Veto

Veto (pronounced vee-toh)

(1) In constitutional law, the power or right vested in one branch of a government to cancel or postpone the decisions, enactments etc of another branch, especially the right of a president, governor, or other chief executive to reject bills passed by a legislature.

(2) The exercise of this right.

(3) In the UN Security Council, a non-concurring vote by which one of the five permanent members (China, France, Russia, UK & US) can overrule the actions or decisions of the meeting on most substantive matters.  By practice and convention, in the context of geopolitics, this is "the veto power".

(4) Emphatically to prohibit something.

1620–1630: From the Latin vetō (I forbid), the first person singular present indicative of vetāre (forbid, prohibit, oppose, hinder (perfect active vetuī, supine vetitum)) from the earlier votō & votāre, from the Proto-Italic wetā(je)-, from the primitive Indo-European weth- (to say).  In ancient Rome, the vetō was the technical term for a protest interposed by a tribune of the people against any measure of the Senate or of the magistrates.  As a verb, use dates from 1706.  Veto is a noun, verb and adjective, vetoless is a (non-standard) adjective and vetoer is a noun; the noun plural is vetoes.  In the language of the diplomatic toolbox the related forms pre-veto, re-veto, un-veto & non-veto, used with and without the hyphen.

The best known power of veto is that exercised by the five permanent members (P5) of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).  The UNSC is an organ of the UN which uniquely possesses the authority to issue resolutions binding upon member states and its powers include creating peacekeeping missions, imposing international sanctions and authorizing military action.  The UNSC has a standing membership of fifteen, five of which (China, France, Russia, the UK and the USA) hold permanent seats, the remaining ten elected by the UNGA (UN General Assembly) on a regional basis for two year terms.  P5 representatives can veto any substantive resolution including the admission of new UN member states or nominations for UN Secretary-General (the UN’s CEO).  The term “united nations” was used as early as 1943, essentially as a synonym for the anti-Axis allies and was later adopted as the name for the international organization which replaced the League of Nations (LoN, 1920-1946) which had in the 1930s proved ineffectual in its attempts to maintain peace.  When the UN was created, its structural arrangements were designed to try to avoid the problems which beset the LoN which, under its covenant, could reach decisions only by unanimous vote and this rule applied both to the League's council (which the specific responsibility of maintaining peace) and the all-member assembly.  In effect, each member state of the League had the power of the veto, and, except for procedural matters and a few specified topics, a single "nay" killed any resolution.  Learning from this mistake, the founders of the UN decided all its organs and subsidiary bodies should make decisions by some type of majority vote (although when dealing with particularly contentious matters things have sometimes awaited a resolution until a consensus emerges).

The creators of the UN Charter always conceived the three victorious “great powers” of World War II (1939-1945), the UK, US & USSR, because of their roles in the establishment of the UN, would continue to play important roles in the maintenance of international peace and security and thus would have permanent seats on the UNSC with the power to veto resolutions.  To this arrangement was added (4) France (at the insistence of Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) who wished to re-build the power of France as a counterweight to Germany and (5) China, included because Franklin Roosevelt (1882-1940 US president 1933-1945) was perceptive in predicting the country’s importance in the years to come.  This veto is however a power only in the negative.  Not one of the permanent members nor even all five voting in (an admittedly improbable) block can impose their will in the absence of an overall majority vote of the Security Council.  Nor is an affirmative vote from one or all of the permanent five necessary: If a permanent member does not agree with a resolution but does not wish to cast a veto, it may choose to abstain, thus allowing the resolution to be adopted if it obtains the required majority among the fifteen.

Lindsay Lohan meeting Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (b 1954; prime-minister or president of the Republic of Türkiye since 2003), Ankara, January 2017.

As part of her efforts during 2017 drawing attention to the plight of Syrian refugees, Lindsay Lohan was received by the president of Türkiye.  As well as issuing a statement on the troubles of refugees and IDPs (internally displaced persons) in the region, Ms Lohan also commented on another matter raised by Mr Erdogan: the need to reform the structure of the UNSC which still exists in substantially the form created in 1945, despite the world’s economic and geopolitical realities having since much changed with only the compositional alteration being the PRC (People's Republic of China) in 1971 taking the place of the renegade province of Taiwan, pursuant to UNGA Resolution 2758, which recognized the PRC as “the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations” and expelled “the representatives” of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek (1887-1975; leader of the Republic of China (mainland) 1928-1949 & the renegade province of Taiwan.  In an Instagram post, Ms Lohan used the phrase “the world is bigger than five.  Five big nations made promises but they did not keep them.”  Despite her efforts, reform of the UNSC has advanced little because although consensus might be reached on extending permanent membership to certain nations, it remains doubtful all of the P5 (the permanent five members) would achieve consensus for this including the veto.  That would have the effect of replacing the present two-tier structure with three layers and it seems also unlikely a state like India would accept the “second class status” inherent in a permanent seat with no veto.

The Vatican, the CCP and the bishops, real & fake

A well-known and economically significant niche in modern Chinese manufacturing is fakes.  Most obvious are fake Rolexes, fake Range Rovers et al but Peking for decades produced fake bishops.  After the Holy See and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) sundered diplomatic relations in 1951, papal appointments to Chinese bishoprics were not recognized by Peking which appointed their own.  In retaliation, popes refused to acknowledge the fakes who in turn ignored him, the amusing clerical stand-off lasting until January 2018 when negotiations appeared to produce a face-saving (sort-of) concordat.  As a prelude, Rome retired or re-deployed a number of their bishops in order to make way for new (once-fake) bishops, nominated by the CCP and, in a telling gesture, Pope Francis (b 1936; pope 2013-2025) re-admitted to "full ecclesial communion" seven living Chinese bishops who were ordained before the deal without Vatican approval, and had thus incurred a latae sententiae (literally "of a judgment having been brought") penalty.  Long a feature of the Catholic Church's canon law, a latae sententiae works as an administrative act, the liability for which is imposed ipsō factō (literally "by the same fact" and in law understood as "something inherently consequent upon the act").  What that means is the penalty is applied at the moment the unlawful act is done; no judicial or administrative actions needs be taken for this to happen.  Thus, at the point of non-Vatican approved ordination, all fake bishops were excommunicated.

On 22 September 2018, a provisional agreement was signed.  It (1) cleared the Chinese decks of any bishops (fake or real) not acceptable to either side, (2) granted the CCP the right to nominate bishops (the list created with the help of a CCP-run group called the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association (CCPA) and (3) granted the pope a right of veto.  Although not mentioned by either side, the most important understanding between the parties seemed to be the hints the CCP sent through diplomatic channels that the pope would find their lists of nominees “helpful”.  If so, such a document deserved to be thought "a secret protocol" to the "Holy See-CCP Pact but however the sausages were made, it was a diplomatic triumph for Beijing.  Although Rome at the time noted it was a “provisional agreement”, many observed that unless things proved most unsatisfactory, it was doubtful Rome would be anxious again to draw attention to the matter because, whatever the political or theological implications, to acquiesce to the pope as cipher would diminish the church’s mystique.

Things may be worse even than the cynics had predicted.  In late 2020 the two-year deal handling the appointment of Chinese bishops was extended after an exchange of notes verbales (in diplomatic language, something more formal than an aide-mémoire and less formal than a note, drafted in the third person and never signed), both sides apparently wishing to continue the pact, albeit still (technically) on a temporary basis.  The uneasy entente seems however not to have lasted, Beijing in 2021, through bureaucratic process, acting as if it had never existed by issuing Order No. 15 (new administrative rules for religious affairs) which included an article on establishing a process for the selection of Catholic bishops in China after 1 May 2021.  The new edict makes no mention of any papal role in the process and certainly not a right to approve or veto episcopal appointments in China, the very thing which was celebrated in Rome as the substantive concession gained from the CCP.

Still, Beijing’s new rules have the benefit of clarity and while it's doubtful Francis held many illusions about the nature of CCP rule, he certainly had certainty for the remainder of his pontificate.  Order No. 15 requires clergy of the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Church (CPCC) to “adhere to the principle of independent and self-administered religion in China” and actively support “the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party” and “the socialist system,” as well as to “practice the core values of socialism.”  They must also promote “social harmony” which is usually interpreted as conformity of thought with those of the CCP (although in recent years that has come increasingly to be identified with the thoughts of comrade Xi Jinping (b 1953; paramount leader of China since 2012) which, historically, is an interesting comparison with the times of comrade Chairman Mao Zedong (1893–1976; chairman of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) 1949-1976).  Essentially, the CPCC is an arm of the CCP regime (something like "the PLA (People's Liberation Army" at prayer") and formalizing this is the requirement for bishops and priests to be licensed for ministry, much the same process as being allowed to practice as a driving instructor or electrician.

All this is presumably was a disappointment to the pope though it’s unlikely to have surprised to his critics, some of whom, when the agreement was announced in 2018 and upon renewal in 2020, predicted it would be honored by Beijing only while it proved useful for them to weaken the “underground” church and allow the CCP to assert institutional control over the CPCC.  At the time of the renewal, the Vatican issued a statement saying the agreement was “essential to guarantee the ordinary life of the Church in China.”  The CCP doubtlessly agreed with that which is why they have broken the agreement, and, if asked, presumably they would point out that, legally, it really didn’t exist, the text never having been published and only ever discussed by diplomats.  Although there are (by the Vatican's estimates) only some five million Chinese Catholics among a population of some 1.4 billion, that's still five-million potential malcontents and as the "Godless atheists" of the CCP know from their history books, that's enough to cause problems and if problems can be solved in the "preferred" CCP manner, they must be "managed".

Beware of imitations.  British Range Rover Evoque (left) and Chinese Landwind X7 (right).

Although not matching the original in specification or capabilities, the Landwind X7 sold in China for around a third what was charged for an Evoque and while it took a trained eye to tell the difference between the two, Chinese capitalism rose to the occasion and, within weeks, kits were on the market containing the badges and moldings needed to make the replication closer to exact.  Remarkably, eventually, Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) won a landmark legal case (in a Chinese court!), the judges holding the “…Evoque has five unique features that were copied directly” and that the X7’s similarity “…has led to widespread consumer confusion.”  In a decision which was the first by a Chinese court ruling favor of a foreign automaker in such a case, it was ordered Landwind immediately cease sales of the vehicle and pay compensation to JLR.  It was a bit hypocritical for the British to complain because for years shamelessly the British industry "borrowed" styling from Detroit and in the early, cash-strapped, post-war years, the Standard Motor Company (later Standard-Triumph) sent their chief stylist to sit with his sketch-pad outside the US embassy in London to "harvest" ideas from the new American cars being driven by diplomats and other staff.  That's why Standard's Phase I Vanguard (the so-called "humpback", 1947-1953) so resembles a 1946 Plymouth, somewhat unhappily shrunk in every dimension except height.  One can debate the ethics of what Landwind did but as an act of visual cloning, they did it well and as Chinese historians gleefully will attest, when it comes to cynicism and hypocrisy, the British have centuries of practice.    

Beware of imitations.  Joseph Guo Jincai (b 1968, left) was in 2010 ordained Bishop of Chengde (Hebei) today without the approval of the pope.  He is a member of the China Committee on Religion and Peace and was appointed a deputy to the thirteenth National People's Congress.  Because of the circumstances of his ordination as a bishop, he was excommunicated latae sententiae but later had the consolation of being elected vice-president of Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association.  In September 2018, Francis lifted the excommunication of Joseph Guo Jincai and other six bishops previously appointed by the Chinese government without pontifical mandate.  What Francis did was something like the "re-personing" granted in post-Soviet Russia to those "un-personed" under communist rule.

Politically, one has to admire the CCP’s tactics.  Beijing pursued the 2018 deal only to exterminate the underground Catholic Church which, although for decades doughty in their resistance to persecution by the CCP (including pogroms during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976)), were compelled to transfer their allegiance to the CPCC once it received the pope’s imprimatur.  After the agreement, Chinese authorities rounded up underground Catholic clergy, warning that they would defy the pope if they continued baptizing, ordaining new clergy and praying in unregistered churches; most of those persuaded became part of the CPCC and those unconvinced resigned their ministries and returned to private life.  According to insiders, a rump underground movement still exists but it seems the CCP now regard the remnant as a terrorist organization (a la the subversive Falun Gong) and are pursuing them accordingly.

The central committee of the CCP's politburo contains operators highly skilled in the art of political opportunism and in 2025 they demonstrated their prowess during the brief interregnum between the death of PFrancis and the election of Leo XIV (b 1955; pope since 2025) when unilaterally they “elected” two bishops, one of them to a diocese already led by a Vatican-appointed bishop.  The clever maneuver took advantage of the fact that during this sede vacante (the vacancy of an episcopal see), the Holy See had been unable to ratify episcopal nominations.  The CCP clearly regards its elections as a fait accompli and one technically within the terms of the 2018 provisional agreement (most recently renewed in October 2024), adopting the pragmatic position of “what’s done is done and can’t be undone”.  The Vatican lawyers might demur and even though the terms of the agreement have never been published, the convention had evolved that Beijing would present to the Vatican a single candidate chosen by assemblies of the clergy affiliated by the CCPA; this nominee the pope could the appoint or not.  In 2025, the argument is that no veto was exercised which, during a sede vacante, was of course impossible but it’s no secret that in recent years Beijing has on a number of occasions violated the agreement.  The CCP are of the “how many divisions has he got” school established by comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953), practiced with the “take whatever you can grab” ethos of capitalism which modern China has embraced with muscular efficiency.

The files were among the many piled in Leo’s in-tray and keenly Vaticanologists awaited his response and the new pope didn’t long delay, in June 2025 appointing Bishop Joseph Lin Yuntuan (b 1952) as an assistant in Fuzhou, the capital of the south-eastern Fujian province.  Unlike bishoprics elsewhere, analysts made no mention of whether the appointee belong to the “liberal” or “conservative” factions but focused instead on both sides exhibiting a clear desire to “continue on the path of reconciliation”.  In a statement, the Holy See Press Office stressed “final decision-making power” remained with the pope while for Beijing the attraction was the (substantial) resolution of the decades-long split between the underground church loyal to Rome and the state-supervised CCPA although there are doubtless still renegades being pursued.  Lin had in 2017 been ordained a bishop in the underground church and had the CCP wished to maintain an antagonism it could of course declined to countenance the appointment of a character with such a dubious past but the installation’s rubber-stamping in both states seems a clear indication both wish to maintain the still uneasy accord.  During the ceremony, Bishop Lin swore to abide by Chinese laws and safeguard social harmony.

Monospecchio

Monospecchio (pronounced mon-oh-spec-kjo)

The Italian for “one mirror”, a descriptor applied to the early production (1984-1987) Ferrari Testarossas (1984-1991).   

1984: The construct was mono- + specchio.  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- (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).  The Italian specchio (mirror, table, chart) was from the Vulgar Latin speclum, a syncopated form of the Classical Latin speculum, the construct being speciō +‎ -culum.  Speciō (observe, watch, look at) was from the From Proto-Italic spekjō, from the primitive Indo-European spéḱyeti which was cognate with the Ancient Greek σκέπτομαι (sképtomai), the Avestan (spasyeiti), and the Sanskrit पश्यति (páśyati).  The suffix –culum was (with anaptyxis) from the Proto-Italic -klom, from the primitive Indo-European -tlom, from -trom.  Despite the resemblance, ōsculum and other diminutive nouns do not contain this suffix which was used to form some nouns derived from verbs, particularly nouns representing tools and instruments.

1957 Ferrari 250 Testa Rossa in Rosso Corsa.

The 250 Testa Rossa was created because rule changes for the 1958 season imposed a 3.0 litre displacement limit, rendering the 3.8 Litre 315 S obsolete.  A 250 Testa Rossa sold in a private sale in 2014 for a reported US$39.8 million, exceeding somewhat the US$16.39 million one achieved at auction in 2011.  The (testra rossa literally “red head” in Italian) was a revival of one the factory had last used on the 1954 500 TR, the visual link to the name the red paint applied to the engines' camshaft covers.  The 250 Testa Rossa was part of the team which contributed to Scudaria Ferrari winning the the 1957 World Sportscar Championship. 

BB & BB:  Ferrari 365 GT4 BB (left) on display at the 1971 Turin Motor Show and Brigitte Bardot, supine, 1968 (right).

Appearing also in Formula One and sports car racing, between 1973-1996 Ferrari to used a flat-12 win a number of road cars.  Pedants insist the engines were really 180^o V12s ("flattened V12" in the engineer's slang) because of a definitional distinction related to the attachment and movement of internal components; the external shape is essentially identical but the factory was in general a bit loose with the nomenclature on which purists like to insist.  The first of the road-going flat-12 Ferraris was the 365 GT4 BB (1973-1984), the “BB” long thought to stand for Berlinetta Boxer but Road & Track in 2018 noted RoadRat's publication of an interview with the BB’s designer, Leonardo Fioravanti (b 1938) who admitted it was named after the actress Brigitte Bardot (b 1934), simply because the staff in Ferrari's design office were as besotted with Mademoiselle Bardot as engineers everywhere; "Berlinetta Boxer" was just a cover story.  There’s an undeniable similarity in the pleasing lines of the two and on the factory website, Ferrari later confirmed the story.  Until then "Berlinetta Boxer" was the orthodoxy although there must have been enough suspicion about for someone to speculate the origin might be bialbero, (literally "twin shaft"), a clipping of bialbero a camme in testa (double overhead camshaft (DOHC)) which was from the slang of Italian mechanics.

1975 Ferrari 365 GT4 BB in Verde Germoglio with satin black lower panels over Nero leather.

The Italian berlinetta translates as “little saloon” and is the diminutive of berlina (sedan) and the 365 GT4 BB in no way resembled a saloon, small or large, Ferrari using the word to describe a two-seat car with a closed cockpit (convertibles are Spiders or Spyders), referred to by most as a coupé.  Nor was the Ferrari’s flat-12 technically a boxer, the boxer configuration one where each pair of opposed pistons move inwards and outwards in unison, the imagery being that of a pugilist, ritualistically thumping together their gloves prior to a bout.  The Ferrari unit instead used the same arrangement as a conventional V12, each pair of pistons sharing a crankpin whereas as true boxer has a separate crankpin for each piston.  This is one practical reason why boxer engines tend not to have many cylinders, the need for additional crankpins adding to weight & length.  Thus the earlier flat-16s, the Coventry Climax FWMW (1963-1965) intended for Formula One and the unit Porsche developed in 1971 for the Can-Am and tested in chassis 917-027 weren't boxers although bulk was anyway a factor in both proving abortive, Porsche instead turbo-charging their flat-12 and Coventry Climax giving up entirely, the FWMW having never left the test-bench.  Despite it all, just about everybody calls the 365 GT4 BB “the Boxer” and its engine a “flat-12”, the factory clearly unconcerned and while cheerfully acknowledging the technical differences, their documents refer to it variously as a “boxer”, a “180^o v12”, a “flat-12” & a “boxer-type” engine.

1985 Ferrari Testarossa “monospecchio-monodado” in Rosso Corsa over Beige leather.  The early cars were fitted with centre-lock magnesium-alloy wheels, chosen for their lightness but, responding to feedback from the dealer network, as a running-change during 1988, these were substituted for units with a conventional five-bolt design.  The centre-lock wheels were called monodado (one nut) while the five lug-types were the cinquedado (five nut) and because of the time-line, while all the monospecchio cars are also monodado, only some of the monodaddi are monospecchi.

When first shown at the Paris Motor Show in 1984, two features of the Testarossa which attracted much comment were the distinctive strakes which ran almost from the front of the door to the radiator air-intakes ahead of the rear wheel arch and the single, high-mounted external mirror (on the left or right depending on the market into which it was sold).  The preferred term is the native “monospecchio” (one mirror) although in the English speaking-world it has also been called the “flying mirror", rendered sometimes in Italian as “specchio volante” (a ordinary wing mirror being a “specchietto laterale esterno” (external side mirror), proving most things sound better in Italian.  The unusual placement and blatant asymmetry of the monospecchi cars annoyed some and delighted others, the unhappy more disgruntled still if they noticed the vent on right of the front spoiler not being matched by one to the left.  It was there to feed the air-conditioning’s radiator and while such offset singularities are not unusual in cars, many manufacturers create a matching fake as an aesthetic device: the functionalists at Ferrari did not.

Monospecchio: Lindsay Lohan selfies, one mirror at a time.

The regulatory environment in various jurisdictions was a matter of great significance in the Testarossa’s development.  None of the versions of the Berlinetta Boxer had ever been certified for sale in the US which had been Ferrari’s most lucrative market and a core objective was for the Testarossa to be able easily to meet the current & projected regulations in places like the US and EU (European Union) where rules were most strict.  The number of Boxers which privately had been imported into the US to be subjected to the so-called “federalization” process was an indication demand there existed for a mid-engined, 12 cylinder Ferrari.

1985 Ferrari Testarossa “monospecchio-monodado” in Rosso Corsa over Beige leather.  On left-hand-drive (LHD) cars the asymmetric mirror and intake for the air-conditioner's radiator were both on the left; on right-hand-drive (RHD) models the mirror shifted to the other side.

One piece of legislation which soon attracted attention was the EU’s stipulations about “full rearward visibility” in the side-view mirrors.  With conventionally shaped automobiles this is usually unchallenging for designers but the Testarossa had a very wide, ascending waist-line and the sheer size of the rear bodywork was necessitated by the twin radiators which sat behind the side-strakes.  As the team interpreted the rule, the elevation of the mirror was the only way to conform but the bureaucrats proved untypically helpful, not changing the rule but providing an interpretation which would make possible the installation of the mirror at the traditional level.  That alone may have been enough to convince the factory to change but there had also been complaints, many from the US, that the monospecchio restricted the vision of oncoming traffic and many missed having a passenger-side mirror, remarking too on the difficulties found when trying rapidly to adapt to the placement, few owners using a Testarossa as their only car.  Thus was taken the decision to phase in the fitting of dual mirrors, mounted in a conventional position at the base of the A pillars.  Shown at the 1986 Geneva Motor Show, the first examples of the new arrangement were those built for European sale, a handful bound for the US revised initially in 1987 with a single, low-mounted mirror before later gaining the same dual arrangement as those sold in Europe.

1959 MGA Twin Cam Roadster with central, dash mounted mirror.  In the era, side-mirrors tended to be factory options, dealer-fitter or from the after-market.

Historically, there was nothing unusual about a car having only a driver's side mirror and while that fitting wasn't common until the 1950s, it would not be for some two decades after that before, in the West, two became (more or less) standard.  Prior to that, on passenger vehicles, it wasn't uncommon for a passenger's side mirror to be seen only on vehicles used for towing.  The usefulness of mirrors had been understood in the early days of motoring and, three-quarters of a century before the debut of the Testarossa, had been controversial, US racing driver Ray Harroun (1879–1968) fitting one to the Marmon Wasp with he would win the inaugural Indianapolis 500 (1911).  The fitting of a rear-view mirror was not against the rules but what Harroun did was use it as a substitute for the observer (styled the “riding mechanic”) who race regulations required to be seated alongside the driver.  His argument prevailed and the observers, victims of technological change, began to vanish from the closed circuits although to this day (variously as mechanics, co-drivers, navigators etc) they remain a part of long-distance events on public roads.

An earlier monospecchio: 1964 Maserati 5000 GT (103-062) by Allemano with dash-mounted rear-view mirror and driver's side “bullet” door mirror.  Between 1959-1966, 34 Maserati 5000 GTs were built, 22 by Allemano, 4 by Touring, 3 by Fura, 2 by Monterosa, 1 by Bertone, 1 by Ghia and 1 by Scaglietti (Pininfarina).  As far as is known, the Allemano 103-062 was the only one factory-fitted with a side-mirror and because these are now museum pieces rarely driven on the road, restorers tend to remove from 5000 GTs any after-market mirrors.

The Cartoon Network's Powderpuff Girls (2016-2019, left) and their inspiration, Stratton Art Deco style Poppy Flower Powder compact (1970s, centre & right (on doily)).

Women are of course better acquainted with mirrors than (most) men and even though phones now include a “mirror app” (ie the front facing camera), many still carry in the apparently compulsory handbag a “compact” (a slim folding case (the internal side of the lid featuring a mirror) containing a powder-puff and pressed face-powder (finely milled powder compressed into what appears a solid cake form but is not chemically a solid in the rigid sense but rather a mechanically bound aggregate of particles)).  Compact carrier (and holder of the world's first WSR (water speed record) & the women's world LSR (land speed record)) Dorothy Levitt (1882–1922) well understood the value of a mirror and in her book The Woman and the Car: A Chatty Little Handbook for All Women who Motor or who Want to Motor (1906) she recommended her fellow “motorinas” always to keep in some convenient spot a small hand-mirror which should be “held aloft from time to time” to afford a view of what lay behind.  In the UK, fixed mirrors began to appear on automobiles in 1914 and manufacturers used various placements including the now familiar mounting at the top-centre of the windscreen as well as on the dashboard, in the middle of the bonnet (hood), on the fenders and on the door.  While a mirror of some type was in some cases required by law (usually on the dash or above), not until well into the post-war years would regulators get interested in door mirrors.  Beginning in the 1970s, many door mirrors visually became “A-pillar mirrors” after the Mercedes-Benz R107 (1971-1989) popularized the new location.

1968 Toyota 2000GT (1967-1970) with fendā mirā.

Some jurisdictions however not only mandated twin mirrors but also their placement, cars produced for the JDM (Japanese domestic market) were between 1952 and 1983 required to have a matching set of フェンダーミラー (fendā mirā (an adaptation of the US -English “fender mirror”, known in the UK as “wing mirrors”.)) and these sat about mid-way between the base of the A-pillar and front bumper bar.  They provided a good rearward view but did have the disadvantage of not being easily adjustable by a driver although some very expensive models were fitted with small electric motors for remote control.  The law was in 1983 liberalized only because Western manufacturers had argued the refusal to allow the door-mounted mirrors (which had by then long been elsewhere the standard) was a “non-tariff trade barrier”.  This was one foreign intrusion into Japanese life which attracted no complaint, JDM consumers overwhelmingly choosing the door mirrors when offered the option and soon the fendā mirā were phased-out, pleasing the manufacturers who no longer had to have different fittings for their RoW (rest of the world) production.

Fendā mirā old and new in Tokyo taxi livery: Toyota Crown Comfort (left) and Toyota JPN (right).  As well as the white gloves, one tradition which has been inherited by the new taxis is the use of "car doilies" (more correctly antimacassars).

The one exception was the taxi fleet and even now, fendā mirā continue to be fitted to most JDM vehicles built for the taxi market because not only do they provide a wider vista, they also protrude less from the body, something of some significance in the crowded traffic plying the often narrow roads in Japanese cities; for taxi drivers, every saved millimetre can be precious.  Sociologists explain the there is also a cultural imperative, the fender mirrors allowing customers to feel a greater sense of privacy because drivers can use the mirrors without turning their head toward the passenger seat; such a glance could be misconstrued and face could be lost.  Traditionalists, some Japanese taxi drivers still wear the white gloves the companies once required but technological change may threaten the fendā mirā because Nissan no longer produces its traditional sedan for the taxi market and while since 2017 the hybrid Toyota JPN (with fendā mirā) has become the taxi of choice, some operators are using the company's Prius and its shape really permits only door mirrors.  Despite Nissan withdrawing from the market, in the US the slang "Datsun mirrors" still is used to describe the type and there is a small but dedicated cult which retro-fits fendā mirā for that "authentic" Japanese look.   

1989 Ferrari Testarossa "doppiospecchio-cinquedado" in Giallo over Nero leather.

The distinctive side strakes were added because of a unique FRG (Federal Republic of Germany, the old West Germany) regulation which specified the maximum dimensions of apertures, the purpose said to be to prevent a child's head from entering such an opening during an accident.  Thus the fins but as well as meeting the rules, they were designed to take advantage of the properties of fluid dynamics, the air-flow being made less "wavy" and thus reducing turbulence, two vertical fins added to direct lateral air-flow directly into the radiators.  The engineering of the strakes was sound and most thought them aesthetically well-executed but they created such a stir that unfortunately, on both side of the Atlantic, a number of imitators quickly rendered usually fake versions in fibreglass, gluing them to Jaguars, BMWs, Mercedes-Benz and such.  Almost all were applied to cars with front-mounted radiators but this was the 1980s and a subset of the market was receptive.

Caveat emptor: 1986 Ferrari Testarossa in Rosso Corsa over Nero leather in "volante doppiospecchio-monodado" trim.

Being Ferraris with a certain cachet, the monospecchio cars attract additional interest and inevitably there is fakery and folklore.  There exists the odd early Testarossa with either double-high or double-low (doppiospecchio) mirrors but these are assumed to be modifications installed either by dealers or owners and there was at a time, a lot of it about.  It wasn’t a simple job, requiring one or two mirrors, window frames and support assemblies and thus always cost somewhere in four figures but, like those who once converted their now precious 1963 split-window Chevrolet Corvettes to 1964’s single piece of glass lest they be thought driving last year’s model, there were those who didn’t wish to look outdated (ironically, the 1963 coupés are now among the more coveted of the breed and there are later C2 coupés which were at some point "backdated").  Also, with over 7,000 sold, the Testarossa was, by Ferrari’s standards at the time, almost mass-produced and in the aftermath of the severe recession of the early 1990s a glut emerged which for years depressed prices; originality not then the fetish it would later become, sometimes ill-advised modifications became uncommon.  Still, the factory was known to accommodate special requests from good customers so if a doppiospecchio with high mounts does show up, accompanied with the vital proof of authenticity, it would add a notch of desirability.  Market support for Ferrari’s flat-12 ecosystem (Boxer, Testarossa & 512 TR) is now healthy and, while not matching the buoyancy of the pre-1973 cars (and certainly not the 206 & 246 Dinos which all but the most pedantic now accept as "Ferraris"), operates well into US$ six figures, the quirk of the monospecchio cars making them much fancied.

Adhesive

Adhesive (pronounced ad-hee-siv or ad-hee-ziv)

(1) Something coated with glue, paste, mastic, or other sticky substance (which may be intended for either temporary or permanent purposes); a substance that causes something to adhere, as glue or rubber cement.

(2) Figuratively, tenacious or clinging.

(3) Sticking fast; sticky; apt or tending to adhere; clinging.

(4) In physics, of or relating to the molecular force that exists in the area of contact between unlike bodies and that acts to unite them.

(5) The quality or degree of stickiness in the physical sense; relating to adhesion.

(6) In philately, a postage stamp with a gummed back, as distinguished from one embossed or printed on an envelope or card.

1660s: The adjective meaning “sticky, cleaving or clinging” was from the French adhésif, from the Latin adhaesivus, from adhaereō (supine adhaesum). The French construct was formed from the Latin adhaes-, past-participle stem of adhaerere (stick to), the source also of adherent.  The noun was derived from the adjective and emerged in 1881, original as a descriptor of postage stamps (as a clipping of the original (1840) adhesive stamp, the word later adopted in philately as a technical distinction between the classic stick-on stamps and other types.  Around the turn of the twentieth century, it was used in the general sense of "a substance that causes to adhere", as a point of differentiation from simple glue.  The spelling adhæsive is obsolete.

Because of the use in engineering, science, industry & commerce, adhesive is a popular modifier, the forms including adhesive capsulitis, adhesive tape, hot melt adhesive, self-adhesive, adhesive bra, adhesive bandage, adhesive binding, adhesive plaster & adhesive tape.  Words related to adhesive (in the physical or figurative sense depending on context) sense include gummy, sticky, adherent, holding, hugging, pasty, adhering, agglutinant, attaching, clinging, clingy, gelatinous, glutinous, gooey, gummed, mucilaginous, resinous, tenacious, viscid & viscous.  Adhesive is a noun & adjective, adhesion is a noun, adhesively is an adverb and adhesiveness is a noun; the noun plural is adhesives.

Piet Mondrian, neo-plastic painting and adhesive tape

Piet Mondrian’s (1872-1944) 1941 New York City 1 is a series of abstract works created with multi-colored adhesive paper tape.  One version first exhibited at New York’s Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) in 1945 has since 1980 hung in the Düsseldorf Museum as part of the Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen’s collection and recently it was revealed for the past 77 years it has been hanging upside down.  The work is unsigned, sometimes an indication the artist deemed it unfinished but Mondrian left no notes.

Mondrian’s 1941 New York City 1 as it (presumably correctly) sat in the artist's studio in 1944 (left) and as it was since 1945 exhibited (upside-down) in New York and Düsseldorf (right).  Spot the difference. 

The decades-long, trans-Atlantic mistake came to light during a press conference held to announce the Kunstsammlung’s new Mondrian exhibition.  During research for the show, a photograph of Mondrian’s studio taken shortly after his death showed the work oriented in the opposite direction and this is being treated as proof of the artist’s intension although experts say the placement of the adhesive tape on the unsigned painting also suggests the piece was hung upside down.  How the error occurred is unclear but when first displayed at MOMA, it may have been as simple as the packing-crate being overturned or misleading instructions being given to the staff.  However, 1941 New York City 1 will remain upside because of the condition of the adhesive strips.  “The adhesive tapes are already extremely loose and hanging by a thread,” a curator was quoted as saying, adding that if it were now to be turned-over, “…gravity would pull it into another direction.  And it’s now part of the work’s story.”

1941 New York City 1, Paris Museum of Modern Art.

The curator made the point that as hung, the interlacing lattice of red, yellow, black and blue adhesive tapes thicken towards the bottom, suggesting a sparser skyline but that “…the thickening of the grid should be at the top, like a dark sky” and another of Mondrian’s creations in a similar vein (the oil on canvas New York City I (1942)) hangs in the Musée National d’Art Moderne in Paris with the thickening of lines at the top.  Whether Mondrian intended 1941 New York City 1 to be part of his oeuvre or it was just a mock-up in adhesive tape for the oil-on canvas composition to follow isn’t known, artists having many reasons for leaving works unsigned.  Mondrian was one of the more significant theorists of abstract art and its withdrawal from nature and natural subjects.  "Denaturalization" he proclaimed to be a milestone in human progress, adding: "The power of neo-plastic painting lies in having shown the necessity of this denaturalization in painterly terms... to denaturalize is to abstract... to abstract is to deepen."   

Lindsay Lohan adhesive stickers.

Adhesives in applied structural engineering

Conventional "backless" bras.

The term "backless bra" can be misleading in that most of them aren't actually built without a back-strap; rather the strap is engineered in a variety of ways to sit well below the shoulder-blades, usually somewhere around the lower back; the "backless" is a reference to the back-strap not being visible when the wearer is clothed.  Often that's enough to suit the outfit with which it's being paired but sometimes there's a need to expose the whole back and here an adhesive bra can be the solution.  Adhesive bras (single-use and re-usable and sometimes called "stick-on bras" or "stickies") are specialized devices which have a large part of the surface-area facing the skin coated with a medical-grade adhesive.  Made usually from silicone or polyurethane and available in a variety of designs (in one and two-piece configurations), almost all are strapless or backless and the variations in design exist to accommodate the different clothes under which the bra will be worn.  One chooses one’s adhesive bra cognizant of the dress or top to be worn, the idea being that once dressed, only skin and fabric should be visible.  In cases where no commercially available adhesive bra is quite right, a variety of medical-grade tapes (sold as tit-tape, skin-tape, boob-tape et al) can be used including double-sided versions which can hold the fabric of clothes in place.  These have the advantage of being able to be rendered in whatever shape is required but can be difficult to apply single-handedly although boyfriends and girlfriends should be anxious to assist.  Experts suggest avoiding the cheapest on the market because some of there are not medical grade and there's the risk of minor skin damage and consequent infection.

For those (regardless of size) who don’t require lift and need only to minimize lateral movement, the two-piece units (which can use a central coupling depending on the outfit) are ideal because they are available in versions with a smaller surface area, some of which use a higher percentage of the adhesive material to adhere to skin below the bust-line which can be helpful.  These are essentially a modern variation of the pasties (adhesive patches worn over the nipples by exotic dancers) from the late 1950s with some structural engineering added to enhance support.

Most two-piece adhesive bras are a pair of stand-alone units but some offer the option of centre-adjustments.  The methods vary, some using Velcro, the familiar hook & eye combination or buckles but the most popular type use shoe-lace style ties.  The scope of adjustment offered is not only lateral (forcing the flesh towards the centre) but also vertical (forcing the flesh upwards), both movements enhancing cleavage and this permits the same bra to be used for more than one style of outfit.

Although mostly associated with backless and strapless styles, adhesive bras are also available which accommodate plunging necklines.  The two-piece units allow designers to display a cut to the waist but more modest renditions, optimized for cleavage, use a kind of cantilever, usually called the “plunge”.

Adhesive cooperate with rather than defy the laws of physics and there are limits to the volumes which can be accommodated.  As a general principle, as the movable mass (and in this case there’s not always a direct correlation between weight and volume) increases, the surface area of the adhesive material which adheres to skin above the functional centre of gravity (essentially the pivot point) should increase.  That means larger sizes can be handled for backless dresses and even plunges are possible but it won’t be possible always to display the skin on the upper poles and designs required to secure a greater mass can be less comfortable because they often include some variation of an underwire to guarantee structural integrity.  As with all forms of structural engineering (essentially, making push equal pull), the physics involved means there are limits to what can be done.