Vulpine (pronounced vuhl-pahyn or vuhl-pin)
Etymology of words with examples of use illustrated by Lindsay Lohan, cars of the Cold War era, comrade Stalin, crooked Hillary Clinton et al.
Monday, August 11, 2025
Vulpine
Monday, February 17, 2025
Osculate
Osculate (pronounced os-kyuh-leyt)
(1) To come into
close contact or union.
(2) In geometry (of
a curve), to touch another curve or another part of the same curve so as to
have the same tangent and curvature at the point of contact.
(3) To kiss (now
often jocular).
(4) In zoology, of
an organism or group of organisms, to be intermediate between two taxonomic
groups.
(5) In mathematics,
determining whether a number is divisible by another by means of certain
operations on its digits.
1650-1660: From the Classical Latin ōsculātiōn, stem of ōsculātiō (a kissing) drawn from osculor (I kiss). The –ate suffix (used to form adjectives from nouns indicating the possession of a thing or a quality) was from the Proto-Italic -ātos, from the primitive Indo-European –ehtos; a "pseudo-participle" possibly related to -tus, though similar formations in other Indo-European languages show that it was distinct from it already in Indo-European times. It was cognate to the Proto-Slavic –atъ and the Proto-Germanic –ōdaz. Osculator has retained its original meaning (a kisser) but is now more often cited as the title of the Osculator software, a specialised calculator.
The noun & adjective osculatory (the noun plural osculatories) means "of or relating to kissing" but also enjoys two technical meanings: (1) in geometry it means "relating to, or having the properties of, an osculatrix; capable of osculation" and (2) in Christianity it describes a religious tablet (usually one with a representation of Christ or the Virgin Mary) which is kissed by the priest during the Mass (the "kiss of peace") after which it is passed to others in the congregation for them to kiss (the ritual modified in recent years, notably after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic). As an adjective (in both geometry and kissing!), the comparative is more osculatory and the superlative most osculatory). The now most commonly used form now appears to be the noun osculation, from the Latin ōsculātus, past participle of ōsculārī (to kiss) from osculum (a kiss; pretty mouth, sweet mouth (literally "little mouth") a diminutive of os (mouth). Osculate is a verb & adjective, osculation is a noun, osculated is a verb, osculating is a verb & adjective, osculant is a noun & adjective and osculatory is a noun & adjective; the most common noun plural is osculations.
Il Bacio della Morte (The Kiss of Death). That Ms Christian's eyes remained wide open at such a moment has long disturbed some.
The monochrome image known as the Il Bacio della Morte (The Kiss of Death) was taken on 12 May 1957 at the moment actress Linda Christian (1923-2011) kisses Scuderia Ferrari factory driver Alfonso de Portago (1928–1957) as he was about to re-join the 1957 Mille Miglia (thousand mile) race after a brief stop. Moments later, Portago died instantly when, at high speed on the road between Cerlongo and Guidizzolo, a tyre blew, causing his 4.2 litre Ferrari 335 S to crash, killing eleven including de Portago's navigator and nine spectators, four of whom were children. The 1957 event was the 24th running of the endurance classic which had first been contested in 1927 and by the 1950s was one of the most prestigious rounds of the World Sports Car Championship, attracting factory entries from Alfa Romeo, Ferrari, Maserati, Mercedes-Benz, BMW & Porsche; it would also be the last.
The victorious Ferrari 315 S, 1957 Mille Miglia.
Scuderia Ferrari's entries would finish 1-2-3 and the team would win the
1957 World Sports Car Championship. Only
three 315 S cars were constructed, two modified from earlier chassis (a 290 S
& 290 MM) and one an original build.
Because a 3.0 litre limit was imposed for the subsequent season,
development ceased and the 250 Testa Rossa (literally "Red Head" a reference to the red paint applied to the V12's camshaft covers) was created.
Just who took the photograph which came to be dubbed Kiss of death has never been known and although one eye is drawn Linda Christian looking lovely in polka dots, what is striking is the sight of de Portago in "pudding basin" helmet, goggles and leather jacket, sitting in his open Ferrari without seatbelts. It was a time when motor racing was a dangerous business for drivers and spectators alike (83 of whom were killed in a single accident at Le Mans in 1955) and the reasons for the long and lucrative careers of modern top-flight drivers includes (1) they survive because the cars and circuits are now so much safer and (2) they're not when younger dissuaded from their career choice by having to attend several funerals a year. Life magazine was not hyperbolic when it published the photograph under the headline Death finally takes a man who courted it. There remains an alluring romance to The Kiss of Death and as much as any human interaction the kiss enchants poets. In Poets in a Landscape (1957) the Scottish American classicist & literary critic Gilbert Highet (1906–1978) observed of the Latin neoteric poet of the late Roman Republic Catullus (Gaius Valerius Catullus, circa 84–54 BC):
“He came from the north. He lived a brief, passionate, unhappy life. He wrote magnificent poetry. And he introduced a new word for ‘kiss’ into the European languages… Whenever a Frenchman says baiser, whenever an Italian talks of un bacio, when a Spaniard says besar or a Portuguese beijar, they are using the word which this poet picked up and made into Latin to amuse his sweetheart. The woman was unworthy. The poet died. The word lives.”
The Neoterikoi (from the Ancient Greek νεωτερικοί) were in the Latin known as the poetae novi (new poets), modern literary historians calling them the Neoterics. Emerging in the first century BC, they were the disruptive avant-garde who eschewed the long dominant style of classical Homeric epic poetry, turning from the gods, mythological heroes and endless wars of Antiquity to themes more domestic and often intensely personal. The troubled Catullus remains among the best remembered of these proto-modernist emos and that sexual imagery appears so often in his works of devotion and unrequited love made him a favourite among lecturers and students alike. Presumably, neo-Freudians might also be attracted. However, while poets can contribute to language, those who follow will make of their words what they will and while the French baiser (from the Old & Middle French baiser, from the Latin bāsiāre (to kiss) endures, the dominant sense of verb has become “fuck”, something which evolved from euphemistic use. Of this, Catullus might have approved but Highet would have been appalled.
Ms Linda Christian.Linda Christian was between 1949-1956 married to the film star Tyrone Power (1914-1958) whom she had divorced only shortly before The Kiss of Death was taken. When one-time Hollywood enfant terrible Orson Wells (1915-1985) was in 1956 received in the Vatican for an audience with Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958), he was expecting to be quizzed about American politics but was intrigued to find His Holiness more interested in industry gossip. Later, Wells would recall the two sitting alone for 45 minutes, the pope "held my hand and never let it go" while asking questions like "Is it true that Irene Dunne is contemplating divorce?" and "What do you think of Ty Power’s marriage coming up?" "All the hot stuff" was how Welles put it. Others have had similar experiences with exalted clerics, Harold Macmillan (1894–1986; UK prime-minister 1957-1963) complaining that whenever he met an bishop with whom he wished to discuss some theological point, all they wanted to do was "talk politics". The year after meeting Pius XII, Welles began production of the film noir Touch of Evil (1958) but it may be unfair to suggest any connection between these two events in the director's life.
Kissing is a style, a technique and a message:
Top row
left: Comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) delivers a “socialist fraternal kiss” to Red Air
Force pilot Vasily Molokov (1895-1982) while (in cap, to the right) comrade
Vyacheslav Molotov (1890–1986; Soviet foreign minister 1939-1949 &
1953-1956) watches approvingly. Public
kisses between men are rare in the modern Russia but the tradition was long and
it was part of Soviet social orthodoxy.
Top row
centre: Melania Trump (b 1970, US First Lady 2017-2021 and since 2025)
demonstrates her perfected art of the “air kiss” with osculating husband, Donald
Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021 and since 2025). Jacqueline Kennedy (1929-1994; US First Lady
1961-1963) told Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) she
wore wide-brimmed hats to prevent him kissing her.
Top row
right: Lindsay Lohan (b 1986) and fashion designer Donna Karan (b 1948 and creator
of the Donna Karan New York and DKNY clothing labels), London, 2006. This photograph pre-dates Ms Lohan meeting
former special friend, DJ Samantha Ronson (b 1977).
Bottom row
left: George W Bush (George XLIII, b 1946; US president 2001-2009) and US talk
show personality Oprah Winfrey (b 1954).
Ms Winfrey is here stopping a stage short of the “air kiss”, adopting
the “lie back and think of the ratings”
attitude.
Bottom row
centre: Barack Obama (b 1961; US president 2009-2017) and crooked Hillary
Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013). Note crooked Hillary's open eyes and pursed
lips.
Bottom row right: French football player Madeleine Bracquemond (1898–1981, left) and English Association Football (soccer) player Alice Cook (née Kell, 1898–1972, right), North End, Deepdale, Preston, UK, 1920. In England, women's football (soccer) had in local competitions been played for decades before a rise in popularity during and immediately after World War I (1914-1918). The English FA (Football Association) imposed a ban on women's participation in 1921, something attributed variously to sexism, selective theological interpretation and avarice, the fiscal envy trigged by the large (paying) crowds the women attracted. Not until the 1970s was the ban relaxed and it took until the twenty-first century for women's football to enter the cultural and economic mainstream.
Wednesday, December 18, 2024
Consecutive
Consecutive (pronounced kuhn-sek-yuh-tiv)
(1) Following
one another in uninterrupted succession or order; successive without
interruption.
(2) Marked
or characterized by logical sequence (such as chronological, alphabetical or
numerical sequence).
(3) In grammar
& linguistics, as “consecutive clause”, a linguistic form that implies or
describes an event that follows temporally from another (expressing consequence
or result).
(4) In
musical composition, a sequence of notes or chords which results from repeated
shifts in pitch of the same interval (an alternative term for “parallel”).
1605-1615:
From the sixteenth century French consécutif,
from the Medieval Latin cōnsecūtīvus,
from the Latin cōnsecūtus (follow up;
having followed), from consequī (to
pursue) & cōnsequor (to travel). The construct was consecut(ion) + -ive. Consecution dates from the early fifteenth
century and by the 1530s was used in the sense of “proceeding in argument from
one proposition to another in logical sequence”. It was from the Middle English consecucioun (attainment), from the Latin
consecutionem (nominative
consecution), noun of action from the past-participle stem of consequi (to follow after), from an assimilated
form of com (in the sense of “with, together”) + sequi (to follow (from the primitive Indo-European root sekw- (to follow). The meaning “any succession or sequence”
emerged by the 1650s. The Latin cōnsecūtiō (to follow after) was from
the past participle of cōnsequor (to
follow, result, reach). The
–ive suffix was from the Anglo-Norman -if
(feminine -ive), from the Latin -ivus. Until the fourteenth century, all Middle
English loanwords from the Anglo-Norman ended in -if (actif, natif, sensitif, pensif etc) and, under the influence of
literary Neolatin, both languages introduced the form -ive. Those forms that have not been replaced were
subsequently changed to end in -y (hasty, from hastif, jolly, from jolif
etc). The antonyms are inconsecutive
& unconsecutive but (except in some specialized fields of mathematics)
“non-sequential” usually conveys the same meaning. Like the Latin suffix -io (genitive -ionis), the
Latin suffix -ivus is appended to the
perfect passive participle to form an adjective of action. Consecutive is a noun & adjective, consecutiveness
is a noun and consecutively is an adverb; the noun plural is consecutives.
In sport, the most celebrated consecutive sequence seems to be things in three and that appears to first to have been institutionalized in cricket where for a bowler to take three wickets with three consecutive deliveries in the same match was first described in 1879 as a “hat trick”. Because of the rules of cricket, there could be even days between these deliveries because a bowler might take a wicket with the last ball he delivered in the first innings and the first two he sent down in the second. A hat trick however can happen only within a match; two in one match and one in another, even if consecutive, doesn’t count. Why the rare feat came to be called “hat trick” isn’t certain, the alternative explanations being (1) an allusion to the magician’s popular stage trick of “pulling three rabbits out of the hat” (there had earlier also been a different trick involving three actions and a hat) or (2) the practice of awarding the successful bowler a hat as a prize; hats in the nineteenth century were an almost essential part of the male wardrobe and thus a welcome gift. The “hat trick” terminology extended to other sports including rugby (a player scoring three tries in a match), football (soccer) & ice hockey (a player scoring three goals in a match) and motor racing (a driver securing pole position, setting the fastest lap time and winning a race). It has become common in sport (and even politics (a kind of sport)) to use “hat trick” of anything in an uninterrupted sequence of three (winning championships, winning against the same opponent over three seasons etc) although “threepeat” (the construct being three + (re)peat) has become popular and to mark winning three long-established premium events (not always in the same season) there are “triple crowns). Rugby’s triple crown is awarded to whichever of the “home countries” (England, Ireland, Scotland & Wales) wins all three matches that season; US Horse racing’s triple crown events are the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness Stakes and the Belmont Stakes.
Graham Hill (1929–1975) in BRM P57 with the famous (but fragile) open-stack exhausts, Monaco Grand Prix, 3 June 1962. Hill is the only driver to have claimed motor-racing's classic Triple Crown.
The term is widely used in motorsport but the
classic version is the earliest and consists of the Indianapolis 500, the 24
Hours of Le Mans and the Formula One (F1) World Drivers' Championship (only one
driver ever winning all three) and there’s never been any requirement of “consecutiveness”;
indeed, now that F1 drivers now rarely appear in other series while contracted,
it’s less to happen.
Donald
Trump, a third term and the Twenty-second Amendment
Although
the MAGA (Make America Great Again) team studiously avoided raising the matter
during the 2024 presidential election campaign, while Donald Trump (b 1946; US
president (POTUS) 2017-2021 and since 2025) was president elect awaiting inauguration, Steve Bannon (b
1957 and a most prominent MAGA operative) suggested there’s a legal theory (that
term may be generous) which could be relevant in allowing him to run again in
2028, by-passing the “two-term limit” in the US Constitution. Speaking on December 15 at the annual gala dinner
of New York’s Young Republican Club’s (the breeding ground of the state’s
right-wing fanatics), Mr Bannon tantalized the guests by saying “…maybe we do it
again in 28?”, his notion of the possibility a third Trump term
based on advice received from Mike Davis (1978, a lawyer who describes himself as
Mr Trump’s “viceroy” and was spoken of in some circles as a potential contender
for attorney general in a Trump administration). Although the Twenty-second Amendment to the
constitution states: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President
more than twice”, Mr Davis had noted it was at least arguable this applied only to “consecutive” terms so as Mr Bannon confirmed,
there was hope. Warming to the topic, Mr
Bannon went on to say :“Donald John Trump is going to raise his hand on the King
James Bible and take the oath of office, his third victory and his second term.”
(the MAGA orthodoxy being he really “won” the 2020 election which was “stolen”
from him by the corrupt “deep state”.
Legal
scholars in the US have dismissed the idea the simple, unambiguous phrase in
the amendment could be interpreted in the way Mr Bannon &
Mr Davis have suggested. In the common
law world, the classic case in the matter of how words in acts or statutes should
be understood by courts is Bank of
England v Vagliano Brothers (1891) AC 107, a bills of exchange case,
decided by the House of Lords, then the UK’s final court of appeal. Bank of
England v Vagliano Brothers was a landmark case in the laws relating to negotiable
instruments but of interest here is the way the Law Lords addressed significant
principles regarding the interpretation of words in statutes, the conclusion being
the primary goal of statutory interpretation is to ascertain the intention of
Parliament as expressed in the statute and that intention must be derived from
the language of the statute, interpreted in its natural and ordinary sense,
unless the context or subject matter indicates otherwise. What the judgment did was clarify that a statute
may deliberately depart from or modify the common law and courts should not
assume a statute is merely a restatement of common law principles unless the
statute's language makes this clear. The
leading opinion was written by Lord Herschell (Farrer Herschell, 1837–1899;
Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain 1886 & 1892-1895) who held that if
the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, it should be interpreted
as it stands, without assuming it is subject to implicit common law principles;
only if the language is ambiguous may courts look elsewhere for context and
guidance.
So the
guiding principle for courts is the words of a statute should be understood with
what might be called their “plain, simple
meaning” unless they’re not clear and unambiguous. While the US Supreme Court recently has
demonstrated it does not regard itself as bound even its own precedents and
certainly not those of a now extinct UK court, few believe even the five most
imaginative of the nine judges could somehow construe a constitutional amendment created
for the explicit purpose of limiting presidents to two terms could be read down
to the extent of “…more than twice…” being devalued to “…more than twice in a row…”.
Still, it was a juicy chunk of bleeding raw meat for Mr Bannon to toss to his ravenous audience.
The ratification numbers: Ultimately, the legislatures of 41 of the then 48 states ratified the amendment with only Massachusetts and Oklahoma choosing to reject.
What
the Twenty-second amendment did was limit the number of times someone could
be elected president. Proposed on 21
March 1947, the ratification process wasn’t completed until 27 February 1951, a
time span of time span: 3 years, 343 days which is longer than all but one of
the other 26, only the Twenty-seventh (delaying laws affecting Congressional
salary from taking effect until after the next election of representatives)
took longer, a remarkable 202 years, 223 days elapsing between the proposal on 25
September 1789 and the conclusion on 7 May 1992; by contrast, the speediest was
the Twenty-sixth which lowered the voting age to 18, its journey absorbed only
100 days between 23 March-1 July 1971. While
not too much should be read into it, it’s of interest the Eighteenth (prohibiting the manufacturing or sale of alcoholic drinks within the US) required 1
year, 29 days (18 December 1917-16 January 1919) whereas the Twenty-first (repealing the Eighteenth) was done in 288 days (little more than half the time); proposed on 20 February
1933, the process was completed on 5 December the same year.
The path to the Twenty-second amendment began when George Washington (1732–1799; first POTUS, 1789-1797) choose not to seek a third term, his reasons including (1) a commitment to republican principles which required the presidency not be perceived as a life-long or vaguely monarchical position, (2) the importance of a peaceful transition of power to demonstrate the presidency was a temporary public service, not a permanent entitlement and (3) a desire not to see any excessive concentration of power in one individual or office. Historians have noted Washington’s decision not to seek a third term was a deliberate effort to establish a tradition of limited presidential tenure, reflecting his belief this would safeguard the republic from tyranny and ensure no individual indefinitely could dominate government.
AI (Artificial Intelligence) generated image by Stable Diffusion of Lindsay Lohan and Donald Trump enjoying a coffee in Trump Tower's coffee chop.
For
more than a century, what Washington did (or declined to do) was regarded as a
constitutional convention and no president sought more than two terms. Theodore Roosevelt (TR, 1858–1919; POTUS 1901-1909), celebrating his re-election in 1904 appeared to be moved
by the moment when, unprompted, he announced: “Under no circumstances will I be a candidate
for or accept another nomination” and he stuck to the pledge,
arranging for William Howard Taft (1857–1930; POTUS 1909-1913 & chief justice of the SCOTUS (US Supreme Court) 1921-1930) to be his
successor, confident he’d continue to pursue a progressive programme. Taft however proved disappointingly
conservative and Roosevelt decided in 1912 to seek a third term. To critics who quoted at him his earlier
pledge, he explained that “…when a man at breakfast declines the third cup of coffee his
wife has offered, it doesn’t mean he’ll never in his life have another cup.” Throughout the 1912 campaign, comedians could
get an easy laugh out of the line: “Have another cup of coffee”? and to those who
objected to his violating Washington’s convention, he replied that what he was
doing was “constitutional”
which of course it was.
Puck magazine in 1908 (left) and 1912 (right) wasn't about to let Theodore Roosevelt forget what he'd promised in 1904. The cartoon on the left was an example of accismus (an expression of feigned uninterest in something one actually desires). Accismus was from the Latin accismus, from Ancient Greek ακκισμός (akkismós) (prudery). Puck Magazine (1876-1918) was a weekly publication which combined humor with news & political satire; in its use of cartoons and caricatures it was something in the style of today's New Yorker but without quite the same tone of seriousness.
Roosevelt
didn’t win the Republican nomination because the party bosses stitched thing up
for Taft so he ran instead as a third-party candidate, splitting the GOP vote
and thereby delivering the White House to the Democrats but he gained more than
a quarter of the vote, out-polling Taft and remains the most successful
third-party candidate ever so there was that.
His distant cousin Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR, 1882–1945, POTUS 1933-1945) was the one to prove the convention could be ignored and he
gained not only a third term in 1940 but also a fourth in 1944. FDR was not only a Democrat but also a most
subversive one and when Lord Halifax (Edward Wood, 1881–1959; British
Ambassador to the United States 1940-1946) arrived in Washington DC to serve as ambassador, he was surprised when one of a group of Republican senators with
whom he was having dinner opened proceedings with: “Before you speak, Mr Ambassador, I want you
to know that everyone in this room regards Mr Roosevelt as a bigger dictator
than Hitler or Mussolini. We believe he
is taking this country to hell as quickly as he can.” As a sentiment, it sounds very much like the
discourse of the 2024 campaign.
"The Trump Dynasty has begun" four term coffee mugs (currently unavailable) created for the 2020 presidential campaign.
The Republicans truly were appalled by Roosevelt’s third and fourth terms and as soon as they gained control of both houses of Congress began the process of adding an amendment to the constitution which would codify in that document the two-term limit Washington has sought to establish as a convention. It took longer than usual but the process was completed in 1951 when the became part of the constitution and were Mr Trump to want to run again in 2028, it would have to be repealed, no easy task because such a thing requires not only the concurrence of two thirds of both the House of Representatives & Senate but also three quarters of the legislatures of the 50 states. In other countries where presidential term limits have appeared tiresome to those who have no intention of leaving office the “work-arounds” are usually easier and Mr Trump may cast the odd envious eye overseas. In Moscow, Mr Putin (Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin; b 1952; president or prime minister of Russia since 1999) solved the problem by deciding he and his prime-minister temporarily should swap jobs (though not authority) while he arranged a referendum to effect the necessary changes to the Russian Constitution. The point about referendums in Russia was explained by comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) who observed: “it matters not who votes, what matters is who gets to count the votes.” Barring accidents or the visitation of the angel of death, Mr Putin is now set to remain as president until at least the mid-2030s.
Some mutual matters of interest: Donald Trump (left) and Vladimir Putin (right).
There have been many African presidents who have "arranged" for constitutional term limits to be "revised" but the most elegant in the handling of this was Pierre Nkurunziza (1964–2020; president of Burundi 2005-2020) who simply ignored the tiresome clause and announced he would be standing for a third term, tidying up loose ends by having Burundi's Constitutional Court declare the president was acting in accordance with the law. It would seem the principle of statutory interpretation in Bank of England v Vagliano Brothers wasn't brought before the court (formerly part of the empire of Imperial Germany and later a Belgian-administered territory under a League of Nations mandate, Burundi follows the civil law tradition rather than the common law inheritance from the old British Empire) and shortly before the verdict was handed down, one judge fled into exile, claiming the government had applied "pressure" on the court to deliver a ruling favorable to the president.
For most of the republic's existence, holders of the office of VPOTUS (vice-president of the US) tended to be obscure figures noted only if they turned out to be crooks like Spiro Agnew (1918–1996; VPOTUS 1969-1973) or assumed the presidency in one circumstance or another and during the nineteenth century there was a joke about two brothers: “One ran off to sea and the other became vice-president; neither were ever heard from again.” That was of course an exaggeration but it reflected the general view of the office which has few formal duties and can only ever be as powerful or influential as a president allows although the incumbent is “a heartbeat from the presidency”. John Nance Garner III (1868–1967, VPOTUS 1933-1941), a reasonable judge of these things, once told Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; VPOTUS 1961-1963 & POTUS 1963-1969) being VPOTUS was “not worth a bucket of warm piss” (which in polite company usually is sanitized as “...bucket of warm spit”). In the US, a number of VPOTUSs have become POTUS and some have worked out well although of late the record has not been encouraging, the presidencies of Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon (1913-1994; VPOTUS 1953-1961, POTUS 1969-1974) and Joe Biden (b 1942; VPOTUS 2008-2017, POTUS 2021-2025) 1963-1968, all ending badly, in despair, disgrace and decrepitude respectively.
Still, in the post-war years, the VPOTUS has often assumed a higher profile or been judged to be more influential, the latter certainly true of Dick Cheney (b 1941; VPOTUS 2001-2009) and some have even been given specific responsibilities such as LBJ’s role as titular head of the space program (which worked out well) or Kamala Harris (b 1964; VPOTUS 2021-2025) co-ordinating the response to difficulties on the southern border (a role in which either she failed or never attempted depending on the source). So wonderfully unpredictable is Donald Trump that quite what form the Vance VPOTUSship will assume is guesswork but conspiracy theorists already are speculating part of MAGA forward-planning is to have Mr Vance elected POTUS in 2028, simply as part of a work-around in a constitutional jigsaw puzzle.
The conspiracy revolves around the words in Section 1 of the Twenty-second Amendment: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice” and even the most optimistic MAGA lawyers concede not even Brett Kavanaugh (b 1965; associate justice of the SCOTUS since 2018) or Clarence Thomas (b 1948; associate justice of SCOTUS since 1991) could construct an interpretation which would allow Mr Trump to be elected for a third term. The constitution is however silent on whether any person may serve a third (or fourth, or fifth!) term so that makes possible the following sequence:
(1) In the 2028 election J.D.Vance is elected POTUS and somebody else (matters not who) is elected VPOTUS.
(2) J.D. Vance and somebody else (matters not who) are sworn into office as POTUS & VPOTUS respectively.
(3) Somebody else (matters not who) resigns as VPOTUS.
(4) J.D. Vance appoints Donald Trump as VPOTUS who is duly sworn-in.
(5) J.D. Vance resigns as POTUS and, as the constitution dictates. Donald Trump becomes POTUS and is duly sworn-in.
(6) Donald Trump appoints J.D.Vance as VPOTUS.
Whatever the politics, constitutionally, there is nothing controversial about those six steps because it replicates what happened between 1968 when Nixon & Agnew were elected POTUS & VPOTUS and 1974 when the offices were held respectively by Gerald Ford (1913–2006; VPOTUS 1973-1974 & POTUS 1974-1977) & Nelson Rockefeller (1908–1979; VPOTUS 1974-1977), neither of the latter pair having been elected. Of course, in January 2029 somebody else (matters not who) would be a “left-over” but he (it seems a reasonable assumption somebody else (matters not who) will be male) can, depending on this and that, be appointed something like Secretary of Agriculture or a to sinecure such as an ambassadorship to a nice (non-shithole) country with a pleasant climate and a majority white population.
Friday, October 25, 2024
Frango
Frango (pronounced fran-goh)
(1) A young
chicken (rare in English and in Portuguese, literally “chicken”).
(2) Various
chicken dishes (an un-adapted borrowing from the Portuguese).
(3) In
football (soccer) (1) a goal resulting from a goalkeeper’s error and (2) the
unfortunate goalkeeper.
(4) The trade name of a chocolate truffle, now sold in Macy's department stores.
In English,
“frango” is most used in the Portuguese sense of “chicken” (variously “a young
chicken”, “chicken meat”, “chicken disk” etc) and was from the earlier Portuguese frângão of unknown origin. In colloquial figurative use, a frango can be
“a young boy” and presumably that’s an allusion to the use referring to “a
young chicken”. In football (soccer),
it’s used (sometimes trans-nationally) of a goal resulting from an especially
egregious mistake by the goalkeeper (often described in English by the more
generalized “howler”. In Brazil, where
football teams are quasi-religious institutions, such a frango (also as frangueiro)
is personalized to describe the goalkeeper who made the error and on-field
blunders are not without lethal consequence in South America, the Colombian
centre-back Andrés Escobar (1967–1994) murdered in the days after the 1994 FIFA
World Cup, an event reported as a retribution for him having scored the own
goal which contributed to Colombia's elimination from the tournament. Frango is
a noun; the noun plural is frangos.
The Classical Latin verb frangō (to break, to shatter) (present infinitive frangere, perfect active frēgī, supine frāctum) which may have been from the primitive Indo-European bhreg- (to break) by not all etymologists agree because descendants have never been detected in Celtic or Germanic forks, thus the possibility it might be an organic Latin creation. The synonyms were īnfringō, irrumpō, rumpō & violō. As well as memorable art, architecture and learning, Ancient Rome was a world also of violence and conflict and there was much breaking of stuff, the us the figurative use of various forms of frangō to convey the idea of (1) to break, shatter (a promise, a treaty, someone's ideas (dreams, projects), someone's spirit), (2) to break up into pieces (a war from too many battles, a nation) and (3) to reduce, weaken (one's desires, a nation).
A frangō in the sense of the Classical Latin: Lindsay Lohan with broken left wrist (fractured in two places in an unfortunate fall at Milk Studios during New York Fashion Week) and 355 ml (12 fluid oz) can of Rehab energy drink, Los Angeles, September 2006. The car is a 2005 Mercedes-Benz SL 65 AMG (R230; 2004-2011) which earlier had featured in the tabloids after a low-speed crash. The R230 range (2001-2011) was unusual because of the quirk of the SL 550 (2006-2011), a designation used exclusively in the North American market, the RoW (rest of the world) cars retaining the SL 500 badge even though both used the 5.5 litre (333 cubic inch) V8 (M273).
The
descendents from the Classical Latin frangō
(to break, to shatter) included the Aromanian frãngu (to break, to destroy; to defeat), the Asturian frañer (to break; to smash) & francer (to smash), the English fract (to break; to violate (long
obsolete)) & fracture ((1) an instance of breaking, a place where something
has broken. (2) in medicine a break in a bone or cartilage and (3) in geology a
fault or crack in a rock), the Friulian franzi
(to break), the German Fraktur
((1) in medicine, a break in a bone & (2) a typeface) & Fraktion (2) in politics, a faction, a
parliamentary grouping, (3) in chemistry, a fraction (in the sense of a
component of a mixture), (4) a fraction (part of a whole) and (5) in the
German-speaking populations of Switzerland, South Tyrol & Liechtenstein, a
hamlet (adapted from the Italian frazione)), the Italian: frangere (1) to break (into pieces), (2) to press or crush
(olives), (3) in figurative use and as a literary device, to transgress (a
commandment, a convention of behavior etc), (4) in figurative use to weaken
(someone's resistance, etc.) and (5) to break (of the sea) (archaic)), the
Ladin franjer (to break into pieces),
the Old Franco provençal fraindre (to
break; significantly to damage), the Old & Middle French fraindre (significantly to damage), the
Portuguese franzir (to frown (to form
wrinkles in forehead)), the Romanian frânge
(1) to break, smash, fracture & (2) in figurative use, to defeat) and frângere (breaking), the Old Spanish to
break), and the Spanish frangir (to
split; to divide).
In
Portuguese restaurants, often heard is the phrase de vaca ou de frango? (beef or chicken?) and that’s because so many
dishes offer the choice, much the same as in most of the world (though
obviously not India). In fast-food
outlets, the standard verbal shorthand for “fried chicken” is “FF” which turns
out to be one of the world’s most common two letter abbreviations, the reason
being one “F” representing of English’s most unadapted linguistic exports. One mystery for foreigners sampling
Portuguese cuisine is: Why is chicken “frango”
but chicken soup is “sopa de galinha?” That’s because frango is used to mean “a young male chicken” while a galinha is an adult female. Because galinha
meat doesn’t possess the same tender quality as that of a frango, (the females bred and retained mostly for egg production),
slaughtered galinhas traditionally were
minced or shredded and used for dishes such as soups, thus: sopa de galinha (also as canja de galinha or the clipped caldo and in modern use, although rare, sopa de frango is not unknown). That has changed as modern techniques of
industrial farming have resulted in a vastly expanded supply of frango meat so, by volume, most sopa de galinha is now made using frangos (the birds killed young,
typically between 3-4 months). Frangos have white, drier, softer meat while
that of the galinha is darker, less
tender and juicer and the difference does attract chefs in who do sometimes
offer a true sopa de galinha as a kind
of “authentic peasant cuisine”.
There are
also pintos (pintinhos in the diminutive) which are chicks only a few days old
but these are no longer a part of mainstream Portuguese cuisine although galetos (chicks killed between at 3-4
weeks) are something of a delicacy, usually roasted. The reproductive males (cocks or roosters in
English use) are galos. There is no tradition, anywhere in
Europe, of eating the boiled, late-developing fertilized eggs (ie a bird in the
early stages of development), a popular dish in the Philippines and one which
seems to attract virulent disapprobation from many which culturally is
interesting because often, the same critics happily will consume both the eggs
and the birds yet express revulsion at even the sight of the intermediate
stage. Such attitudes are cultural
constructs and may be anthropomorphic because there’s some resemblance to a
human foetus.
Now sold in
Macy’s Frangos are a chocolate truffle created in 1918 for sale in Frederick
& Nelson department stores. Although
originally infused with mint, many variations ensued and they became popular
when made available in the Marshall Field department stores which in 1929
acquired Frederick & Nelson although it’s probably their distribution by Macy's
which remains best known. Marshall
Field's marketing sense was sound and they turned the Frango into something of
a cult, producing them in large melting pots on the 13th floor of the flagship
Marshall Field's store on State Street until 1999 when production was
out-sourced to a third party manufacturer in Pennsylvania. In the way of modern corporate life, the
Frango has had many owners, a few changes in production method and packaging and
some appearances in court cases over rights to the thing but it remains a
fixture on Macy’s price lists, the trouble history reflected in the “Pacific
Northwest version” being sold in Macy's Northwest locations in Washington,
Idaho, Montana and Oregon while the “Seattle version” is available in Macy's
Northwest establishments. There are
differences between the two and each has its champions but doubtless there are
those who relish both.
A patent
application (with a supporting trademark document) for the Frango was filed in 1918,
the name a re-purposing of a frozen dessert sold in the up-market tea-room at Frederick
& Nelson's department store in Seattle, Washington. The surviving records suggest the “Seattle Frangos”
were flavoured not with mint but with maple and orange but what remains
uncertain is the origin of the name. One
theory is the construct was Fr(ederick’s)
+ (t)ango which is romantic but
there are also reports employees were told, if asked, to respond it was from Fr(ederick) –an(d) Nelson Co(mpany)
with the “c” switched to a “g” because the word “Franco” had a long
established meaning. Franco was a word-forming
element meaning “French” or “the Franks”, from the Medieval Latin combining
form Franci (the Franks), thus, by
extension, “the French”. Since the early
eighteenth century it had been used when forming English phrases & compound
words including “Franco-Spanish border” (national boundary between France &
Spain), Francophile (characterized by excessive fondness of France and all
things French (and thus its antonym Francophobe)) and Francophone (French
speaking).
Hitler and Franco, photographed at their day-long meeting at Hendaye, on the Franco-Spanish border, 23 October 1940. Within half a decade, Hitler would kill himself; still ruling Spain, Franco died peacefully in his bed, 35 years later.
Remarkably,
the Frango truffles have been a part of two political controversies. The first was a bit of a conspiracy theory,
claiming the sweet treats were originally called “Franco Mints”, the name changed
only after the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) in which the
(notionally right-wing and ultimately victorious) Nationalist forces were led
by Generalissimo Francisco Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975) and
the explanation was that Marshall Field wanted to avoid adverse publicity. Some tellings of the tale claim the change was
made only after the Generalissimo’s meeting with Adolf Hitler (1889-1945;
Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state
1934-1945) at Hendaye (on the Franco-Spanish border) on 23 October 1940. Their discussions concerned Spain's
participation in the War against the British but it proved most unsatisfactory
for the Germans, the Führer declaring as he left that he'd rather have "three of four
teeth pulled out" than have to again spend a day with the Caudillo. Unlike Hitler, Franco was a
professional soldier, thought war a hateful business best avoided and, more
significantly, had a shrewd understanding of the military potential of the
British Empire and the implications for the war of the wealth and industrial
might of the United States. The British
were fortunate Franco took the view he did because had he agreed to afford the
Wehrmacht (the German armed forces) the requested cooperation to enable them to
seize control of Gibraltar, the Royal Navy might have lost control of the
Mediterranean, endangering the vital supplies of oil from the Middle East,
complicating passage to the Indian Ocean and beyond and transforming the
strategic position in the whole hemisphere.
However, in the archives is the patent application form for “Frangos”
dated 1 June 1918 and there has never been any evidence to support the notion “Franco”
was ever used for the chocolate truffles.
The other political stoush (a late nineteenth century Antipodean slang meaning a "fight or small-scale brawl) came in 1999 when, after seventy years, production of Frangos was shifted from the famous melting pots on the thirteenth floor of Marshall Field's flagship State Street store to Gertrude Hawk Chocolates in Dunmore, Pennsylvania, the decision taken by the accountants at the Dayton-Hudson Corporation which had assumed control in 1990. The rationale of this was logical, demand for Frangos having grown far beyond the capacity of the relatively small space in State Street to meet demand but it upset many locals, the populist response led Richard Daley (b 1942; mayor (Democratic Party) of Chicago Illinois 1989-2011), the son of his namesake father (1902–1976; mayor (Democratic Party) of Chicago, Illinois 1955-1976) who in 1968 simultaneously achieved national infamy and national celebrity (one’s politics dictating how one felt) in his handling of the police response to the violence which beset the 1968 Democratic National Convention held that year in the city. The campaign to have the Frangos made instead by a Chicago-based chocolate house was briefly a thing but was ignored by Dayton-Hudson and predictably, whatever the lingering nostalgia for the melting pots, the pragmatic Mid-Westerners adjusted to the new reality and, with much the same enthusiasm, soon were buying the Pennsylvanian imports.
Remarkably, there appears to be a “Frango spot market”. Although the increasing capacity of AI (artificial intelligence) has improved the mechanics of “dynamic pricing” (responding in real-time to movements in demand), as long ago as the Christmas season in 2014, CBS News ran what they called the “Macy's State Street Store Frango Mint Price Tracker”, finding the truffle’s price was subject to fluctuations as varied over the holiday period as movements in the cost of gas (petrol). On the evening of Thanksgiving, “early bird” shoppers could buy a 1 lb one-pound box of Frango mint “Meltaways” for US$11.99, the price jumping by the second week in December to US$14.99 although that still represented quite a nominal discount from the RRP (recommended retail price) of US$24.00. Within days, the same box was again listed at US$11.99 and a survey of advertising from the previous season confirmed that in the weeks immediately after Christmas, the price had fallen to US$9.99. It may be time for the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) to open a market for Frango Futures (the latest “FF”!).