Entasis

Entasis (pronounced en-tuh-sis)

(1) In architecture, a slight convexity given to a column or tower, claimed to correct the optical illusion of concavity and create the perception of straight lines.

(2) In medicine and physiology, an involuntary or spasmodic muscular contraction (also called entasia (from the Greek ɛnˈteɪzɪə)).

(3) In typography & calligraphy, the thinning in the waist of a stroke, the technique used to compensate for the visual perception of a stroke with perfectly straight sides appearing slightly to bulge.

1745–55: From the Latin entasis, from the Ancient Greek ἔντασις (éntasis) (tension, straining), from εντείνω (enteínō) (to stretch or strain tight), the construct being enta, variant stem of enteínein (to stretch tight) + teínein (to stretch) + sis.  The –sis suffix was from the Ancient Greek -σις (-sis) and was attached to words in English often via Latin or French.  It was identical in meaning with the Latin –entia and the English –ing and was used (1) to form nouns of action or process (catharsis, dialysis, diagnosis, crisis etc), (2) in medicine to form nouns of condition (psoriasis, sepsis, tuberculosis, psychosis etc) and more generally (3) nouns as required (basis, oasis, thesis, stasis etc).  Entasis is a noun; the noun plural is entases.

The Entasis or Parthenon Principle

The Parthenon in Athens; it's the most celebrated use of entasis.

In modern architecture, entasis is the application of a convex curve to a surface for aesthetic purposes.  Its best-known use is in the columns from antiquity which curve slightly as their diameter is decreased from the bottom upward.  Because no relevant documents have yet been discovered, it’s not known whether the architects in antiquity applied the technique for aesthetic effect or as an engineering technique to enhance strength.  The latter is suggested by the design principle being described by Roman architect Marcus Vitruvius Pollio (circa 75 BC–circa 20 BC) using the Greek word enteino (to stretch or strain tight), suggesting some emphasis on structural strength rather than appearance.  However, until contemporary records are uncovered, their reasons for using entasis remain mysterious, hence the two-thousand odd years of conjecture.  The earliest known documented view of the matter was that written by Greek mathematician and engineer Hero of Alexandria (circa 10-circa 70), is that entasis corrects the optical illusion of concavity in the columns that the human eye would create if the correction were not made.  

Basilica's western front of the Second Temple of Hera, a Greek temple in Paestum, Campania, Italy.

The Second Temple of Hera (circa 55 BC) was built in the Doric order, just north of the first.  For the visual effect of entasis to work, the convex curve has to be so slight as to be imperceptible and it's not known why the Second Temple of Hera has an entasis so pronounced the curvature is obvious; there is illusion of straightness.  The proportions are such that historians have speculated it must have been deliberate (presumably for structural strength) but it's at least possible the architect was afflicted by the desire many of his modern contemporaries share: The wish to produce something "original" and "new", the reason why so many modern buildings are so unpleasing to the eye, architectural awards & prizes handed out not for beauty and elegance but novelty and shock.

For millennia, entasis and its place in the history of architecture has been one of the most persistent tales from Antiquity but there have long been contrarians prepared to argue the concept, while not exactly a myth, is greatly exaggerated in significance.  In September 2026, Belgian mathematician Professor Alain Goriely (b 1967; professor of mathematical modelling at the University of Oxford) published the findings of his study, challenging the belief the Parthenon’s “curves” were included to correct “optical illusions” that would have made pure straight lines appear “distorted”.  What the professor’s modelling was said to reveal was (1) the “curves” are practically imperceptible and the alleged “illusion” they were claimed to correct doesn’t exist; “the illusions are illusory”.  Deconstructing Vitruvius, the study begins with the claim the sides of the Parthenon’s stylobate (base) are not horizontal but form a very flat “V”, rising gently 60 mm (2.36 inches) towards the centre.  According to Vitruvius, this was to correct the illusion that, when viewed as a whole, the base appears to “sag in the middle”.  For centuries, the “sagging effect” was attributed to one of two “tricks of the light”: (1) That because of the way light is interpreted by the human brain, long horizontal lines “appear to slump” towards the centre or (2) That the structure’s marble columns create the illusion; this based on the “Hering illusion” (where in 2D (two dimensions) parallel lines can appear “bowed” when intersected by other lines).  Professor Goriely found nothing to support either proposition, noting the Hering illusion (discovered in 1861 by German physiologist Ewald Hering (1834--1918) is most apparent when lines intersect at acute angles and the Parthenon’s columns are anyway “too close to the vertical” to produce the illusion.  Additionally, extensive modelling produced no proof the effect would manifest on the Parthenon even in 3D (three dimensions), viewed from any angle.

The persistent claims of entasis.

Those details were really footnotes in architecture textbooks, entasis the most famous of the legends.  What that suggests is “bulges” in the Parthenon’s columns (the curvature called entasis) were included by the builders to correct an optical illusion that would make them appear “too narrow” in the middle.  Not only did Professor Goriely found no evidence the illusion exists but the columns bulge by a mere 18 mm (less than ¾ inch) which, at that scale, is simply not perceptible to the human eye at a typical viewing distance.  What he doesn’t dispute is the architects may have had some reason to include variations in the dimensions; it’s just he found no evident they were there as “optical correctives”, the slopes on the base perhaps there for a reason as mundane as preventing puddles forming after rain; as every builder knows, only a very slight incline is needed for water to flow.  The very minor increase in width in the columns’ centre sections is more mysterious and may have been something to do with what would have been a very labor-intensive production process but there seems to be no optical effect.

Beyond the math, Professor Goriely speculates the reason the myth has proved so enduring was the extraordinary level of veneration granted to the engineers, philosophers and architects of Antiquity when, in the late Medieval period and (especially) the Renaissance, so many of the texts were “re-discovered” and a the perception emerged of Ancient Greece as a supremely knowledgeable and ingenious civilisation.  For centuries, in Western Europe, the Classical World was idealized and unless explicitly disproved (as came to be done of their medicine, cosmology and such), the texts were treated with great respect, thought something of “Civilization’s gold standard”.  In the modern age, the veracity of what Vitruvius wrote tended to be reinforced by internet users repeating the tale, search engines affording a greater credibility to “facts” appearing in the greatest volume.  Now of course, AI (artificial intelligence) bots have centuries of architectural texts from which to harvest information and given what Vitruvius who wrote about the Parthenon (400 years after its construction), came to be treated as something “scriptural” (despite the loss of loss of the many Greek texts about their temple architecture he claimed to have read when preparing his own), the authority was strengthened.  Untypically for an academic paper, the professor recommends not too much dwelling on his findings but commending instead: “Trust your own eyes, question what you see and decide for yourself whether the theory of optical corrections holds up.”  Professor Goriely concluded entasis “might be the oldest myth that we have” before mischievously adding “apart from religion.”

1964 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud III Flying Spur; coachwork by H.J. Mulliner Park Ward.

One orthodoxy to emerge in the twentieth century was the famous Rolls-Royce radiator grille owed as much to Classical architecture as to being something there to prevent stones damaging the fragile core behind; if Rolls-Royce was going to be influenced by anyone, it’d be the architects of Antiquity.  According to chapter 4 of The Lexicon of Rolls‑Royce (the company doesn’t have web pages, it has chapters), what it styles as the “Pantheon Grille” was “…inspired by Rome’s imposing Pantheon temple, the Rolls-Royce grille is iconic. The Pantheon’s majestic columns were purposefully built with wider middle sections so that the human eye perceives each long pillar to be completely straight. It’s a perfect optical illusion and a genius stroke of design.  Taking inspiration from this, the Rolls-Royce grille is tactfully arranged using wider columns at the edge and thinner columns towards the middle to create an aesthetic illusion of symmetry when admired from the front. It’s a design that appears more perfect than nature intended.”  The days are gone when Rolls-Royce’s documents were characterized by understatement (it once described its engines’ power outputs as “adequate”), the vulgar numbers revealed only when German regulators humorlessly insisted.

While Professor Goriely’s computer models could find no evidence of the effect, a century-odd earlier, Rolls-Royce’s designers were convinced by the optical tricks of the Greeks and in 1925 integrated one of their optical techniques their new grille.  Although the “squared-off” shell dates from shortly after the company’s formation in 1904, not until 1928 did the now familiar grille with its upright bars become standardized.  Prior to 1925, the radiators were fronted by horizontal “slats” best thought of as “louvers” in that they functioned like “venetian blinds” (controlled by a lever next to the driver) to enable the airflow to be controlled (thus regulating engine temperature).  By the time of the release of the model Twenty in 1928, improvements in thermal-management technology meant the slats were no longer needed so the designers could start with a “clean sheet” and, being Rolls-Royce, the went neo-classical and built their own Pantheon, refining the ideas first seem in 1925 on the “New Phantom” (known retrospectively as the “Phantom I” (1925-1931) after new generations of the model followed).  So, although Professor Goriely’s math couldn’t detect any evidence entasis produced a detectable effect for those looking at the Parthenon, what Rolls-Royce does has been modelled and although slight, the effect of their trick is real.

Lindsay Lohan in Rolls-Royce Phantom Drophead Coupé (2007-2017).  By the 1970s factory (mostly) had ceased to use the historic terms FHC (Fixed-Head coupé) and DHC (Drop-Head Coupé (DHC) and the revival in 2007 for the Phantom Drophead Coupé has proved (thus far) a nostalgic one-off.  Over the decades, the designers generally were successful in their adaptations as they were required to make the grille wider and lower but the Phantom would have benefited aesthetically if a more traditional approach had been taken with the headlamps (centre) and even hidden units (right) would have been more pleasing.  Still, twenty-first century customers seem more accommodating of stylistic innovation than earlier generations.

According to opticians, what the design does (wider bars at the edges, more slender towards the centre) is create the illusion of symmetry when viewed straight on (at even a slight angle there will be no effect).  That’s said to be because when viewing such a structure, the brain processes the image as a whole (not a sequence of individual bars) and, paradoxically, what the slight difference in width does is render an “artificial equalization”.   Because of the way the brain processes the sight of a series of “parallel bars”, were they equally-spaced and equally wide, there would be a “hollowing” effect with a “pinching” towards the centre, caused by the natural human tendency to perceive outer edges as tapering away.  The eye is an outgrowth of the brain and it’s the brain doing the processing; while “looking at a grill” might sound a simple task, in the Rolls-Royce grille there’s a lot of “information” and processing it all is an act of high-level cognition.

Hi-rise Pantheon: 1965 Rolls-Royce Phantom V.  This was about at tall as the grille got; it appeared on the Phantom V (1959-1968) & VI (1968-1990).

All else being equal, the brain tends first to focus on an image’s centre (that information sent to the fovea centralis (the part of the retina handling “sharp central vision”)) with the edges simultaneously entering the “peripheral vision” where spatial resolution decreases (the brain therefore gathering less precise detail about the outer dimensions).  All this happens in a fraction of a second but does still happen sequentially, the brain using “predictive modelling” to “fill in the blanks” and there is much to process, the grille a large, highly reflective three-dimensional object with repeating lines.  The brain’s visual cortex has much to do understand the contrasting light patterns and depth cues and that it does all this in a fraction of a second in an indication of how powerful a machine it is.  Additionally, Rolls-Royce further assists the brain in “manufacturing perfection by machining each bar with a very slight outward curve, not detectable to the naked eye.  The combination of this functionally imperceptible “width-shifting & curvature” uses the way the brain operates to induce the required corrective “shortcuts”.

The Pantheon Temple, Rome (left) and 1985 Rolls-Royce Camargue (right).

The Pantheon's Latin inscription M·AGRIPPA·L·F·COS·TERTIVM·FECIT isn't all that poetic and reads like a note the draftsman might have put on the blueprint (had there then been blueprints): it translates as "Marcus Agrippa, son of Lucius, made [this building] when consul for the third time.", crediting the Roman statesman & general, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (circa 63 BC–12 BC) who commissioned the construction during his third consulship in 27 BC.  The Pantheon that stands today was rebuilt by Emperor Hadrian (Publius Aelius Hadrianus, 76–138; Roman emperor 117-138) circa 126 AD after the original structure suffered severe damage in a blaze; Hadrian chose to retain Agrippa's inscription as a tribute (not all the emperors were narcissists).  Since 609 AD, the Pantheon has been a Roman-Catholic church and is known as the Basilica Santa Maria ad Martyres (Basilica of St. Mary and the Martyrs).   In 1975, when the Camargue (1975-1986) was released, the novelty of it being the first Rolls-Royce designed using exclusively metric measurements (except for the odd carry-over component) attracted little attention but there was much comment about it being the first built with anything but a perfectly vertical grille.  The Camargue's grille was slanted at a (for mid-century Rolls-Royce) rakish 7^o.

Waftability

Parthenon Grill, Murfreesboro, Tennessee.

Understandably, the malapropism “Parthenon grill” is sometimes heard (and there is a well-reviewed Greek restaurant in Murfreesboro, Tennessee of that name) and despite occasional claims, the Pantheon grille doesn't feature a classic entasis (slight swelling in the middle of a column to counteract the alleged illusion of concavity) but the slight curve of the bars is real and can be checked with equipment no more complex than a “straight-edge” (a 12 inch (300 mm)) metal ruler ideal for the purpose.  Although for much of the twentieth century Rolls-Royce was much associated with straight lines (the “knife-edge” models bodied by coach-builder Hooper between 1935-1959 the high point of the brief era of  blending of a severe rectilinearly with the flowing lines of the pre-war aesthetic although, despite the mix, the approach was not within the lineage of post-modernism) curves have often been a component and in 2009 Tom Purves (b 1949; CEO of Rolls-Royce Motor Cars 2008-2010) announced the neologism “waftability” was “the essence of the brand”.  That, he defined as “calm perfect motion and accelerating quickly without fuss”.  Back then (and 2009 seems now little less remote than the days of the Cold War (1947-1991)), the CEO was describing the relationship between the appearance of a static Rolls-Royce as something that embodied that definition, revealing the internal name for the “gentle, upswept line of the sill” on the new Ghost model was a “waftline” (actually borrowed from the fashion business), the idea being it created “a powerful, poised stance and makes the car appear to be moving when stationary.”

1988 Rolls-Royce Corniche Convertible.  Although rendered redundant by electric motors, the Pantheon Grille will endure; it will be wider and lower (as has already happened) and some functional use may even be found but as an essential element in “brand identity” it won't go away.

The significance of “waftability” was Rolls-Royce was then still in the business of making large-displacement engines running on fossil fuels sound and behave as if they were electric motors but, by 2023, the company announced the Spectre, the brand’s first purely electric car.  So it had taken a while but the interest in electric energy predated even the formation of the company in 1904.  Sir Henry Royce (1863–1933) was an engineer who had designed dynamos, electric crane motors and patented the bayonet-style light bulb fitting while Charles Rolls (1877–1910) as early as 1900 drove an electric car declaring it the almost ideal form of propulsion, observing: “The electric car is perfectly noiseless and clean. There is no smell or vibration, and they should become very useful when fixed charging stations can be arranged.  But for now, I do not anticipate that they will be very serviceable – at least for many years to come.”  So it proved.  By 2023 however, the technology was ready and so (more debatably) was the infrastructure and there is nothing better at waftability than something large, luxurious and electric, Rolls-Royce saying that some time in the next decade, their last car running on fossil fuel will leave the assembly line.  Nothing lasts forever and, having spent more than a century trying to make ICEs (internal combustion engine) as smooth and silent as electric motors, the times seem now to suit Rolls-Royce.  For others (such as Ferrari, Porsche, Dodge etc), selling to a customer base with an emotional attachment to the howl, throb & scream of gasoline (petrol) exploding in six, eight or twelve combustion chambers, the challenge is to find a way to make them content with a piped soundtrack.  Engineers have conquered matters of performance and even range but nostalgia may prove harder to package.  For Rolls-Royce however, the task is simpler because it’s purely visual: While an electric car needs no radiator and thus no protective grill, it can be guaranteed Pantheon Grilles, severely cut in stainless steel, will continue to appear.

Ghost

Ghost (pronounced gohst)

(1) The soul of a dead person, a disembodied spirit imagined, usually as a vague, shadowy or evanescent form, as wandering among or haunting living persons.

(2) A mere shadow or semblance; a trace; a remote possibility; a faint trace or possibility of something.

(3) A spiritual being; the principle of life; soul; spirit (sometimes initial capital letter).

(4) A secondary image, especially one appearing on a television screen as a white shadow, caused by poor or double reception or by a defect in the receiver (also called ghosting).

(5) In photography, a faint secondary or out-of-focus image in a photographic print or negative resulting from reflections within the camera lens (also called ghost image).

(6) In optics, a series of false spectral lines produced by a diffraction grating with unevenly spaced lines.

(7) In metalworking, a streak appearing on a freshly machined piece of steel containing impurities.

(8) In pathology, a red blood cell having no hemoglobin.

(9) In tax-avoidance and other frauds, a fictitious employee, business etc, fabricated especially for the purpose of manipulating funds.

(10) In literature (especially quasi-literature), as ghost-write, to write a book, speech etc for another without attribution (distinct from the trade of the acknowledged ghostwriter).

(11) In engraving, to lighten the background of a photograph before engraving.

(12) In informal use (often associated with social media), suddenly to end all contact with a person without explanation, especially a romantic relationship; abruptly to leave a social event or gathering without saying goodbye.

(13) In digital technology, to remove comments, threads, or other digital content from a website or online forum without informing the poster, keeping them hidden from the public but still visible to the poster.

(14) In bibliography, as ghost edition, an entry recorded in a bibliography of which no actual proof exists.

Pre 900: From the Middle English gost, gast & goost (breath; good or bad spirit, angel, demon; person, man, human being", in Biblical use "soul, spirit, life”), from the Old English gāst (breath, soul, spirit, ghost, being), related to the Old High German gaist & geist (spirit) and the Sanskrit hēda (fury, anger).  The Proto-West Germanic gaist was derived from the Proto-Germanic gaistaz (ghost, spirit, (source also of the Old Saxon gest, the Old Frisian jest, the Middle Dutch gheest, the Dutch geest & the German Geist (spirit, ghost))), from the primitive Indo-European ǵhéysd-os, from ǵhéysd- (anger, agitation) and was cognate with the Scots ghaist (ghost), the Saterland Frisian Gäist (spirit), the West Frisian geast (spirit), the Dutch geest (spirit, mind, ghost), the German Geist (spirit, mind, intellect), the Swedish gast (ghost), the Sanskrit हेड (héḍa), (anger, hatred) and the Persian زشت‎ (zešt) (ugly, hateful, disgusting).  There’s no documentary evidence but the ultimate root is conjectured to be the primitive Indo-European gheis-, used in forming words involving the notions of excitement, amazement, or fear (source also of Sanskrit hedah (wrath), the Avestan zaesha- (horrible, frightful), the Gothic usgaisjan and the Old English gæstan (to frighten).  Ghost is a noun & verb (and used imaginatively as an adjective), ghoster is a noun, ghostly & ghosty are adjectives, ghosting is a noun & verb and ghosted is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is ghosts.

Ghost is the English representative of West Germanic words for "supernatural being" and in Christian writings in Old English it was used to render the Latin spiritus, a sense preserved by the early translators of the Bible in “Holy Ghost”.  The sense of a "disembodied spirit of a dead person", especially imagined as wandering among the living or haunting them, is attested from the late fourteenth century, a meaning-shift which returned the word to what was its probable prehistoric sense.  Most Indo-European words for "soul or spirit" also double with reference to supernatural spirits.  Many have also a base sense of "appearance" (the Greek phantasma; the French spectre; the Polish widmo, from Old Church Slavonic videti (to see), the Old English scin, the Old High German giskin (originally "appearance, apparition”), related to the Old English scinan & the Old High German skinan (to shine)).  Other concepts exist, including the French revenant (literally "returning" (from the other world)), the Old Norse aptr-ganga, (literally "back-comer") & the Breton bugelnoz (literally "night-child”).  The Latin manes (spirits of the dead) was probably a euphemism.

The gh- spelling appeared early in the fifteenth century in Caxton, influenced by Flemish and Middle Dutch gheest, but was rare in English before mid-1500s.  The sense of a "slight suggestion, mere shadow or semblance" (as in ghost image, ghost of a chance etc) is noted from the 1610s; the sense of "one who secretly does work for another" is from 1884 and ghost-write was a 1922 back-formation from the earlier (1919) ghost-writing.  The American Indian ghost dance was first noted in 1890, ghost town is from 1908, ghost story dates from 1811, the now less common ghost-word (apparent word or false form in a manuscript due to a blunder) is from 1886.  The “ghost in the machine” was English philosopher Gilbert Ryle's (1900-1976) 1949 description of René Descartes's (1596-1650) mind-body dualism and the phrase "to give up the ghost" (to die or prepare to die) was well-known in the Old English version; one of the many way folk avoid words like "death" or "die".  Synonyms include phantom, devil, demon, soul, shadow, spectre, vision, vampire, apparition, revenant, appearance, haunt, visitor, shade, spook, poltergeist, phantasm, wraith, daemon & manes.  There are a surprising number of uses of ghost, ghosted, ghosting etc said to be associated modern or internet slang covering fields as diverse as linguistic techniques and the art & science of smoking weed, the latter a rich vein of coinings.  However, the most commonly used describes someone with whom one has been in contact suddenly stops responding, disappearing, as it were, like a ghost.  This can happen in conjunction with unfriending etc but can be an act in isolation.  After becoming one of a number of Australian prime ministers (figuratively) defenestrated by their party before the voters got their chance, Malcolm Turnbull (b 1954; prime minister of Australia 2015-2018) left parliament and decried similarly deposed leaders who chose to stay as "miserable ghosts", a breed with a long tradition in many parliaments.   

Ghostwriters

Art of the Deal by Donald J Trump with Tony Schwartz (1987).  If the Nobel Committee can't bring themselves to confer on President Trump the Peace Prize, they could perhaps make him the Literature Laureate.  He would think that equally deserved.

Ghostwriters (also as ghost-writer) are professional writers hired to create content (books, columns, posts or any other (traditionally) text-focused item), the authorship of which ultimately will be credited to another although ghostwriters can be acknowledged as “co-authors” or (more commonly), receive credit in the form of having their name appear on the cover with a preceding “with”.  That latter approach of course implies some form of collaborative authorship and a famous example is Donald Trump’s (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) The Art of the Deal (1987), published as “by Donald J. Trump with Tony Schwartz” [b 1952].  The Art of the Deal is said to be competently written and for those in the business of the ruthless pursuit of deals it’s apparently an invaluable manual, Mr Trump in one interview saying perhaps the most important passages those advising (1) most deals don’t come off and (2) it’s better to walk away from what appears a bad deal than to close it in the hope it can be made to work.  Had than counsel been followed, there’d likely have been rather fewer corporate collapses than have been suffered since it was published; there’s good reasons why The Art of the Deal stayed at number 1 on The New York Times Best Seller list for three months and was a on the list for a year odd.

One day, there may be Lindsay Lohan: The autobiography.  Hopefully, there will be competing "authorized" and "unauthorized" editions.

So what does “By X with Y” usually imply?  The conventional view is it means “Y” is likely to have composed much of the text, based on interviews with “X”, their previous statements or other things they may have written.  It’s the most common approach in the biographies of sports stars that appear in the run-up to Christmas or father’s day; those books often sell well although whether they’re so often read is uncertain.  By contrast, “By X and Y” should mean true co-authorship (though not necessarily on the basis of 50-50 contribution) whereas “X by Y” should be a pure biography (although that can be “authorized” with the cooperation of “X” or “unauthorized” with even “X’s” active opposition to publication).  The “with” category obviously is the most ambiguous and thus often the most useful for a subject, allowing them to bask in the praise of a work well-received yet provide a layer of “plausible deniability” if needed.  Ghostwriters are used for a number of reasons including constraints of time, a lack of interest in the project (though not the profits) or, typically, a lack of the necessary skill with the written word.  Ghostwriting contracts can vary but the focus typically includes terms of payment, non-disclosure of involvement, the notional author’s exercise of veto over all or some of the content and the rights to the finished work.  Mr Trump certainly acknowledged using a ghostwriter, as did Paris Hilton (b 1981) who in her 2023 memoir thanked the ghostwriter who: “helped me find my voice”.

Monsieur Sarközy (left) and his third wife (Italian supermodel Carla Bruni, b 1967, right) arrive at La Santé Prison, November 2025.  Ghostwritten or not, it's unfair to "judge a book by its cover" but Monsieur Sarközy always looked guilty of something.  

One who never needed help to "find his voice" was Nicolas Sarközy (b 1955; President of France 2007-2012) who even found symbolic ways to express his inner torments.  When, in October 2025, entering La Santé Prison in Montparnasse to begin a five-year sentence imposed for “criminal association” related to campaign financing (it was a conspiracy charge), as well as comfortable shoes and some nice warm jumpers, the former Le Président took a novel and made sure the assembled press pack knew it was a copy of Le Comte de Monte-Cristo (The Count of Monte Cristo, 1844-1946) by Alexandre Dumas (1802-1870)), one of literature’s great “tales of revenge”.  He's since been released pending an appeal hearing so he's got some time to plot and scheme his vengeance and decide upon whom it will first be visited.

It’s the disclosure of using a ghostwriter that is critical, even if the exact details of relative contributions to the text remain murky.  The French novelist and dramatist Alexandre Dumas (1802-1870) is best-known for Les Trois Mousquetaires (The Three Musketeers, 1844) and Le Comte de Monte-Cristo but, by his own reckoning, he published some 1,200 volumes, hiring a veritable corps of ghostwriters so the production of “his” works could proceed on an assembly-line basis (many famous painters did much the same, creating by the twentieth century a significant (and lucrative) industry of those in the "authentication" business).  His illegitimate son (Alexandre Dumas fils (1824–1895 (fils being French for “son”)) was also an author of note (best remembered for The Lady of the Camellias (1848 and Camille in English-language versions), adapted by Giuseppe Verdi (1813–1901) for his opera  La traviata (The Fallen Woman, 1853)) and when one day father and son met for lunch, Dumas the elder asked: ‘‘Have you read my new novel yet?”.  “No,” replied the younger man, “Have you?”

JFK's Ghost, Kennedy, Sorensen and the Making of Profiles in Courage (2021) by David R.Stokes (b 1956 and a member of the Association of Ghostwriters).

One ghostwriter not (explicitly) acknowledged was Theodore Chaikin "Ted" Sorensen (1928–2010; US lawyer, author & presidential adviser), now widely believed to have written the great bulk (and possibly all) of Profiles in Courage (1956), credited to John Kennedy (JFK, 1917–1963; POTUS 1961-1963).  The slim volume displayed Sorensen’s fine touch with language but it was a slight work, a collection of eight, short biographical sketches describing acts of “bravery and integrity” by  DWM (dead white men who were now mostly forgotten US senators) and that it received the 1957 Pulitzer Prize for Biography was an indication more of the political sympathies of the selection committee than the work’s literary merit or historical significance.  Still, it was a minor contribution to history and Barack Obama (b 1961; POTUS 2009-2017) accepted the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, awarded apparently to express the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s gratitude he wasn’t George W Bush (George XLIII, b 1946; POTUS 2001-2009).  Even at the time the authorship of Profiles in Courage was controversial with some journalists openly accusing the then Senator Kennedy (Democrat-Massachusetts 1953-1960) of having done little more than put his name on the cover and accept a Pulitzer.  A fortnight after the award was announced, stories began to appear in the press casting doubt on the authorship and, within days, a check (cheque) was drawn against a Kennedy family trust in favour of Ted Sorensen for US$100,000-odd, a extraordinary sum wholly disproportionate to either the fee even well-paid ghostwriters would expect or the profits realised by Profiles in Courage.  Shamelessly (a Kennedy family trait), whether as a senator or POTUS, JFK would autograph copies of “his” book and personally hand them as gifts to visiting dignitaries.

Politicians of course have speechwriters and their contributions are usually well-publicized, some of the more-skilful (or more publicity-conscious) becoming minor celebrities, a thing sometimes resented by those for whom they write although, as a general principle, politicians are well-advised if they leave speech-writing to the pros.  During the 1969 election campaign, when discussing speechmaking, bizarrely, the idiosyncratic Sir John Gorton (1911-2002; prime minister of Australia 1968-1971), despite having at his finger-tips the entire resources of the Commonwealth government, complained that the leader of the Opposition’s (Gough Whitlam (1916–2014; Prime Minister of Australia 1972-1975) “…large staff—which I haven’t got—helps him.  You see, I have never delivered a speech that I haven’t written myself. I doubt very much if Mr Whitlam has ever delivered a speech he wrote himself.  I need some research assistance, some background speech notes and this is what [Mr Whitlam’s staff are] doing and that is all [they are] doing.”  When asked his reaction to Mr Gorton’s claim he wrote all his speeches himself, Mr Whitlam (who had spent the campaign lampooning Gorton’s frequent lapses into near incoherency) quipped: “That is one of the few prime ministerial statements of this election that I find credible.”

An artist's ghostly take on an unforgiving woman: Portrait of Lady Violet Bonham Carter (circa 1917), oil on canvas by Sir William Orpen (1878–1931).

It’s not only speeches that are written for politicians to deliver, much of that to which their signatures are appended the work of others including most correspondence and some ghostwriters manage to hone their style to emulate the distinctiveness of those for whom they labor.  Although he once claimed “Oh, I have not read a great deal”, Winston Churchill’s (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) literary output was prodigious, including even one novel (that proved great fun for Freudians interested in mother-son relationships) and yielded the 1953 Nobel Prize in Literature.  His style came to be called “Churchillian” and is recognizable (indeed, even in the 1930s it was thought old-fashioned) but it could also be replicated and, years after his death, it became more widely known his teams of “research assistants” genuinely were responsible for many first drafts and even the authorship of what were at the time described in terms like “rolling Churchillian phrases” but in fairness, in that he was not unique and he did review every word prior to publication, editing and polishing as required.  Sometimes the criticism of such practices can go too far.  When Lord Beaverbrook (Maxwell Aitken, 1879-1964), died, Churchill’s private secretary drafted a short message of condolence to be published in the next edition of The Times: “I am deeply grieved at the loss of my oldest and closest friend who severed his country and his causes valiantly and was the most loyal and devoted of comrades.”  As a message from an old man with not long to live to the memory of his friend of almost 60 years, it seemed not objectionable but an objection came from Lady Violet Bonham Carter, (1887–1969, daughter of Henry Asquith (1852–1928; UK prime minister 1908-1916)) who called the message “clearly political” and thus breaking his silence on such matters, a silence tacitly for some time erected due to his decline.  The secretary smoothed things over with her but she returned to the theme after seeing two messages sent in Churchill's name in support of the Conservative Party on the eve of the 1964 general election.  These she branded “forgeries”.  To this accusation the secretary responded with rather more ferocity, telling her: “I really do not think you should have used the word ‘forgery’ to me.  Sir Winston has had things drafted for him for many years, even when he was prime minister.  If they represent his views, and he signs them, they are not ‘forgeries’.”

C'était ça ou mourir (2026) by Thélyson Orélien.  How the Prix Goncourt's committee rules on this work may prove influential in the future of publishing.

That represents the current view of what's "drafting" rather than "forging" although it may take some time before texts created by generative AI (artificial intelligence) are granted the same approbation, a ghostwriter’s hand still human and, at least for a while, that still matters as one French committee recently concluded, removing from consideration for the 2026 Prix Goncourt (The Goncourt Prize) the novel C'était ça ou mourir (It Was Either That or Die, 2026) by Haitian-born Canadian novelist Thélyson Orélien (b 1988), the concerns being “plagiarism” and “the use of generative AI.”  Although Le prix Goncourt carries a merely symbolic purse of €10, it’s vested with genuine prestige and is associated with a spike in sales so is worth winning.  Monsieur Orélien denies the accusations and the matter is attracting attention because it’s a sign of things to come, literary prize committees among the many institutions that will need to formulate protocols to determine where legitimate use of AI (research, grammar checks, formatting etc) ends and concepts like plagiarism, appropriation and “non-authorship” begins.  It was the English philosopher Gilbert Ryle (1900–1976) who, in The Concept of Mind (1949), when discussing the notion of dualism explored by the French philosopher René Descartes (1596–1650), introduced the phrase “ghost in the machine” and that was better to illustrate for modern readers his critique of the Cartesian position of the mind being distinct from the body with physical and mental activities occurring “simultaneously but separately”.  Mind-body dualism had a long run in Western philosophy and can again be re-considered because we’ve come a long way and with generative AI, the "ghostwriter is now the machine" and these agents clearly have “opinions” so not only are they writing, increasingly, they are “deciding” what to write.  The problems confronting such committees seem insoluble so the fudge may be the creation of new literary prizes for AI generated works and there’s no reason why the committees and juries shouldn’t at least in part be made up of AI agents.

Holy Ghost vs Holy Spirit in Biblical Translation

Pentecostés (Pentecost, circa 1545), oil on canvas by Tiziano Vecelli (or Vecellio), (circa 1489-1576; known in English as Titian), basalica of Santa Maria della Salute, Venice.  The Christian holy day of Pentecost (celebrated 50 days after Easter Sunday) commemorates the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and other followers of Jesus Christ while they were in Jerusalem celebrating the Feast of Weeks.

The Trinity is one of Christianity’s central doctrines, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in the one Godhead.  One of the most important Christian affirmations about God, it’s rooted in the idea God came to meet Christians in a threefold figure: (1) as Creator, Lord of the history of salvation, Father, and Judge, as revealed in the Old Testament; (2) as the Lord who, in the incarnated figure of Jesus Christ, lived among human beings and was present in their midst as the “Resurrected One”; and (3) as the Holy Spirit, whom they experienced as the helper or intercessor in the power of the new life.  In the Roman Catholic Church, the Sign of the Cross is made in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.  It’s a myth that prior to Vatican II (the Second Vatican Council 1962-1965), the Third Person of the Trinity was always referred to in English as the Holy Ghost and one of the council’s decisions was to replace this with Holy Spirit.  Although it’s true Pius XII (1876–1958, pope 1939-1958) authorized several bilingual rites that included Holy Spirit, this was merely procedural and a formalization of processes for the publishing of new editions of existing works. Well before the twentieth century, the shift to Holy Spirit had become almost universal in translation although use of the older form persisted because of the reverence for tradition among some congregations (if not always the clergy) and a fondness, particularly in the Anglican community, for earlier translations, especially the Book of Common Prayer (1549-1622) and the King James version of the Bible (KJV: 1611).

Pentecôte (Pentecost, 1732), oil on canvas by Jean Restout (1692–1768), Louvre Museum, Paris.

The change reflects the evolution of words but, as a matter of Christian theology, "Holy Ghost" and "Holy Spirit" mean exactly the same thing.  The early translators were influenced by ghost being of Germanic origin and, as the Old English gast inherited the original meaning “soul, life, breath, good or bad spirit, angel or demon”, they used gast to translate the Latin Spiritus: thus Holy Ghost.  Although the more modern sense of a disembodied dead person dates from the late fourteenth century, it long remained rare and when translating the Bible into English the scholars behind the KJV opted mostly to use Holy Ghost which enjoys 90 entries compared with seven for Holy Spirit (between translators it's thought there were only linguistic and not doctrinal differences).  Either as literature or theology, there’s nothing in the texts to suggest any difference of meaning between the two, the conclusion of biblical scholars being the choices were wholly arbitrary and probably an unintentional consequence of the KJV being translated from the Greek into English by different committees.  One committee translated hagion pneuma as Holy Spirit while the other preferred Holy Ghost and when the work of the two bodies was combined, the differences remained.  In English, the meaning shift of ghost was induced essentially by its adoption in literature and popular culture, the sense long universally understood to be that of the spectre of a deceased person or a demonic apparition, hardly an association the church found helpful.  It hasn’t wholly been replaced however, some editions of the Book of Common Prayer still are printed with the phrase “He may receive the benefits of absolution, together with ghostly counsel and advice, to the quieting of his conscience.”

Unrelated to etymological matters however, there is one fine theological point about the Trinity.  It took some time for the Patristic Fathers (the early Christian writers of the period generally considered to run from the end of New Testament times or end of the Apostolic Age (circa 100 AD) to either the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) or the Second Council of Nicaea (787 AD)) to work out the Trinity was three persons, but one God.  The Old Testament foretold the visit to earthly life of the Messiah, but did not name him explicitly as Jesus, seeing the Holy Spirit as a manifestation of God, but did not see Him as a separate person of the one Godhead.  Despite the implications of that, at least since the still influential Saint Augustine of Hippo (354–430), it’s never been an orthodox view the Old Testament should be thought incomplete.  Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022), always one to find a fine theological point, noted “Christians do not read the Old Testament for its own sake but always with Christ and through Christ, as a voyage to Truth through continuing Revelation.”

Rolls-Royce and Ghosts, ancient & modern

A century-odd apart: 1902 Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost (left) and Paris Hilton's 2010 Rolls-Royce Ghost (right).

Although for model names Rolls-Royce has borrowed from the atlas (Corniche, Camargue), their most frequent source has been the spirit world (Ghost, Phantom, Wraith,  Spectre) and the Silver Ghost (1906-1926) was the car that cemented the company's reputation for quality.  Sometime during its life, it may well have deserved to be regarded "the best car in the world" and while that term a long ago ceased to be useful, Rolls-Royce have at times justified the tag "best-made cars in the world".  Some might have matched the quality of the fit and finish but it's doubtful many have ever done it better and such was the reputation the Silver Ghost quickly gained that the name (coined by the Autocar magazine and not the factory) overtook the line.  Originally, the Silver Ghost had been but one model in a range available on their standard (40/50 hp) chassis but the name so captured the public imagination that, eventually, the factory relented and when the first of the Phantom line was released in 1926, Silver Ghost for all the 40/50 cars it became.  Perhaps surprisingly, although in the subsequent century there were many uses of the "silver" element (Silver Wraith, Silver Dawn, Silver Cloud, Silver Shadow, Silver Spirit, Silver Spur & Silver Seraph), it wasn't until 2009 the "Ghost" name was revived and (since 2021 in its second generation), it remains in production, the line augmented in 2011 by the Ghost EWB (extended wheelbase).  Plenty of manufacturers have over the years listed LWB (long wheelbase) models but EWB was a genuinely novel abbreviation, the factory not commenting on whether LWB had become "a bit common" or it was just a piece of "product differentiation".      

RAF (Royal Air Force) Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost armored car, Iraq, circa 1936.

The Silver Ghost also had what may seem an improbable career as a military vehicle, the factory eventually building 120 armored cars on the chassis, a role to which it was well-suited because famously it was robust enough to survive the often rough roads throughout the British Empire.  Although the period of intended service on the Western Front during World War I (1914-1918) was shortened when the "war of movement" anticipated upon the outbreak of hostilities quickly gave way to effectively static trench warfare, the machines proved ideally suited to the conditions in the Middle East, the most famous the squadron used by T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia; 1888–1935) in battles against Ottoman forces during World War I.  What the British discovered was the tactics the Royal Navy honed at sea for 300-odd years could be applied to motorized operations across vast sandy stretches, detachments of armored cars able to be handled like squadrons of destroyers.  Lawrence remarked the Rolls-Royces were “more valuable than rubies” in desert combat and that he’d be content with one for the rest of his life were it to be supplied with tyres and petrol, the big, heavy Ghosts prone voraciously to chew through both.  In many parts of the empire, numbers of the armoured cars remained in service well into the 1930s (valued especially by the Raj in India) and the last was retired from service with the Irish Free State only in 1944, new tyres having become unobtainable.