the palinode. In the Soviet Union, after the death of comrade Stalin, a number of “scientific orthodoxies” supported by the late leader abruptly were cancelled, notably the dotty, pseudoscientific “theories” of agronomist Trofim Lysenko whose doctrine of Lysenkoism set back Soviet agriculture by decades. The evidence suggests comrade Stalin was well aware comrade Lysenko was likely a comrade charlatan but, uniquely among the many Soviet apparatchiks, the dodgy agronomist achieved a great rapport with the peasants who were being most tiresome. It was Lysenko’s remarkable success in convincing peasants to accept the Kremlin’s imposition of collectivized farming that make him Stalin’s invaluable asset. In China, when comrade Chairman Mao (Mao Zedong 1893–1976; chairman of the CCP, 1949-1976) instituted many of Lysenko’s “agricultural reforms” (which included applying Karl Marx's (1818-1883) theories of class consciousness to the thought processes of seeds), in the great famine which followed, it's believed between 40-45 million may have starved to death. The Kremlin was at least precise in who or what got cancelled whereas the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) were a little vague although the Chinese people understood their language. Long skilled at “reading between the Central Committee’s lines”, when they heard it admitted comrade Chairman Mao’s legacy was “70% good and 30% bad”, the meaning was clear. As a judgment it may have been generous but if applied to some leaders in the West, would the numbers be any more favorable?
So palinody
has a long tradition but while figures like Rousseau, Darwin and Muggeridge
had years or even decades “agonizingly to reappraise” their position, in the
social media age, it can within the hour be necessary to recant. In 2006, Lindsay Lohan granted an interview
to Vanity Fair in which she acknowledged: “I knew I had a problem and I couldn't admit it. “I was making myself sick. I was sick and I had people sit me down and
say: 'You're going to die if you don't take care of yourself'”,
adding she used drugs: “a little”.
On reflection, and possibly after seeking advice, he publicist the next
day contacted the magazine in an attempt to get the “drug confession” retracted. Later, she would also recant her claims her
earlier (and by some much-admired) weight-loss had been achieved by D&E
(diet & exercise), admitting it was the consequence of an eating disorder. Ms Lohan has issued a few palinodes (but although
also a song-writer, none have been in poetic verse) and as well as drug use,
the correctives have covered topics such as the MeToo movement, Harvey
Weinstein (b 1952), Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since
2025) and her attitudes to motherhood.
The first notable palinode of 2026 was interesting for a number of reasons, the first of which was structural. Although the once vibrant industry of print journalism has in the West been hollowed out by successive strikes from the internet, social media and AI (artificial intelligence), in a tactic guaranteed to ensure maximum cross-platform coverage, the multi-media personality, rap singer and apparel designer Ye chose as the host for his latest announcement not Instagram or X (formerly known as Twitter) but a full-page advertisement in Rupert Murdoch’s WSJ (Wall Street Journal). As a “commercial, in confidence” arrangement, it’s not certain how much the WSJ would have invoiced to run the copy but advertising in the paper remains at “premium level” because of its national circulation and readership with a high proportion in the still much-prized “A”, “B1” & “B2” demographics. Industry sources suggest that, depending on the day of the week and other variables, a full-page advertisement (black & white) placement in the WSJ’s national edition typically would cost between US$160,000–$220,000 for a “one-off” (ie no re-runs or ongoing contract).
That’s
obviously rather more than a post on Instagram or X but what a still “prestigious”
legacy title like the WSJ confers is a certain “authority” because, as Marshall
McLuhan (1911-1980) explained in Understanding
Media: The Extensions of Man (1964): “The medium is the message”. If one conveys one’s message through a whole page of the WSJ, regardless of the text’s content, the message is different compared
with the same words appearing on a social media platform: anyone can post a
palinode on Instagram but only a few can pay Rupert Murdoch US$200,000-odd to
print it in the WSJ. The point about Mr
Ye using the WSJ was the message was aimed not only at his usual audience but
those in finance and industry who interact with the music and apparel
businesses. While some consumers of rap
music or his other “projects” may be WSJ readers or even subscribers, the
publication’s base has a very different profile and it will be a certain few of
those Mr Ye wishes his message to reach.
Headed “To those I’ve
hurt”, his palinode was more than a simple retraction and was an apology
for his previous “reckless” anti-Semitism; whether “reckless” carefully was
chosen from the spectrum (careless; reckless; intentional) used by disciplinary
bodies in sporting competitions wasn’t discussed. By way of explanation, Mr Ye revealed that
some 25 years earlier, he’d suffered an injury to the “right frontal lobe” of his brain
and, because the medical focus at the time was on the “immediate physical trauma”, “comprehensive
scans were not done” meaning “the deeper injury, the one inside my skull, went
unnoticed.” It seems that not
until 2023 was his condition correctly assessed, the injury linked to his diagnosis
with Bipolar Disorder type-1 (the old “manic depressive disorder”). Clinicians distinguish between type 1 and
type 2 Bipolar thus: (1) In Bipolar I disorder there must be at least one manic
episode that may come before or after hypomanic or major depressive episodes (in
some cases, mania may cause a dissociation from reality (psychosis)) and (2) In
Bipolar II disorder there must be at least one depressive episode and at least
one hypomanic episode but never any psychosis.
(Cyclothymic Disorder involves periods of hypomania and depression not sufficiently severe to be classified as full episodes). As Mr Ye explained: “Bipolar disorder comes with its own defense system.
Denial. When you’re manic, you don’t
think you’re sick. You think everyone else is overreacting. You feel like you’re seeing the world more
clearly than ever, when in reality you’re losing your grip entirely. Once people label you as ‘crazy’ you feel as
if you cannot contribute anything meaningful to the world. It’s easy for people to joke and laugh it off
when in fact this is a very serious debilitating disease you can die from.”
As he
further noted: “The
scariest thing about this disorder is how persuasive it is when it tells you: You don’t need help. It makes you blind, but
convinced you have insight. You feel powerful, certain, unstoppable. I lost touch with reality. Things got worse
the longer I ignored the problem. I said
and did things I deeply regret. Some of
the people I love the most, I treated the worst. You endured fear, confusion,
humiliation, and the exhaustion of trying to have someone who was, at times,
unrecognizable. Looking back, I became detached from my true self. In that fractured state, I gravitated toward
the most destructive symbol I could find, the swastika, and even sold T-shirts
bearing it. One of the difficult aspects of having bipolar type-1 are the
disconnected moments - many of which I still cannot recall - that led to poor
judgment and reckless behavior that oftentimes feels like an
out-of-body-experience. I regret and am deeply
mortified by my actions in that state, and am committed to accountability,
treatment, and meaningful change. It does not excuse what I did though. I am
not a Nazi or an antisemite. I love Jewish people.” He also included remarks intended explicitly
for the black community, which he acknowledged “held [him] down through all of the highs and lows and
the darkest of times. The black
community is, unquestionably, the foundation of who I am. I am so sorry to have
let you down. I love us. My words as a
leader in my community have global impact and influence. In my mania, I lost complete sight of that.”
He made a comment also about what is a sometimes misunderstood aspect of Bipolar Disorder: “Having bipolar disorder is notable state of constant mental illness. When you go into a manic episode, you are ill at that point. When you are not in an episode, you are completely ‘normal’. And that’s when the wreckage from the illness hits the hardest. Hitting rock bottom a few months ago, my wife encouraged me to finally get help. My words as a leader in my community have global impact and influence. In my mania, I lost complete sight of that. As I find my new baseline and new center through an effective regime of medication, therapy, exercise and clean living, I have newfound, much-needed clarity. I am pouring my energy into positive, meaningful art: music, clothing, design and other new ideas to help the world.” He concluded by saying: “I’m not asking for sympathy, or a free pass, though I aspire to earn your forgiveness. I write today simply to ask for your patience and understanding as I find my way home.” The message was signed “With love, Ye.”
What Mr Ye placed in the WSJ was a certain type of palinode, one in which there’s a retraction and definitely an apology but also an explanation. Although, commendably, he included the words “…It does not excuse what I did…”, documenting the long-undiagnosed traumatic brain injury does provide an explanation for his conduct so, the piece is not a true mea culpa (from the Latin meā culpā (through my fault) and taken from the Confiteor, a traditional penitential prayer in Western Christianity; it’s best translated as “I am to blame”. Mr Ye’s point was that what he did was wrong but “he” was not to blame in the sense that what he did was the result of the Bipolar Disorder induced by his injury. What that means is that there was no mens rea (a construct from the Latin mēns + reus (literally “guilty mind”), the phrase a clipping of the precept in English common law: Actus non facit reum nisi mens rea sit (The act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty). In other words: “I didn’t do it, the Bipolar Disorder did it”. As a defence the approach is well-known but what Mr Ye is suggesting is supported in the medical literature, there being a number of documented cases of individuals whose behavior suddenly and radically changed for the worse as a result of a condition affecting the brain (either traumatic injury or an illness such as a tumor). Despite his caveat, his diagnosed Bipolar Disorder, as well as explaining things, may well “excuse what I did”.
However, as
an exercise in “reputational recovery” (one of the forks of “crisis management”), Mr Ye does
have “a bit of previous” for which to atone including donning a “White Lives
Matter” T-shirt which was controversial because there is no political or moral
equivalence between that and the implications of “Black Lives Matter”. In isolation, such a thing might have been
thought just a publicity device and, in another time, the dark irony may have caught on in sections of the black community but in the atmosphere of 2022
it was the wrong item at the wrong time.
Worse was to come because later that year Mr Ye tweeted he was going “death con 3”
on the Jews, the play on words assumed an adaptation of the DEFCON (Defense
Readiness Condition) status levels used by the US military:
DEFCON 5:
Normal peacetime readiness (lowest level).
DEFCON 4:
Increased intelligence gathering and strengthened security.
DEFCON 3:
Heightened readiness; forces ready for increased alert.
DEFCON 2:
One step from nuclear war; forces ready to deploy at six hours notice.
DEFCON 1:
Maximum readiness; imminent nuclear war or attack underway.
So it could have been worse, assuming his “death con 3” implied only “heightened readiness; forces ready for increased alert”. The Pentagon invoked DEFCON 2 during the Cuban Missile Crisis (16-28 October 1962) and has never (as far as is known) triggered DEFCON 1. However, “death con 3” was thought bad enough and a number of corporations sundered their contractual arrangements with Mr Ye, the loss of the agreement with Adidas believed financially the most damaging. The next year, to his “Vultures album (re-titled Vultures 1 for the packaged release in 2024) listening party” Mr Ye wore a black Ku Klux Klan hood. The use of black rather the while of the KKK in popular imagination attracted some comment from those who seek meaning in such things but it was historically authentic, the original, Reconstruction-era Klan (1865-1871) not having a standardized or even defined garb. In the 1860s, members used whatever fabric was available, bed-sheets, blankets, sackcloth, and women’s dresses all re-purposed with no apparent interest in patterns or color co-ordination and animal hides or even face paint were used if no fabric was to hand. The choices were pragmatic, the purposes concealment and intimidation, not visual uniformity. The now familiar capirote (pointed hood) atop a white robe didn’t become emblematic of the KKK until the heyday of the so-called “Second Klan” between 1915 and the 1940s and although white deliberately was chosen as a symbol of “purity” and white supremacy, there’s nothing to suggest Mr Ye was seeking to vest his garment with similar denotations.
Fashion statement: Mr Ye in the now deleted “Swastika T-shirt” (the Yeezy part-number was HH01).
Most provocative however was doubtlessly his adoption of the swastika for various purposes and his effuse praise for Hitler and Nazism. In humanity’s long and depressing roll-call of evil and depravity, there is Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) and there is “everybody else” so selling “swastika T-shirts” at US$20 (promoted in an advertisement at the 2025 Super Bowl) and “dropping a tune” titled Heil Hitler was never likely to be a good career move. The product code for the T-shirts was “HH01” and those who recalled his comment: “There’s a lot of things that I love about Hitler" in a December 2022 podcast with the since bankrupted host Alex Jones (b 1974) probably deconstructed that to mean “Heil Hitler” although to remove any doubt he also tweeted: “I love Hitler” and “I'm a Nazi”. Swastika T-shirts were just too much for Shopify which took down the page, issuing a statement saying Mr Ye had “violated” the company's T&Cs (terms & conditions). It was an example of the dangers inherent in having a site administered by AI with humans checking the content only in reaction to complaints.
Those with some generosity of spirit will attribute honorable motives to Mr Ye’s palinode while cynics will note the financial hit suffered as a consequence of his recent conduct. In 2020, he complained to Forbes magazine it had neglected to include him on their much-anticipated “Billionaires List” (he may have been peeved his then wife (the estimable Kim Kardashian (b 1980)) had made the cut) and duly the publication re-crunched its numbers, including him in a revised edition. In the wake of his troubles, Forbes “wrote down” the value of his brand and after the “Adidas fallout”, he didn’t appear on the 2023 list. As he said in the WSJ advertisement, he is “pouring my energy into positive, meaningful art: music, clothing, design and other new ideas to help the world” and all these products, appropriately branded, need to be sold at a profit but having a brand tainted by an association with Nazism and anti-Semitism makes things a “harder sell”. Hopefully, all will be forgiven and Yeezy-branded hoodies, running shoes and such will again ship in volume; Rupert Murdoch can be proud of the WSJ’s latest contribution to American commerce.
