Monolith

Monolith (pronounced mon-uh-lith)

(1) A column, large statue etc, formed originally from a single block of stone but latter day use applies the term to structures formed from any material and not of necessity a single piece (although technically such a thing should be described using the antonym: “polylith”.

(2) Used loosely, a synonym of “obelisk”.

(3) A single block or piece of stone, especially when used in architecture or sculpture and applied most frequently to large structures.

(4) Something (or an idea or concept) having a uniform, massive, redoubtable, or inflexible quality or character.

(5) In architecture, a large hollow foundation piece sunk as a caisson and having a number of compartments that are filled with concrete when it has reached its correct position

(6) An unincorporated community in Kern County, California, United States (initial capital).

(7) In chemistry, a substrate having many tiny channels that is cast as a single piece, which is used as a stationary phase for chromatography, as a catalytic surface etc.

(8) In arboreal use, a dead tree whose height and size have been reduced by breaking off or cutting its branches (use rare except in UK horticultural use).

1829: The construct was mono- + lith.  Mono was from the Ancient Greek, a combining form of μόνος (monos) (alone, only, sole, single), from the Proto-Hellenic mónwos, from the primitive Indo-European mey- (little; small).  It was related to the Armenian մանր (manr) (slender, small), the Ancient Greek μανός (manós) (sparse, rare), the Middle Low German mone & möne, the West Frisian meun, the Dutch meun, the Old High German muniwa, munuwa & munewa (from which German gained Münne (minnow).  As a prefix, mono- is often found in chemical names to indicate a substance containing just one of a specified atom or group (eg a monohydrate such as carbon monoxide; carbon attached to a single atom of oxygen). 

In English, the noun monolith was from the French monolithe (object made from a single block of stone), from Middle French monolythe (made from a single block of stone) and their etymon the Latin monolithus (made from a single block of stone), from the Ancient Greek μονόλιθος (monólithos) (made from a single block of stone), the construct being μονο- (mono-) (the prefix appended to convey the meaning “alone; single”), from μόνος (monos) + λίθος (líthos) (a stone; stone as a substance).  The English form was cognate with the German monolith (made from a single block of stone).  The verb was derived from the noun.  Monolith is a noun & verb, monolithism, monolithicness & monolithicity are nouns, monolithic is an adjective and monolithically is an adverb; the noun plural is monoliths.  The adjective monolithal is listed as "an archaic form of monolithic".

Monolith also begat two back-formations in the technical jargon of archaeology: A “microlith” is (1) a small stone tool (sometimes called a “microlite”) and (2) the microscopic acicular components of rocks.  A “megalith” is (1) a large stone slab making up a prehistoric monument, or part of such a monument, (2) A prehistoric monument made up of one or more large stones and (3) by, extension, a large stone or block of stone used in the construction of a modern structure.  The terms seem not to be in use outside of the technical literature of the profession.  The transferred and figurative use in reference to a thing or person noted for indivisible unity is from 1934 and is now widely used in IT, political science and opinion polling.  The adjective monolithic (formed of a single block of stone) was in use by the early nineteenth century and within decades was used to mean “of or pertaining to a monolith”, the figurative sense noted since the 1920s.  The adjective prevailed over monolithal which seems first to have appeared in a scientific paper in 1813.  The antonym in the context of structures rendered for a single substance is “polylith” but use is rare and multi-component constructions are often described as “monoliths”.  The antonym in the context of “anything massive, uniform, and unmovable, especially a towering and impersonal cultural, political, or social organization or structure” is listed by many sources as “chimera” but terms like “diverse”, “fragmented” etc are usually more illustrative for most purposes.  In general use, there certainly has been something of a meaning-shift.  While "monolith" began as meaning "made of a single substance", it's now probably most used to covey the idea of "something big & tall" regardless of the materials used.

One of the Monoliths as depicted in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). 

The mysterious black structures in Sir Arthur C Clarke's (1917–2008) Space Odyssey series (1968-1997) became well known after the release in 1968 of Stanley Kubrick's (1928–1999) film of the first novel in the series, 2001: A Space Odyssey.  Although sometimes described as “obelisk”, the author noted they were really “monoliths”.  In recent years, enthusiasts, mischief makers and click-bait hunters have been erecting similar monoliths in remote parts of planet Earth, leaving them to be discovered and publicized.  With typical alacrity, modern commerce noted the interest  and soon, replicas were being offered for sale, a gap in the market for Christmas gifts between US$10,000-45,000 apparently identified.

In IT, the term “monolithic driver” was used to refer to a software driver designed to handle multiple hardware components or functionalities within a single, large, and cohesive codebase.  In this it differed from earlier (and later) approaches which were modular or layered, the functionality is split into separate, smaller drivers or modules, each of which handled specific tasks or addressed only certain hardware components.  Monolithic drivers became generally available in the late 1980s, a period when both computer architecture and operating systems were becoming more sophisticated in an attempt to overcome the structural limitations imposed by the earlier designs.  It was in the era many of the fundamental concepts which continue to underpin modern systems were conceived although the general adoption of some lay a decade or more away.

During the 1970s & 1980s, many systems were built with a tight integration between software and hardware and some operating systems (OS) were really little more than “file loaders” with a few “add-ons”, and the limitations imposed were “worked-around” by some programmers who more-or-less ignored the operating system an address the hardware directly using “assemblers” (a flavor of “machine-code”).  That approach made for fast software but at the cost of interoperability and compatibility, such creations hardware specific rather using an OS as what came to be known as the HAL (hardware abstraction layer) but at the time, few OSs were like UNIX with its monolithic kernel in which the core OS services (file system management, device drivers etc.) were all integrated into a single large codebase.  As the market expanded, it was obvious the multi-fork approach was commercially unattractive except for the odd niche.

After its release in 1981, use of the IBM personal computers (PC) proliferated and because of its open (licence-free) architecture, an ecosystem of third party suppliers arose, producing a remarkable array of devices which either “hung-off” or “plugged-in” a PC; the need for hardware drivers grew.  Most drivers at the time came from the hardware manufacturers themselves and typically were monolithic (though not yet usually described as such) and written usually for specific hardware and issues were rife, a change to an OS or even other (apparently unrelated) hardware or software sometimes inducing instability or worse.  As operating systems evolved to support more modularity, the term “monolithic driver” came into use to distinguish these large, single-block drivers from the more modular or layered approaches that were beginning to emerge.

It was the dominance of Novell’s Netware (1983-2009) on PC networks which compelled Microsoft to develop Windows NT (“New Technology”, 1993) and it featured a modular kernel architecture, something which made the distinction between monolithic and modular drivers better understood and as developers increasingly embraced the modular, layered approach which better handled maintainability and scalability.  Once neutral, the term “monolithic driver” became something of a slur in IT circles, notably among system administrators (“sysadmins” or “syscons”, the latter based on the “system console”, the terminal on a mainframe hard-wired to the central processor) who accepted ongoing failures of this and that as inherent to the business but wanted to avoid a SPoFs (Single Point of Failure).

In political science, the term “monolithic” is used to describe a system, organization, or entity perceived as being unified, indivisible, and operating with a high degree of internal uniformity, often with centralized control. When something is labeled as monolithic, it implies that it lacks diversity or internal differentiation and presents a singular, rigid structure or ideology.  Tellingly, the most common use of the term is probably when analyzing electoral behavior and demonstrating how groups, societies or sub-sets of either. Although often depicted in the media as “monolithic” in their views, voting patterns or political behavior are anything but and there’s usually some diversity.  In political science, such divergences within defined groups are known as “cross-cutting cleavages”.

It’s used also of political systems in which a regime is structured (or run) with power is highly concentrated, typically in a single dictator or ruling party.  In such systems, usually there is little effective opposition and dissent is suppressed (although some of the more subtle informally tolerate a number of “approved dissenters” who operated within understood limits of self-censorship.  The old Soviet Union (the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) 1922-1991), the Islamic Republic of Iran (1979-), the Republic of China (run by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) (1949-) and the DPRK (Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea) 1948-) are classic examples of monolithic systems; while the differences between them were innumerable, structurally all were (or are) politically monolithic.  The word is used also as a critique in the social sciences, Time magazine in April 2014 writing of the treatment of “Africa” as a construct in Mean Girls (2004):  “Like the original Ulysses, Cady is recently returned from her own series of adventures in Africa, where her parents worked as research zoologists. It is this prior “region of supernatural wonder” that offers the basis for the mythological reading of the film. While the notion of the African continent as a place of magic is a dated, rather offensive trope, the film firmly establishes this impression among the students at North Shore High School. To them, Africa is a monolithic place about which they know almost nothing. In their first encounter, Karen inquires of Cady: “So, if you’re from Africa, why are you white?” Shortly thereafter, Regina warns Aaron that Cady plans to “do some kind of African voodoo” on a used Kleenex of his to make him like her—in fact, the very boon that Cady will come to bestow under the monomyth mode.”  It remains a sensitive issue and one of the consequences of European colonial practices on the African continent (something which included what would now be regarded as "crimes against humanity) so the casual use of "Africa" as a monolithic construct is proscribed in a way a similar of "Europe" would not attract criticism.    

The limitations of the utility of the term mean it should be treated with caution and while there are “monolithic” aspects or features to constructs such as “the Third World”, “the West” or “the Global South”, the label does over-simplify the diversity of cultures, political systems, and ideologies within these broad categories.  Even something which is to some degree “structurally monolithic” like the United States (US) or the European Union (EU) can be highly diverse in terms of actual behavior.  In the West (and the modern-day US is the most discussed example), the recent trend towards polarization of views has become a popular topic of study and the coalesced factions are sometimes treated as “monolithic” despite in many cases being themselves intrinsically factionalized.

Platform

Platform (pronounced plat-fawrm)

(1) A horizontal surface or structure raised above the surrounding area, used for appearances, performances etc (speeches, music, drama etc) and known also as a dais or podium if used for public speaking.

(2) A raised floor constructed for any purpose (an area for workers during construction, the mounting of weapons etc.

(3) The raised area (usually a constructed structure) between or alongside the tracks of a railroad station, designed to provide passenger or freight ingress & egress.

(4) The open entrance area, or vestibule, at the end of a railroad passenger car.

(5) A landing in a flight of stairs.

(6) A public statement of the principles, objectives, and policy (often referred to as “planks”, the metaphor being the timber planks used to build physical platforms) on the of a political party, especially as put forth by the representatives of the party in a convention to nominate candidates for an election; a body of principles on which a person or group takes a stand in appealing to the public; program; a set of principles; plan.

(7) Figuratively, a place or an opportunity to express one's opinion (historically also referred to as a tribune; a place for public discussion; a forum.

(8) Figuratively, something (a strategy, a campaign etc) which provides the basis on which some project or cause can advance (described also as a foundation or stage).

(9) A deck-like construction on which the drill rig of an offshore oil or gas well is erected.

(10) In naval architecture, a light deck, usually placed in a section of the hold or over the floor of the magazine (also used in to general nautical design).

(11) In structural engineering, a relatively flat member or construction for distributing weight, as a wall plate, grillage etc.

(12) In military jargon, solid ground on which artillery pieces are mounted or a metal stand or base attached to certain types of artillery pieces.

(13) In geology, a vast area of undisturbed sedimentary rocks which, together with a shield, constitutes a craton (often the product of wave erosion).

(14) In footwear design, a thick insert of leather, cork, or other sturdy material between the uppers and the sole of a shoe, usually intended for stylish effect or to give added height; technically an ellipsis of “platform shoe”, “platform boot” etc.

(15) In computing (as an ellipsis of “computing platform”, a certain combination of operating system or environment & hardware (with the software now usually functioning as a HAL (hardware abstraction layer) to permit the use of non-identical equipment); essentially a standardized system which allows software from a variety of vendors seamlessly to operate.

(16) In internet use (especially of social media and originally as an ellipsis of “digital platform”), software system used to provide online and often multi-pronged interactive services.

(17) In manufacturing, a standardised design which permits variations to be produced without structural change to the base.

(18) In automotive manufacturing (as an ellipsis of “car platform”, a set of components able to be shared by several models (and sometimes shared even between manufacturers).  The notion of the platform evolved from the literal platforms (chassis) used to build the horse-drawn carriages of the pre-modern era.

(19) A plan, sketch, model, pattern, plan of action or conceptual description (obsolete).

(20) In Myanmar (Burma), the footpath or sidewalk.

1540–1550: From the Middle English platte forme (used also as plateforme), from the Middle French plateforme (a flat form), the construct being plate (flat) from the Old French plat, from the Ancient Greek πλατύς (platús) (flat) + forme (form) from the Latin fōrma (shape; figure; form).  It was related to flatscape which survived into modern English as a rare literary & poetic device and which begat the derogatory blandscape (a bland-looking landscape), encouraging the derived “dullscape”, “beigescape”, “shitscape” etc.  Platform & platforming are nouns & verbs, platformer & platformization are nouns, platformed is a verb; the noun plural is platforms.  The noun & adjective platformative and the noun & adverb platformativity are non-standard.

In English, the original sense was “plan of action, scheme, design” which by the 1550s was used to mean “ground-plan, drawing, sketch”, these uses long extinct and replaced by “plan”.  The sense of a “raised, level surface or place” was in use during the 1550s, used particularly of a “raised frame or structure with a level surface”.  In geography, by the early nineteenth century a platform was a “flat, level piece of ground”, distinguished for a “plateau” which was associated exclusively with natural elevated formations; geologists by mid-century standardized their technical definition (a vast area of undisturbed sedimentary rocks which, together with a shield, constitutes a craton (often the product of wave erosion).  The use in railroad station design meaning a “raised area (usually a constructed structure) between or alongside the tracks of a railroad station, designed to provide passenger or freight ingress & egress” dates from 1832.

Donald Trump on the platform, Butler, Pennsylvania, 13 July 2024.

For politicians, the platform can be a dangerous place and the death toll of those killed while on the hustings is not inconsiderable.  Since the attempted assassination of Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021), he and his running mate in the 2024 presidential election (JD  James (b 1984; US senator (Republican-Ohio) since 2023) speak behind bullet-proof glass, the threat from homicidal "childless cat ladies" apparently considered "plausible".

The familiar modern use in politics was a creation of US English meaning a “statement of political principles policies which will be adopted or implemented were the candidates of the party to secure a majority at the upcoming election” and appeared first in 1803.  The use would have been derived from the literal platform (ie “on the hustings”) on which politicians stood to address crowds although some etymologists suggest it may have been influenced by late sixteenth century use in England to describe a “set of rules governing church doctrine" (1570s).  During the nineteenth century, platform came to be used generally as a figurative device alluding to “the function of public speaking” and even for a while flourished as a verb (“to address the public as a speaker”).

Lindsay Lohan in Saint Laurent Billy leopard-print platform boots (Saint Laurent part number 532469), New York, March 2019.

On the internet, "cancelling" or "cancel culture" refers to the social (media) phenomenon in which institutions or individuals (either “public figures” or those transformed into a public figures by virtue of an incautious (in the case of decades-old statements sometimes something at the time uncontroversial) tweet or post are called publicly “shamed”, criticized, or boycotted for a behaviour, statement or action deemed to be offensive (problematic often the preferred term) or harmful.  Cancelling is now quite a thing and part of the culture wars but the practice is not knew, the verb deplatform (often as de-platform) used in UK university campus politics as early as 1974 in the sense of “attempt to block the right of an individual to speak at an event (usually on campus)”; the comparative noun & verb being “deplatforming”.  The unfortunate noun & verb “platforming” began in railway use in the sense of (1) the construction of platforms and (2) the movement of passengers or freight on a platform but in the early 2010s it gained a new meaning among video gamers who used it to describe the activity of “jumping from one platform to another.”  Worse still is “platformization” which refers to (1) the increasing domination of the internet by a number of large companies whose products function as markets for content and (2) also in internet use, the conversion of a once diverse system into a self-contained platform.  Software described as “cross-platform” or “platform agnostic” is able to run on various hardware and software combinations.

IBM: In 1983 things were looking good.

In computing, the term “platform” was in use long before “social media platforms” became part of the vernacular.  The significance of “platform” was compatibility, the rationale being that software sold by literally thousands of vendors could be run on machines produced by different companies, sometimes with quite significantly different hardware (the “bus wars” used to be a thing).  The compatibility was achieved was by an operating system (OS) creating was called the HAL (hardware abstraction layer), meaning that by a variety of techniques (most notably “device drivers”)’ an operating system could make disparate hardware manifest as “functionally identical” to application level software.  So, in a sign of the times, the once vital concept of “IBM compatibility” came to be supplanted by “Windows compatibility” and the assertion by in 1984 by NEC when releasing the not “wholly” compatible APC-III that “IBM compatibility is just a state of mind” was the last in its ilk; the APC-III architecture proving a one-off.  The classic computing platform became the “WinTel” (sometimes as “Wintel”, a portmanteau word, the construct being Win(dows) + (In)tel), the combination of the Microsoft Windows OS and the Intel central processing unit (CPU), an evolution traceable to IBM’s decision in 1980 to produce their original PC-1 with an open architecture using Microsoft’s DOS (disk operation system) and Intel’s 8088 (8/16 bit) & 8086 (16 bit) CPUs rather than use in-house products.  In the IBM boardroom, that at the time would have seemed a good idea but it was one which within a decade almost doomed the corporation as the vast ecosystem of “clone” PCs enriched Microsoft & Intel while cannibalizing the corporate market which had built IBM into a huge multi-national.  It is the Wintel platform which for more than forty years has underpinned the digital revolution and, like the steam engine, transformed the world.

The noun & adjective platformative and the noun & adverb platformativity are non-standard.  Platformative was built on the model of “performative” which (1) in structural linguistics and philosophy is used to mean “being enacted as it is said” (ie follows the script) and (2) in post-modernist deconstructionist theory refers to something done as a “performance” for purposes of “spectacle or to create an impression”.  “Platformative is understood as some sort of event or situation which is (1) dependent on the platform on which it is performed or (2) something which exists to emphasise the platform rather than itself.  Platformativity was built on the model of performativity which as a noun (1) in philosophy referred to the capacity of language and expressive actions to perform a type of being and (2) the quality of being performative.  As an adverb, it described something done “in a performative manner”.  The actual use of platformativity seems often mysterious but usually the idea is the extent to which the meaning of a “statement or act” (ie the text) is gained or changed depending upon the platform on which it transpired (something of a gloss on the idea “The medium is the message” which appeared in Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (1964) by Marshall McLuhan (1911-1980).

The automotive platform

In automobile mass-production, the term “platform” tended to be generic until the post-war years and was used (if at all) interchangeably with “chassis” or “frame”, the basic underling structure used to mount the mechanical components and add the bodywork.  The growing adoption of “unitary” construction during the mid-century years radically changed the way cars were manufactured but didn’t much change the language, the underpinnings still often referred to as the “chassis” even though engineers cheerfully would point out one no longer existed.  What did change the language was sudden proliferation of models offered by the US industry in the 1960s; where once, each line (apart from the odd speciality) had a single model, emerging in the 1960s would be ranges consisting of the (1) full-size, (2) intermediate, (3) compact and (4) sub-compact.  The strange foreign cars were often so small they were often described variously as “micros” & “sub-micros”.  With such different sizes now being built, different platforms were required and these came to be known usually with titles like “A Platform”, “C Platform”, “E Platform” etc (although “A Body”, “C Body” etc were also used interchangeably).  Such nomenclature had actually been in use in Detroit as early as the 1920s but there was little public perception of the use which rarely appeared outside engineering departments or corporate boardrooms.  The concept of the platform was in a sense “engineering agnostic” because the various platforms could be unitary, with a traditional separate chassis or one of a variety of BoF (body-on-frame) constructions (X-Frame, Perimeter-Frame, Ladder-Frame etc).  Regardless, in the language of internal designation, anything could be a “platform”.

With the coming of the 1960s, the “platform” concept became the standard industry language, quickly picked up the motoring press which observed the most notable aspect of the concept was that the design of platforms emphasised the ability to be adapted to a number of different models, often with little more structural adjustment than a (quick & cheap) stretch of the wheelbase or a slightly wider track, both things able to be accommodated on the existing production line without the need to re-tool.  The designers of platforms needed to be cognizant not only of the vehicles which would be mounted atop but also production line rationalization.  What this implies is that the more models which could be produced using the single platform, all else being equal, the more profitable that platform tended to be and some of the long-running platforms proved great cash cows.  However, if a platform (1) proved more expensive to produce than the industry average and (2) was used only on a single or limited number of lines, it could be what Elon Musk (b 1971) would now call a “money furnace”.  Such a fate befell Chrysler’s “E Platform” (usually called the “E Body”), produced between 1969-1974 for two close to identical companion lines.  Exacerbating the E Platforms woes was it being released (1) just before its market segment suffered a precipitous decline in sales, (2) government mandated rules began to make it less desirable, (3) rising insurance costs limited the appeal of the most profitable models and (4) the first oil shock of 1973-1974 drove a final nail into the coffin.

1960 Ford Falcon (US, left) and 1976 Ford PC LTD (Australia, right).  Both built on the "Falcon Platform", the 1960 original was on a 109½ inch (2781 mm) wheelbase and fitted with a 144 cubic inch (2.4 litre) straight-six.  By 1973, Ford Australia had stretched the platform to a 121 inch (3100 mm) wheelbase and fitted a 351 cubic inch (5.8 litre) (335 series "Cleveland") V8.      

Ford in North America introduced the Falcon in 1960 in response to the rising sales of smaller imports, a phenomenon the domestic industry had brought upon itself by making their own mainstream production bigger and heavier during the late 1950s and tellingly, when later they would introduce their “intermediate” ranges, these vehicles were about the size cars had been in 1955; they proved very popular although rising prosperity did mean sales of the full-size lines would remain buoyant until mugged by economic reality in a post oil-shock world.  The Falcon began modestly enough and while the early versions were very obviously built to a (low) price and intended to be a commodity to be disposed of when “used up”, it found a niche and Ford knew it was onto something.  The early platform wasn’t without its flaws, as Australian buyers would discover when they took their stylish new 1960 Falcon to the outback roads the frumpy but robust Holden handled without complaint, but it proved adaptable: In North America, the Falcon was produced between 1960-1969, it lasted from 1962-1991 in Argentina and in Australia, in a remarkable variety of forms, it was offered between 1960-2016.

On the Falcon platform: 1965 Mustang (6 cylinder, left) and 1969 Mustang Boss 429 (right).  In the vibrant market for early Mustangs, although it's the high-performance versions and Shelby American's derivatives which attract the collectors, massively out-selling such things were the so-called "grocery-getters", configured typically with small (in US terms) 6 cylinder engines and automatic transmissions.  The "grocery-getters" used to be known as "secretary's" or "librarian's" cars but such sexist stereotyping would now attract cancellation (once known as "de-platforming).

In North America however, the platform wasn’t retired when the last of the Falcons was sold in 1970 because it was used also for other larger Fords (and companion Mercury & even (somewhat improbably) Lincoln models) including the Fairlane (1962-1970), Maverick (1970–1977) & Granada 1975-1980.  Most famously of course, it was the Falcon platform which was the basis for the first generation Mustang (1964-1973); if the development costs for the Falcon hadn’t been amortized by the time the Mustang was released, the extraordinary popularity of the new “pony car” meant the profits were huge.  It’s of course misleading to suggest a machine like the 1969 Mustang Boss 429 (7.0 litre) was “underneath the body just a Falcon with a big engine” but the basic design is the same and between the early versions of the two, there are many interchangeable parts.  Later, Ford would maintain other long-lasting platforms.  The Fox platform would run between 1979-1993 (the SN95 platform (1994-2004) is sometimes called the “Fox/SN95” because it was “a Fox update" but it was so substantial most engineers list it separately) and the larger Panther platform enjoyed an even more impressive longevity; released in 1979, the final Panther wasn’t produced until 2012.

Torch

Torch (pronounced tawrch)

(1) A light to be carried in the hand, consisting of some combustible substance, as resinous wood, or of twisted flax or the like soaked with tallow or other flammable substance, ignited at the upper end.

(2) A portable light-source (now almost universally electric and battery or solar powered); use rare in the US where the preferred term is “flashlight”.

(3) Any of various lamp-like devices that produce a hot flame and are used for soldering, burning off paint etc (blowtorch, oxy-gas torch et al).

(4) Figuratively, something considered as a source of illumination, enlightenment, guidance etc.

(5) In slang, an arsonist (one who to set fires maliciously (ie “torches” stuff).

(6) To burn or flare up like a torch.

(7) As “torch singer”, one who sings “torch songs” (pieces lamenting an unrequited love by one who still “carries a torch” for their object of desire).

(8) As “pass the torch”, the idea (sometimes inter-generational) of a responsibility or office being handed to a successor (synonymous with “pass the baton”).

(9) To insult someone or something, to ruin the reputation of someone or something; to release damaging claims about someone or something (a generalized term, particular flavors of such “torchings” on the internet often now described with specific terms).

1250–1300: From the Middle English noun torch & torche, from the Old French torche & torque (torch; bundle of straw), from the unattested Vulgar Latin torca (something twisted; coiled object) from the Latin torqua, a variant of torquis, from torqueō (twist), from the primitive Indo-European root PIE root terkw- (to twist).  In a very modern twist, it’s from this source that the OnlyFans favourite “twerking” comes.  From the Latin is drawn the modern measure of specific energy (twisting effort): “torque”), the original sense being a “torch formed of twisted tow dipped in wax”.  By at least the 1620s “torch” was in figurative use describing “a source of inspiration or guidance”.  Quite when the term “torch-bearer” (in the literal sense) was first used isn’t known but it’s a very old job and likely therefore also to be used as long as the word “torch” although use seems not to have been documented before the early fifteenth century.  The figurative sense of s “torch-bearer” being the “leader of a cause” dates from the 1530s.  The slang sense of “an arsonist” dates from 1938.  In the way these things happen, electrically powered portable light-sources usually are called “flashlights” in US use while “torch” tended to predominate elsewhere in the English-speaking world although, because so many products are now marketed internationally as “flashlight”, the use has spread.  The verb torch dates from circa 1819 in the sense of “illuminate with a torch” and was derived from the noun while as a regional or dialectal form by mid century it was used to mean “flare up, rise like flame or smoke from a torch”.  In US use, the meaning “set fire to” was in use by 1931, this extended by 1938 to “arsonist”.  Torch & torching are nouns & verbs, torcher is a noun, torched is a verb and torchable, torchless & torchlike (also as torch-like) are adjectives; the noun plural is torches.

In Greek mythology, Θᾰ́νᾰτος (Thánatos) was the personification of Death.  Thánatos was from θνῄσκω (thnēskō) (I die, I am dying) and although his name was transliterated in Latin as Thanatus, his counterpart in Roman mythology was Mors or Letum.  In the Iliad, Thánatos appears as the brother of Sleep (Hypnos) and according to the 7-8^th century BC Ancient Greek poet Hesiod, these two spirits were the sons of Nyx (the personification of the night and its goddess).  The sister of Ertebus and daughter of Chaos, her realm was the far west far beyond the land of Atlas and as well as Death & Sleep, she was the mother of a number of abstract forces including Morus (Destiny), Momus (Reproach), Oizys (Distress), the Moirae (Nemesis), Apate (Deceit), Philotes (Love), Geras (Old Age), Eris (Strife), and the Hesperides (the nymphs of the Setting Sun).  As a dramatic device, Thánatos sometimes appeared as a character in Greek theatre but his presence was otherwise rare.  When he appeared in paintings or sculpture, it was often with the torch he held in his hand being upside-down, signifying death or the end-of-life.

A cooking torch being used to apply a finishing touch to a lemon meringue pie.

There are all sorts of torches including “blow-torch” (a gas-powered tool used by plumbers), “cooking torch” (a gas-powered tool used by chefs usually to induce some sort of “burnt” effect on the surface of dishes), “cutting torch” (the tool attached to cylinders of oxygen & acetylene (ie oxy-acetylene) which, when combined and ignited, enable metal to be cut or joined, “fusion torch” (in nuclear physics, a technique using the high-temperature plasma of a fusion reactor to break apart other materials (especially waste materials) and convert them into reusable elements, “weed torch” (A torch used to kill weeds by means of a high-temperature propane flame, the attraction being precision (ie can be used in close proximity to desirable plants one wishes not to kill) and avoiding the use chemicals or disrupting the soil, “pen torch” (also as “pen-light”) small torches built into functional pens.

In the history of World War II (1939-1945), the word “torch” is most associated with “Operation Torch”, the Allied invasion of French North Africa, conducted between 8–16 November 1942.  One of those “compromises” thrashed out between the British and Americans in the mechanism of the Combined Chiefs of Staff (CCS), it was a vital component in the rhythm of the conflict because (1) it allowed a final “mopping up” of the Axis forces in North Africa, (2) introduced US forces to the European theatre (albeit in Africa) and (3) removed any threat to the Allied control of the Mediterranean, (4) secured Middle East oil supplies and (5) made possible later military action in Italy & southern France.  There was though also a “torch” footnote in the history of the war.  Before things turned against him, Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) would sometimes make (usually inept) attempts at humor and, early in 1941 when the invasion of the Soviet Union was going well, the Führerhauptquartiere (Leader’s Headquarters) was the Wolfsschanze (Wolf's Lair) near the East Prussian town of Rastenburg (now Kętrzyn in present-day Poland).  There one night, he found one of his secretaries (Christa Schroeder (1908–1984)) wandering in the darkness saying she couldn’t find her torch.  He claimed innocence, arguing: “I’m a country thief (Ländledieb) thief, not a lamp (Lämpledieb) thief”.  That was about as good as Anführerhumor got.

Passing the Torch

In use since the late nineteenth century, the idiomatic phrase “pass the torch” is a metaphor drawn from Antiquity: the λαμπαδηδρομία (lampadēdromía) (torch-races), a feature at many festivals in Ancient Greece.  These were relay events, run over a variety of distances, each team member carrying a burning torch, the prize awarded to the team whose runner crossed the finish line first with the torch still burning.  That is of course the long accepted myth but many modern historians regard the "torch relay" from Antiquity as a "manufactured myth", one of many emerged in the centuries long after the purported events were said to have transpired.  The idea entered modern athletics in relay events where each runner carries a baton which they hand to the competitor about to run the next leg (thus “pass the baton” being synonymous with “pass the torch”).  The torch relay idea was revived for 1936 Summer Olympic Games in Berlin and has since been a feature of all games (winter & summer), the design of the devices now part of Olympic history.   

Berlin, 1936.

So much publicity did the torch run from Olympia in Greece to Berlin attract as a prelude to the 1936 Olympic games that it has since been a feature of every subsequent summer & winter games (and within five years the Nazis would occupy Greece although not willingly).  The 1936 run was a genuine relay which involved over 3,000 in a route which included Greece (which within five years the Nazis would occupy although not willingly, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia (invaded by the Nazis in 1941), Hungary (invaded by the Nazis in 1944), Austria (annexed by the Nazis in 1938), Czechoslovakia (annexed by the Nazis in 1938-1939) & Germany.

Rendered in steel and fueled by a flammable paste inside a magnesium tube, each load had a burning time for some 10 minutes, ideal for the relay schedule but there were quality control problems with one batch of torches so the Nazis cheated, some of the torchbearers in more rural regions being driven by car.  The decision to use a torch was a deliberate attempt to link the Third Reich with the classical civilizations of Antiquity.  Although symbolic fires had been kept alight during the games at Amsterdam (1928) and Los Angeles (1932), neither had been lit with flame carried from Olympia in a torch relay.  The first intention of the Berlin organizing committee had been to remain true to the old ways, creating torches of hardwood topped with bundles of narthex stalks, taken from a Mediterranean tree known for its slow combustion but tests soon revealed this to be impractical and so metal torches were fabricated.

Mexico City, 1968.

One of the more pleasing designs was that used for the 1968 summer games in Mexico City.  In a then novel touch, the torch was produced in four versions: (1) An all-steel construction with vertical grooves present on the whole body of the torch, (2) A similar design to the first type except for the bottom part of the body which featured a black leather handle, (3) A design which included a handle made partly from wood and a motif featuring a dove was repeated on the upper part and (4) A silver ring with repeated dove motifs was added to decorate the top of the torch while the caption “Mexico” was reproduced twice at the base of the handle.  Depending on which method of construction was used, the fuel load varied, the solid mix including nitrates, sulphurs, alkaline metal carbonates, resins and silicones.

Lake Placid, 1980.

According to the organizing committee, the design and choice of materials used for the torch for the XIII Olympic Winter Games held at New York’s Lake Placid in 1980 was intended to symbolize the blending of modern technology and the traditions of Ancient Greece.  Accordingly, it was constructed of metal with a bronze finish, a handle wrapped in leather and as fuel it used liquid propane, each torch able to remain alight for an impressive 40 minutes.  The sole decorative element was a silver ring where metal met leather, the inscription reading: “XIII Olympic Winter Games Lake Placid 1980”. Although it pre-dated both the personal computer (PC) revolution and the internet, apparently there was some use of computers in the design.    The committee described the shape of the bowl as a tribute to classical Greek architecture but many couldn’t help but notice some resemblance to a certain plumbing tool.

President Biden passes the torch

Opinion seems divided on whether the remarkable “Pass the torch Joe” advertisement a Democratic Party Super Political Action Committee (PAC) paid to run on what is known to be one of Joe Biden’s (b 1942; US president since 2021) favorite television shows had much to do with his decision to withdraw from seeking his party’s nomination for a second term.  Even if not decisive however, for a Super PAC publicly (and expensively) to advocate something which is usually an internal party matter must have had some sort of “shock effect” on the president because it was unprecedented; to him it must have been something like seeing "something nasty in the woodshed".  While the Super PAC structure is not exclusive to US politics, the American devices (created essentially as a work-around of tiresome campaign finance laws) work on a grand scale compared with those in other countries but previously they have exclusively been devoted to promoting a candidate, not airing the dirty laundry.

The Super PAC’s message (best translated as “Joe, you’re too old and senile to do this”) wasn’t new because it had (in sanitized form) since the first presidential debate in June been either stated or selectively leaked by any number of party grandees including a former president, a former speaker and leading Democrats in both houses of Congress.  That might have been manageable by the Biden faction but what was not was the flow of funds from party donors drying up, another candidate being the only conduction of resumption.  The Super PAC’s choice of “pass the torch” as a metaphor was clever because (1) it’s well understood and (2) with its classical origin it lends an air of nobility, the idea being the old warrior, standing undefeated, handing the torch to someone who was after all his chosen deputy.  Of course, what was left unspoken was that in Ancient Greece the point of the exercise was the torch has to be passed while still aflame, the question being whether it has in Mr Biden’s increasingly unsteady grip, blown out, leaving only smoking embers.

On the way out; on the way in: Time magazine covers after the debate (left) and after the tweet (right).  What the latter cover lacked was a word to replace "panic".  The editorial board would have discussed the matter, pondering possibly "faith", "hope" or "desperation" before deciding to leave it to the readers.  The choice of red for the background was interesting.

By Sunday 21 July it seems the cold hard numbers had been assembled and presented to Mr Biden, explaining that not only could he not win the presidency but that with him as a candidate, The Democrats would likely lose control of the Senate and the Republicans would increase their majority in the House of Representatives.  Senile or not, Mr Biden can still comprehend basic electoral arithmetic and understand the implication for his “legacy” were he to cling to something his very presence was making a losing cause.  His statement on X (formerly known as Twitter) was essentially the same as that of Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) who realized the war in Vietnam had destroyed his presidency:

President Biden, 2024 (edited): “My Fellow Americans, over the past three-and-a-half years, we have made great progress as a nation.  Today, America has the strongest economy in the world.  America has never been better positioned to lead than we are today.  I know none of this could have been done without you, the American people.  Together, we overcame a once in a century pandemic and the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.  We've protected and preserved our democracy. And we've revitalised and strengthened our alliances around the world.”

“It has been the greatest honour of my life to serve as your President. And while it has been my intention to seek re-election, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term.  For now, let me express my deepest gratitude to all those who have worked so hard to see me re-elected.  I want to thank Vice President Kamala Harris for being an extraordinary partner in all this work. And let me express my heartfelt appreciation to the American people for the faith and trust you have placed in me.”

The Washington Post, 1 April 1968.

President Johnson, 1968 (edited): “With America's sons in the fields far away, with America's future under challenge right here at home, with our hopes and the world's hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes or to any duties other than the awesome duties of this office — the presidency of this country.  Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president.”

Not all were happy when crooked old Lyndon announced he would not seek another term, Carl Giles (1916–1995), Daily Express, 2 April 1968.  Reaction to senile old Joe's tweet will also be mixed.

LBJ’s legacy is now better regarded than would have been thought likely in 1968 but it’s not possible to predict what will be the fate of Mr Biden’s except to say it will at least be influenced by the outcome of the 2024 election and perception of what part his long delayed withdrawal from the contest played.  The comparisons with 1968 are inevitable for a number of reasons, not least because both presidents were products of and operatives in the Democratic Party machine and both achieved the highest office in unlikely circumstances, having earlier failed while attempting a more conventional path.  The other echo of 1968 is the prospect of an open party convention in Chicago, something the political junkies would welcome for the same reasons the party leadership will wish to avoid one; on both sides, the conventions have for decades been stage-managed affairs, something in no small part encouraged by the scenes of violence and chaos in Chicago in 1968.  Thus, what’s planned is to have Kamala Harris (b 1964; US vice president since 2021) position on the ticket stitched up by a “virtual vote” of the delegates, well in advance of the mid-August convention which can then be allowed to function as a combination of coronation and formal campaign launch.  Details about which white, male governor of which battleground state will be named as running mate have yet to be confirmed.  It’s impossible to say how good Ms Harris will be as a candidate (or for that matter as president) because until they’re in the arena (having “the blowtorch applied to the belly” as Neville Wran (1926–2014; premier of the Australian state of New South Wales (NSW) 1976-1986) put it), it won’t be known and political history is littered with examples of those of whom much was expected yet failed and of those expected to fail yet who prospered for a decade or more and not un-noticed in both parties is her unprecedented electoral advantage in being (1) not white and (2) not male, thus making available at any time accusations of racism or misogyny.  Already, some Republicans are complaining she’ll be “bubble-wrapped” by the liberal media (the outfits Mr Trump calls “the fake new media”) and they’re suggesting that any time a difficult question is asked (presumably by Fox News) it’ll be answered by “that’s sexist” or “that’s racist”.  Played selectively, they can be good cards.

So the 2024 election will be a very modern campaign.  One who must be mulling over the wisdom of doing such a good job in making Mr Biden’s candidature untenable is Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) and it was notable that in the hours after Mr Biden’s tweet, he couldn’t resist continuing his attacks of the person no longer his opponent.  It was flogging a dead horse but presumably his team had no more appropriate material available for his use.  The Trump campaign team certainly has a problem in that all the resources they have for months devoted to honing the attacks for a Trump-Biden re-match and it’s unlikely much can be re-purposed for a Trump-Harris bout.  Tellingly, perhaps because of concerns about the “racism, sexism thing”, not much thought seems to have been given to Ms Harris and even the occasionally used “laffin’ Kamala” has nothing like the ring of “crooked Hillary”, “sleepy Joe”, “the Biden crime family”, “low energy Jeb”, “crazy Bernie” “lyin’ Ted”, “Mini Mike” or any of the other monikers he used to so effectively import into political campaigning the techniques he’d perfected on reality television.  He does deliberately mispronounce “Kamala” (which, like “lafin’”, some have suggested is a coded racial slur) and, apparently impromptu, recently said “she’s nuts” but none of that suggests anything which had been well-workshopped.  The team will be aware that when dealing with a PoC (person of color) there must be caution so it'll be interesting to see what they come up with.  That caution meant Mr Trump must have regretted he couldn't use the gay slur "mayor Buttplug" of Pete Buttigieg (b 1982 US secretary of transportation since 2021), an allusion to him being (as it's still put in sections of the Republican Party) "a confessed homosexual" because "Alfred E Newman" didn't catch on, Mad Magazine now too remote for most of the population; "must be a generational thing" Mr Buttigieg said, explaining it baffled him although the resemblance certainly was striking.  

It is a whole new dynamic for the campaign but what hasn’t changed is that just as there was no great pro-Biden feeling, nor is there yet much of a pro-Harris feeling (although there may be a pro-woman & pro-PoC factor) and the 2024 poll remains pro-Trump vs anti-Trump.  Unlike a week ago, a Democrat victory is now something many are contemplating.  The critical factors are abortion which in recent months has proved an electoral asset for the Democrats and the potential a PoC has to entice to vote the habitually politically disconnected.  To win the election a party needs a surprisingly small number of these recalcitrant souls to turn out and it’s worth remembering that both Mr Biden and crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) in 2020 & 2016 respectively anyway received substantially more votes than Mr Trump.  The 2024 election can go either way and is now interesting in a way it wasn’t a week ago.

Torch Songs

The notion of “keeping the torch burning” refers to those who remain faithful to causes often thought doomed.  Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) for example never gave up the idea the Orthodox Church might one day return to communion with Rome and thus always “kept burning on the ramparts a torch to guide home the wandering daughter who ran off to Constantinople.”  It’s used also of those who never abandon the idea they might yet be reconciled with a long-lost lover and it’s those feelings which inspire the writers of “torch songs” although they are often tales of unrequited love.  Most “torch singers” seem these days to be women but the original pieces described as “torch songs” during the 1920s were performed by men although when “torch singer” came into wider use the next decades, it seems mostly to be used of women.

Over, a Lindsay Lohan torch song (official music video).

Over by John Shanks, Kara Dioguardi & Lindsay Lohan, © BMG Rights Management, Sony-ATV Music Publishing, Universal Music Publishing Group, released in 2004 on the album Speak.

I watch the walls around me crumble

But it's not like I won't build them up again

So here's your last change for redemption

So take it while it lasts because it will end

My tears are turning into time I've wasted trying to find a reason for goodbye

I can't live without you

Can't breathe without you

I'm dreamin' 'bout you honestly

Tell me that it’s over

'Cause if the world is spinning and I'm still living

It won't be right if we're not in it together

Tell me that it's over

And I'll be the first to go

Don't want to be the last to know

I won't be the one to chase you

But at the same time you're the heart that I call home

I'm always stuck with these emotions

And the more I try to feel the less I'm whole

My tears are turning into time

I've wasted trying to find a reason for goodbye

I can't live without you

Can't breathe without you

I'm dreamin' 'bout you honestly

Tell me that its over

'Cause if the world is spinning and I'm still living

It won't be right if we're not in it together

Tell me that it's over

And I'll be the first to go

Yeah, I'll be the first to go

Don't want to be the last to know

Over, over, over

My tears are turning into time

I've wasted trying to find a reason for goodbye

I can't live without you

Can't breathe without you

I'm dreamin' bout you honestly

Tell me that it’s over

'Cause if the world is spinning and I'm still living

It won't be right if we're not in it together

Tell me that it's over

Tell me that it's over

Honestly tell me,

Honestly tell me,

Don't tell me that it's over

Don't tell me that it's over.