Oiler

Oiler (pronounced oi-ler)

(1) A person or device which is some way delivers oil.

(2) A worker employed to oil machinery.

(3) Any of several devices, other than pressure devices, for feeding lubricating oil to a bearing.

(4) In oil exploration, a productive well.

(5) An oilcan.

(6) An oilskin garment, especially a coat.

(7) A ship which uses oil as fuel (archaic).

(8) In admiralty slang, an oil tanker used to refuel other vessels.

(9) In admiralty slang, an assistant in the engine room of a ship, senior only to a wiper, mainly responsible for keeping machinery lubricated (archaic).

(10) In the cleaning kits of firearms, a small (typically thumb-sized) metal container of oil, often containing an integral brush.

(11) As an ethnic slur (mostly southern US), a Mexican (sometimes extended to other of Latino appearance.

Circa 1290: The construct was oil + -er.  Oil was from the Middle English olyer, oyller & oyellere (the later alternative spellings included oylle, olie, oli, eoli, eoyle, olige, oyll, uile, oile & oyl.  Oyler was from the Anglo-Norman olie and the Old French oile, from the Latin oleum (olive oil), from the Ancient Greek ἔλαιον (élaion) (olive oil).  The –er suffix was from the Middle English –er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, thought most likely to have been borrowed from the Latin –ārius where, as a suffix, it was used to form adjectives from nouns or numerals.  In English, the –er suffix, when added to a verb, created an agent noun: the person or thing that doing the action indicated by the root verb.   The use in English was reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French –or & -eor (the Anglo-Norman variant -our), from the Latin -ātor & -tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.  When appended to a noun, it created the noun denoting an occupation or describing the person whose occupation is the noun.  The meaning “an appliance for distributing oil in machines" was in use by 1861 and was adopted by the British Admiralty in 1916 to describe "navy vessels carrying oil for use by other ships"; although such vessels had been in use for some years, the Royal Navy having begun the conversion from coal to oil a decade earlier, by 1911 only the submarine fleet ran exclusive on oil and coal (sometimes sprayed with oil) still fuelled most of the navy’s vessels.  Oiler is a noun; the noun plural is oilers.

Evolution of the Ford 427 side-oiler

The side valve (usually called “the flathead”, an allusion to the almost flat plate covering the combustion chambers) Ford V8 of 1932 is remembered for its vices as well as the many things which made it one of the great engines of the mid-century.  In the 1930s, those vices could be both forgiven and worked-around but by 1953, it was still in production and outdated (though in overseas production it would continue, in French Simca cars until 1961, in Brazilian Fords until 1964 and remarkably, until 1990 in the Simca Unic Marmon Bocquet military truck.  For 1954, Ford responded to the modern overhead valve (OHV) V8s others had introduced with the debut of two new engines, essentially (by the standards of the time) small and big block versions of the same design.  Known as the Y-Blocks because of the shape of the castings, they were sturdy pieces of machinery and addressed many of the problems identified in the flathead over two decades of production but neither was suited to the evolutionary path the American automobile unexpectedly would take during the mid-late 1950s.

Top oiler: 1962 Ford 406 FE V8 with 3 x 2 barrel carburetors.

That path was not one which anyone in Detroit was likely to foresee in the late 1940s when the design work on the Y-Blocks began but by 1954, it was at least competitive with the competition.  However, in 1955, Chevrolet introduced their small-block V8 which was light, compact and free-breathing, not something which could be said of the Y-Blocks and more importantly, the design afforded a potential for development which would play out over decades.  By contrast, the Y-Blocks’ potential in both capacity and power output soon plateaued and Ford was forced to resort to exotic solutions like supercharging, something not practical for low-cost mass-manufacturing.  Ford’s solution was not one new V8 but three.  All released during 1958, the SD (Super Duty, a large, low revving truck engine), the MEL (a big block for what were now very large Lincolns and Mercurys) and the FE (thought at the time a big-block but subsequently listed by pedants as a mid-block because later castings would out-weigh it by so much).  The durable SD would remain in the catalogue until 1980, its demise prompted only by the implications of the second oil-shock in 1979, the sole complaint about it being its prodigious thirst.  The MEL would last a decade, early attempts to use it on the race-tracks abandoned because of the penalty imposed by excessive weight although it did enjoy some success in powerboat racing where it’s capacity to run reliably at full throttle for sustained periods was highly valued.

Side oiler: 1966 Ford 427 FE V8 side oiler with tunnel-port cylinder heads and Kar-Kraft transaxle, the specification used in the mid-engined Ford GT40s which recorded a 1-2-3 finish at that year's 24 Le Mans 24 hour classic.

Although rapidly it would earn a stellar reputation which endures to this day, Ford’s FE V8 engine didn’t enjoy a wholly auspicious start, associated as it was with the ill-fated Edsel (FE really did stand for “Ford-Edsel” despite some post-debacle attempts to suggest “Ford Engine” (the contemporary MEL decodes as Mercury-Edsel-Lincoln)).  However, whatever the problems of the Edsel, the use of the FE in some was not one.  Offered in its first few seasons in several displacements, the most produced in the 1960s would be the 352 & 390 cubic inch (5.8 & 6.5 litre) versions, both of which briefly were offered in high-performance versions until the decision was taken to develop such engines (to be used in competition) as a separate FE branch, the first fruit of which was the 406 (6.6 litre) which debuted in 1962.  The 406 had performed well on Ford’s test-rigs, its output slightly exceeding the engineers’ projections and when installed in the new, slippery bodies offered that year, the combination proved fast on the racetracks.  The power however came at the cost of reliability and the increasing speeds on the circuits had exposed weaknesses in the bottom-end, the main bearing caps “walking” when vibrations attained a certain resonance.

Hair oiler: Lindsay Lohan recommends Nexxus Hair Oil and provided the following technical advice for hair care: "I would select three. I love the hair oil because I think we always tend to overdo putting products in our hair, so it's good to give it some rest and let it refresh and replenish. I love a hairspray that doesn't make your hair hard and crunchy. And so the Nexxus XXL Volume Spray does that—it holds, but it doesn't make your hair feel icky, and that's important to me. And then the Slick Stick is good because I mean, I'm always on the go and sometimes I just need it to look nice and chic and back and clean-looking. So that's perfect for that. These are actually products that I use and like."

By their bolts they shall be known.  By convention a "four bolter" was one with the four all into the boss while in a "cross bolter" two were in the boss and two into the block.  "Six bolters" (with four in the boss, two in the block) are now common.

The solution was to “cross-bolt” the caps; an additional two securing bolts (installed sideways through the block) per cap augmenting the pairs mounted in the conventional vertical position.  This approach, still widely used to this day, proved successful and was carried over when in 1963 the FE was further enlarged to 425 cubic inches (7.0 litre), Ford labelling the new mill the 427 to align it with the displacement limit used by both NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing) and the FIA (Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (the International Automobile Federation and world sport’s dopiest regulatory body)).  However, greater capacity meant more power, higher speeds and increased heat and the 427 began to also to suffer, the higher internal pressures meaning lubrication to the now cross-bolted main bearings had become marginal.  Ford’s solution was to reverse the priority with which oil was delivered.  The original design (subsequently known as the “top oiler”) lubricated first the valve-train at the top of the engine, then the main bearings which supported the crankshaft.  The new process reversed this order and the design became known as the side-oiler: on one side of the block was cast an additional oil galley, the bulge the external distinguishing feature of the new arrangement.

By their oil galleys they shall be known: Lubrication systems of 1964 Ford 427 FE V8 top oiler (left) & Ford 427 FE V8 side oiler (right). 

Introduced in 1965, the side-oiling proved the final solution and the 427 became a paragon of reliability, powering even the Le Mans 24 hour winning GT40s in 1966 & 1967.  Today the 427 is perhaps best remembered as the power-plant in the Shelby American AC Cobra 427 (although some of those actually used the rather more tame FE 428) but in those happy days when one could tick a box and have what was essentially a racing engine installed in a road car, it was available also in full-sized machines (the Galaxie), intermediates (the Fairlane) and, at the tail-end of production, a few (by then somewhat toned down) were even put in the Cougar, Mercury’s Mustang-based take on the pony-car.  By then however, the side-oiler’s days were numbered because not only was it noisy, apt to be cantankerous and a bit of an oil-burner, the complex lubrication and cross bolting made it quite expensive to build, added to which the big bore was at close to the limit the FE block could accommodate so during the manufacturing process; even a slight shift in the casting cores meant a scrapped block.  Thus the attraction for most (non racing) purposes of the 428 with its smaller bore, less elaborate lubrication and (then) conventional bottom-end bolting.

As supplied ex-factory: Ford 427 SOHC on stand.

The side oiler also provided the basis for one engine which wasn’t exactly mythical because quite a few were built but remains mysterious because nobody seems quite sure how many, the consensus being it was somewhere in mid-three figures, the last of which (in a crate) wasn't sold until 1970 although production ended in 1967.  This was the 427 SOHC (single overhead camshaft (the “sock” in the slang of some)) which for all sorts of reasons never made it onto the circuits for which it was intended nor into even one road car, despite the wishes of many.  Popularly known as “the cammer”, even some sixty years on there’s still a mystique surrounding the cammer and if one can’t find an original for sale (one sold at auction in 2021 for US$60,000), from a variety of manufacturers it’s possible still to buy all the bits and pieces needed to build one (in a quirk of timing and the overlap of simultaneous product development, some of the very early SOHCs used the top oiler block although most were side oilers and the third party reproductions over the years have always been the latter).  Although the production numbers have never been verified (which seems strange given Ford's accounting system recorded everything which emerged with a serial number), what all agree is the horsepower of a stock SOHC was somewhere over 600, the number bouncing around a bit because there were versions with single and dual four barrel carburetors, different camshaft profiles and variations in the cylinder heads and while it never made it into a production car, it remains the ultimate FE.

The Porsche 911 E series and the Ölklappe affair

1971 Porsche 911S (note the flap for the oil filler cap behind the passenger-side door (US market model and thus left-hand drive (LHD)).  The factory confirmed this car was built in July 1971, despite many references to E series production beginning in August.

Porsche in 1971 began the build of its E series update (produced between July 1971-July 1972 and generally known as the “1972 models”) of the then almost decade-old 911 and in addition to the increase in the flat-six’s displacement from 2.2 litres (134 cubic inch) to 2.3 (143) (although always referred to as the “2.4”), there were a myriad of changes, some in response to US safety & emissions legislation while others were part of normal product development.  One of latter was the placing of the hinged-flap over the oil filler cap behind the right side door, something necessitated by the dry sump oil tank having been re-located from behind the right rear wheel to in front, one of a number of design changes undertaken to shift the weight distribution forward and improve the handling of the rear-engined machine’s inherently tail-heavy configuration.  In Germany, the addition was known variously as Ölklappe, Oil Klapper or Vierte Tür (fourth door, the fuel filler flap being the third).  Weight reduction (then becoming difficult in the increasingly strict regulatory environment), especially at the rear, was also a design imperative and the early-build E series cars were fitted with an aluminum engine lid and license-plate panel although these components were soon switched to steel because of production difficulties and durability concerns.

Where the troubles began:  The fuel filler flap on the left-front fender (left) and the oil filler flap on the right-rear (right).  Apparently, not even the “◀ Oil” sticker in red was sufficient warning.  History blames gas station attendants for getting the two confused but, "history being written by the winners", MRDA may apply and it's likely some owners also pumped gas through the wrong spout.

For the E series 911S, Porsche recommended the use of a multigrade mineral oil (SAE 20W-50 or SAE 15W-40, depending on climate) but were aware those using their vehicles in competition sometimes used a high-viscosity SAE50 monograde.  With the car’s 10 litre (10.6 US quarts, 8.8 Imperial quarts) oil tank, the fluid’s weight would be between 8.5-9.1 kg (18.7-20.0 lb) and the physics of motion meant that the more rearward the placement of that mass, the greater the effect on the 911’s handling characteristics.  It was thus a useful contribution to what would prove a decades-long quest to tame the behaviour of what, in the early versions, was a car regarded (not wholly unfairly) as handling like “a very fast Volkswagen Beetle” and ultimately the engineers succeeded, it being only at the speeds which should be restricted to race tracks the 911s of the 2020s sometimes reveal the implications of being rear-engined.

VDO instruments in 1971 Porsche 911S.  In home market cars, the oil pressure gauge (to the left of the centrally mounted tachometer) was labelled DRUCK.

However, when in August 1972 the revised F series entered production, the oil tank was back behind the rear wheel and the filler under the engine lid, the retrogressive move taken because there had been instances of gas (petrol) station attendants (they really used to exist) assuming the oil filler flap was the access point for the gas cap and, to be fair, it was in a location used for gas on many front-engined cars (a majority of the passenger-car fleet in most markets where Porsche had a presence).  Quite how often this happened isn’t known but it must have been frequent enough for the story to become part of the 911 legend and the consequences could have been severe and rectification expensive.  The factory paid much attention to oil and also ensured drivers could monitor the status of the critical fluid; all air-cooled 911s ran hot and the more highly tuned the model (in 1971-1972 the 911T, E & S in increasing potency), the hotter they got.  As well as being a lubricant, engine oil functions also as a coolant and the VDO instrumentation included gauges for oil level, oil temperature, and oil pressure; for all three to appear in a road car was unusual but being air-cooled and thus with no conventional fluid coolant, the oil's dynamics were most important, engineers noting it's as accurate to speak of such machines being "oil-cooled".

IIII

IIII (pronounced fawr (U) or fohr (non-U))

A translingual form, an alternative form of IV: the Roman numeral representing four (4), the other known forms being iv, iiii & iiij

Circa 500 BC: The Roman numeral system spread as Roman conquest expanded and remained widely used in Europe until from circs 1300 it was replaced (for most purposes) with the more adaptable Hindu-Arabic system (including the revolutionary zero (0) which remains in use to this day.

IIII as a representation where the value four is involved has long been restricted to the value 4.  To avoid numbers becoming too cumbersome, the Roman system always used subtraction when a smaller numeral precedes a larger numeral so the number 14 would be represented as XIV instead of XIIII.  The convention which emerged was that a numeral can precede only another numeral which is less than or equal to ten times the value of the smaller so I can precede only (and thus be subtracted from) V (five) & X (ten).  However, these “rules” didn’t exist during Antiquity and weren’t (more or less) standardized until well into the medieval period; it’s thus not unusual to find old documents where 9 is represented as VIIII instead of IX.  The practical Romans, unlike the Greeks for whom abstraction was a calling, were little concerned with the concepts of pure mathematics, such as number theory or geometric proofs, and other abstract ideas, devoted instead to utilitarian purposes such as financial accounting, keeping military records and building things.

The numeral system had to be manageable to make simple calculations like addition and subtraction so it was attractive to make the text strings conveniently short: 44 as XLIV obvious preferable to XXXXIIII.  Although its limitations seem obvious to modern eyes, given the demands of the times, the system worked remarkably well for almost two millennia despite the largest numeral being M (1000).  It was silly to contemplate writing a string of 1000 M’s to indicate a million (presumably not a value then often used) so the Romans concocted a bar (the vinculum) which, when it appeared above a numeral, denoted a multiplier of 1000: MMMM (6000) could thus appear as V̄Ī and a million as M̄.  Compared with the Hindu-Arabic system, it was a fudged but one which for centuries proved serviceable.

Where Roman numbers are occasionally still used (book prefaces & introductions, some aeroplanes & automobiles and charmingly, some software), the number four is almost always represented by IV rather than IIII.  One exception to this however is watch & clock faces where the use of IIII outnumbers IV, regardless of the cost of the device.  Watchmakers have provided may explanations for the historical origin of this practice, the most popular of which dates from Antiquity: Because “I” stood for the “J” and “V” for the “U”, IV would be read as JU and thus Jupiter, an especially venerated Roman god, Jupiter Optimus Maximus being the king of all gods, chief of the pantheon and protector of ancient Rome.  The suggestion is that invoking the name of Jupiter for such a banal purpose would be thought offensive if not actually blasphemous.  Thus IIII it became.

Lindsay Lohan wearing 19mm (¾ inch) Cartier Tank Americaine in 18 karat white gold with a quartz movement and a silver guilloche dial with Roman numerals including the traditional IIII.  The Cartier part-number is B7018L1.

There’s the notion to that the convention arose just because of one of those haphazard moments in time by which history sometimes is made.  The appearance of IIII was said to be the personal preference of Louis XIV (1638–1715; le Roi Soleil (the Sun King), King of France 1643-1715), the Sun King apparently issuing an instruction (though there’s no evidence it was ever a formal decree) that IIII was the only appropriate way to write the number four, watchmakers ever since still tending to comply.  Whether Louis XIV wished to retain some exclusivity in the IV which was part of “his” XIV isn’t known and it may be he simply preferred the look of IIII.  Despite the belief of some, it’s anyway wrong to suggest IIII is wrong and IV right.  The design of the IIII was based upon four outstretched fingers which surely had for millennia been the manner in which the value of 4 was conveyed in conversation and V denoted 5 in tribute to the shape the hand formed when the thumb was added.  The IV notation came later and because it better conformed with the conventions used for writing bigger numbers, came in medieval times to be thought correct; it was thus adopted by the Church, becoming the “educated” form and that was that.

Not all agree with those romantic tales however, the German Watch Museum noting that in scholarly, ecclesiastical and daily use, IIII was widely used for a millennia, well into the nineteenth century, while the more efficient “IV” didn’t appear with any great frequency until circa 1500.  The museum argues that the watch and clock-makers concerns may have been readability and aesthetics rather than any devotion to historic practice, IIII having display advantages in an outward-facing arrangement relative to the centre of the dial (ie partially upside down, such as on wall, tower or cuckoo clocks), any confusion between IV (4) & VI (6) eliminated.  Also, a watch, while a functional timepiece, is also decorative and even a piece of jewellery so aesthetics matter, the use of III rendering the dial symmetrically balanced because 14 individual characters exist on each side of the dial and the IIII counterbalances the opposite VIII in the manner IX squares off against III.  So there’s no right or wrong about IIII & IV but there are reasons for the apparent anomaly of the more elegant IV appearing rarely on the dials of luxury watches.

Formalism

Formalism (pronounced fawr-muh-liz-uhm)

(1) Strict adherence to, or observance of, prescribed or traditional forms, as in music, poetry and art.

(2) In religion, a strong attachment to external forms and observances.

(3) In philosophy (ethics), a doctrine that acts are in themselves right or wrong regardless of consequences.

(4) In literary theory, an approach to the interpretation of texts focused on the structure rather than the content, context of its origin or reception.

(5) In mathematics (formal logic), a doctrine that mathematics, including the logic used in proofs, can be based on the formal manipulation of symbols without regard to their meaning (the mathematical or logical structure of a scientific argument as distinguished from its subject matter; the theory a statement has no meaning but that its symbols, regarded as physical objects, exhibit a structure that has useful applications).

(6) A scrupulous or excessive adherence to outward form at the expense of inner reality or content.

(7) In Marxist criticism, scrupulous or excessive adherence to artistic technique at the expense of social values etc; also a view adopted by some non-Marxist critical theorists).

(8) In performance art, theatre a deliberately stylized mode of production.

(9) In both structural engineering and computer science, the notation, and its structure, in (or by) which information is expressed.

1830–1840: The construct was formal + -ism.  Formal was from the Middle English formel, from the Old French formel, from the Latin formalis, from forma (form) of unknown origin but possibly from the Etruscan morma, from the Ancient Greek μορφή (morphḗ) (shape, fashion, appearance, outward form, contour, figure), dissimilated as formīca and possibly formīdō.  The –ism suffix was from the Ancient Greek –ismos & -isma noun suffixes, often directly, often through the Latin –ismus & -isma, though sometimes through the French –isme or the German –ismus, all ultimately from the Greek.  It appeared in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form action nouns from verbs and on this model, was used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence (criticism; barbarism; Darwinism; despotism; plagiarism; realism; witticism etc).  Although actual use of the word formalism dates only from its adoption (1830s) in critical discourse, disputes related to the matter can be found in texts since antiquity in fields as diverse as agriculture, literature and theology.  Formalism is a noun, formalist is a noun & adjective, formalistic is an adjective and formalistically is an adverb; the noun plural is formalists.

The Russian Formalists

In literary theory, the term “form” is used of the “structure & shape” and the manner in which it is constructed, as opposed to the substance (theme, topic and such).  Form and substance are so intertwined as to be inseparable (although that hasn’t stopped some authors of “experimental” works trying to prove otherwise) but long before the post-modernists made deconstruction a thing, the two strands separately had been assessed and analysed.  The other way the word is used is as a synonym of genre (novella, essay, play etc).  Formalism was different; it was a literary theory with origins in the early Soviet Union of the 1920s, the practitioners and followers labelled “formalists”, a pejorative term which implied limitations.  In the way things then were done by the Bolshevists, Formalism as an identifiable entity faded quickly and fell into desuetude by late in the decade; movements which of which comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) didn’t approve had bleak prospects.

Influenced by the Moscow Linguistic Circle (1915) and The Society for the Study of Poetic Language (1916), Formalism was in 1917 founded by literary theorist, & writer Viktor Shklovsky (1893-1984) and author & political satirist Yevgeny Zamyatin (1884–1937) with the then novel assertion art primarily was a matter of technique, the style not merely a method of execution but also the object of the art.  In an example of the way political forces in the post-tsarist state evolved, although Formalism began in the year of revolutions as something with the obvious socialist theme of the artist as a “worker” or “artisan”, its credos came under suspicion in the Kremlin because it was thought to have been captured by authors, artists & composers who found intoxicating the idea their work could be an exercise in pure technique, sometimes of such intricacy that it was only their colleagues who could understand, the public left unmoved or baffled.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December, 2011.

Reflecting what was going on in intellectual circles in Moscow, the Formalists were interested in applying to literary criticism what had come to be understood as the “scientific method” and were dismissive of the role of ideas, emotions, & actions (and “reality” in general) in defining what was specifically “literary” about a text.  What this meant was any distinction between form and content ceased to be relevant and the writer became a kind of cipher, re-working available literary devices and conventions, some practitioners even holding there were no poets or other literary figures, just the output, encapsulated in Shklovsky’s pithy definition of literature as “the sum total of all the stylistic devices employed in it”.  Shklovsky was the most influential figure in the early days of the movement and he was influenced by the Futurists who had been drawn to the speed and mechanical creations of modernity, something manifested in his concept of ostranenie (making strange, later to be called defamiliarization) which was an attempt to divorce art from conceptions such as beauty, elegance or other conventional benchmarks.

Despite the implications of that, Formalism was dynamic (and in the way movements tend to be) schismatic, a theory of narrative also developed which made a distinction between plot and story, the technique adopted reflecting the approach of the Futurists’ understanding of machinery.  Syuzbet (the plot) referred to the order & manner in which events were presented in the narrative while fabuh (the story) tracked the chronological sequence of events.  Another of the Formalists infused with the tenets of Futurism was the literary critic & theorist Boris Tomashevsky (1890–1957) who used the term modf to denote the smallest unit of plot and distinguished between “bound” & “free” motifs, the former one which the story absolutely requires while the latter was inessential; it was a model as familiar to engineers then as it would be to software developers now.  Formalists of course regarded content as subordinate to the formal devices used in its construction and this dependence on external “non-literary assumptions” was called “motivation”, and a text’s motivation was defined by Shklovsky as the extent to which it was dependent on non-literary assumptions, an example of a work totally without motivation cited as The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman (in nine volumes, 1759–1767) by the Anglo-Irish novelist & Anglican cleric Laurence Sterne (1713–1768).  Whether or not one concurs with Shklovsky’s absolutism, in writing Tristram Shandy, Sterne used so many devices and techniques that had the term “mash-up” then existed, it would have been applied and it can be argued it was with that work the distinction between the techniques of plagiarism and sampling can best be identified.  Formalism’s life was brief but the churning of theory was constant and later the concept of “device” gave way to the notion of “function”, depending on the purpose or mode or genre; it was no longer the device per se which was defamiliarizing but its function in the work.  While comrade Stalin was content he’d killed off Formalism, its elements and deconstructive tools took root in the academic reaches of Western literary criticism and if not a fork, post-modernism is at least a cul-de-sac.

Comrade Stalin, comrade Shostakovich and Formalism

Comrade Shostakovich at his dacha.

Comrade Stalin (1878–1953; leader of the USSR, 1924-1953) didn’t invent the regime’s criticism of formalism but certainly made it famous after comrade Dmitri Shostakovich (1906-1975) was denounced in the Soviet newspaper Pravda (Truth) in January 1936, after the Moscow performance of his opera Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District.  Stalin didn’t like music he couldn’t whistle and the complex strains of Shostakovich’s opera, sometimes meandering, sometimes strident, certainly didn’t permit that; he labeled the composition формализм (formalism), "chaos instead of music", a self-indulgence of technique by a composer interested only in the admiration of other composers, an audience of no value in the school of Soviet realism.  It’s believed the Pravda article may have been written by Stalin himself and he used the word "formalism" in the sense it was understood English; formality being the observance of forms, formalism the disposition to make adherence to them an obsession.  To Stalin, the formal rules of composition were but a means to an end and the only legitimate end was socialist realism; anything other than that "an attack on the people".  Lest it be thought the defeat of fascism in the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) might have mellowed his views in such matters, Stalin at the 1948 party congress made sure the point was hammered home in the Communist Party's brutish way:  

"Comrades, while realistic music is written by the People's composers, formalistic music is written by composers who are against the People.  Comrades, one must ask why it is that realistic music is always written by composers of the People? The People's composers write realistic music simply due to the fact that being by nature realists right to their very core, they simply cannot help writing music that is realistic, while those anti-People composers, being by nature unrepentant formalists, cannot help... cannot help... cannot help writing music that is formalistic."

Comrade Stalin signing death warrants.

In the Soviet Union, producing or performing stuff hated by Stalin was not good career move.  Shostakovich completed his Fourth Symphony in C minor, Opus 43, in May 1936 and, even after the attack in Pravda, planned to stage its premiere in Leningrad December but found the orchestra unwilling to risk incurring the Kremlin’s wrath and almost as soon as rehearsals began, the orchestra's management cancelled the performance, issuing a statement saying comrade Shostakovich had withdrawn the work.  Actual responsibility for the decision remains unclear but it was certainly in accord with the views of the Kremlin and not until 1961, almost a decade on from Stalin’s death, was it performed.

All is forgiven: Soviet postage stamp issued in 1981 to honor 75^th anniversary of Dmitri Shostakovich’s birth.

Shostakovich became a realist, his response to denunciation the melodic Fifth Symphony in D minor, Opus 47.  Premiered in November 1937 in Leningrad, it was a resounding triumph, attracting a standing ovation that lasted more than thirty minutes.  The following January, just before its first performance in Moscow, an article, under the composer’s name, appeared in the local newspaper Vechernyaya Moskva in which he described the Fifth Symphony as "…a Soviet artist's creative response to justified criticism."  Whether Shostakovich actually wrote the piece isn’t known but there’s never been any doubt it’d never have been published without Stalin’s approval and the success of the Fifth Symphony re-personed Shostakovich.  Whatever it lacked in glasnost (openness), it made up for in perestroika (restructuring) and the party engineered his rehabilitation as carefully as it had his fall a couple of years earlier, anxious to show how those bowing its demands could be rewarded as easily and fully as dissidents could be punished.

Awful

Awful (pronounced aw-fuhl)

(1) Extremely bad; unpleasant; ugly.

(2) Inspiring fear; dreadful; terrible.

(3) Solemnly impressive; inspiring awe; full of awe; reverential (obsolete).

(4) Extremely dangerous, risky, injurious, etc.

(5) Very; extremely.

1250-1300: From the Middle English agheful, awfull, auful aueful & aȝefull (worthy of respect or fear, striking with awe; causing dread), the construct of all based on the idea of awe +‎ -ful (aghe the earlier form of awe), the same model as the Old English eġeful & eġefull (terrifying; awful).  Etymologists treat the emergence in the early nineteenth century (1809) of the meaning “very bad” as a weakening of the original sense but it can be regarded as a fork and thus a parallel path in the same way as the sense of "excessively; very great" which is documented since 1818.  Interestingly, there’s evidence from the late sixteenth century that was spasmodic use of awful that was more a variation of the original, meaning “profoundly reverential, full of awe” (awe in this case a thing more of reverence than fear and trepidation).  The spellings awfull, aweful & awefull are all obsolete although some dictionaries list awfull as archaic, a fine distinction of relevance only to lexicographers.  Awful is an adjective & (in colloquial US use, mostly south of the Mason-Dixon Line) an adverb, awfully is an adverb, awfuller & awfullest are adjectives, awfulize is a verb and awfulization & awfulness are nouns; in slang the non-standard noun plural “awfuls” is used in the same sense as the disparaging “ghastlies”.

The adverb awfully (which would later assume a life of its own) around the turn of the fourteenth century meant "so as to inspire reverence" by the end of the 1300s had come also to mean "dreadfully, so as to strike one with awe (in the sense of “fear & dread”) and this was by the 1830s picked up as a simple intensifier meaning "very, exceedingly", Henry Fowler (1858–1933) in his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926) noting with his usual weary disapproval that awfully’s “downward path” was such that it was now nothing but a synonym of “very”.  That seems harsh given “awfully” would seem able to convey a nuance and even Henry Fowler conceded that in Ancient Greek the equivalent word αἰνόςως (ainósōs) was used to mean both (1) “horribly, dreadfully, terribly” & (2) “very, extremely, exceptionally” but despite his reverence for all things Hellenic, he didn’t relent.

Awfully good: Lindsay Lohan at the premiere of Mr & Mrs Smith, Los Angeles, June, 2005.  A kind of elaborated bandage dress with some nice detailing, the dress Lindsay Lohan wore in 2005 attracted much favourable comment, as did the designer's sense of restraint, necklaces and other embellishments eschewed, a sprinkle of freckles presumably thought adornment enough.  A dress like this encapsulates the simple rule: When in doubt, stick to the classics.

The adjective god-awful (also as godawful) had an even more muddled evolution, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) in 1878 listing the meaning “impressive” before, a decade later, revising this to “impressively (ie “very”) terrible”, which seems better to reflect the sense in which it seems always to have been applied since being coined as a colloquialism of US English.  In use it’s thought to have been mostly part of oral speech and except in dictionary entries appeared rarely in print prior to the 1920s so the origin is obscure, etymologists pondering that either “God” was used as a simple intensifier or in the sense of the frequent God's awful vengeance, judgment etc, a phrase common in religious literature.

As adjectives, the usual forms of the comparative & superlative are respectively more awful & most awful but dictionaries continue to acknowledge awfuller & awfullest as correct English although most users would probably flag both as “wrong” and their clumsy sound means they’re avoided even by those aware of their status.  The verbs awfulize, awfulizes, awfulizing & awfulized are technical terms in psychotherapy which describe patients reacting dramatically or catastrophically to distressing events, usually in the sense of a disproportionate reaction; the noun form is awfulization.  Perhaps surprisingly, social media users seem not to have picked up “awfulization”; it would seem a handy descriptor of much content.

A sentence like “it was a godawful book and awfully long but awfully well-written” actually makes sense and few would be confused because the various meanings are conveyed by context.  So, despite the tangled history, awful and its derivatives usually present few problems, even the colloquial “something awful” (“awfully; dreadfully; terribly” except in North America (mostly south of the Mason-Dixon Line & among classes so influenced) where it means “very, extremely”) usually able to be decoded: “I was hungry something awful” and “there’s something awful about crooked Hillary Clinton” both unambiguous even if the former sounds strange to those accustomed to “educated speech”, a term much criticized but well-understood.

Awful: Lindsay Lohan at the afterparty for Roberto Cavalli's fashion show, Milan Fashion Week, March 2010.  Although they tend to group-think, fashion critics are not monolithic but none had a good word to say about this outfit, the consensus being: Awful.  A few grudgingly granted a pass to the glittering Roberto Cavalli harem pants but the fur gilet was condemned as if Ms Lohan had with her bare hands skinned a live mink, eating the liver; these days, even faux fur seems grounds for cancellation.  Some, presumably those who picked up a photo from the agencies, called it a stole and at certain angles it resembled one but it really was as gilet.  As a footnote, many did admire the Fendi platform pumps so there was that though nobody seemed to think they redeemed things.

Gilet was from the French gilet (vest, waistcoat), from the regional Italian gileccu (Calabria), gilecco (Genoa), gelecco (Naples) & ggileccu (Sicily), (though the standard Italian gilè was borrowed directly from the French), from the Turkish yelek (jelick; vest, waistcoat, from the Proto-Turkic yẹl (the noun of “wind”) with the final syllable modified to match other styles of garments such as corselet and mantelet.  Historically a gilet was (1) a man’s waistcoat & (2) a woman’s bodice a la the waistcoat or a decorative panel either attached to the bodice or worn separately.  In modern use, a gilet is a sleeveless jacket which can be closed to the neck and is often padded to provide warmth.  Some puffer jackets and garments described as bodywarmers can be classed as gilets.

Stole was from the Old English stole, from the Latin stola, from the Ancient Greek στολή (stolḗ) (stole, garment, equipment).  The original stoles were ecclesiastical vestments and were decorated bands worn on the back of the neck, each end hanging over the chest (reaching sometimes to the ground) and could, inter alia, be an indication of clerical rank, geographical location or membership of an order.  In English and European universities, stoles were also adopted as academic dress, often added to an undergraduate’s gown for a degree conferring ceremony.  In fashion, the stole was a garment in the style of a scarf or muffler and was there always for visual effect and sometimes warmth.  Fur stoles were especially popular until wearing it became socially proscribed and (trigger warning) there were fox stoles which included the beast's entire pelt including the head and the much admired brush (tail).

Ultra

Ultra (pronounced uhl-truh)

(1) The highest point; acme; the most intense degree of a quality or state; the extreme or perfect point or state.

(2) Going beyond what is usual or ordinary; excessive; extreme.

(3) An extremist, as in politics, religion, sporting team supporters, fashion etc, used semi-formally on many occasions in history.

(4) In the history of military espionage, the British code name for intelligence gathered by decrypting German communications enciphered on the Enigma machine during World War II (initial capital letter).

1690–1700: A New Latin adverb and preposition ultrā (uls (beyond) + -ter (the suffix used to form adverbs from adjectives) + -ā (suffixed to the roots of verbs)).  The prefix ultra- was a word-forming element denoting "beyond" (eg ultrasonic) or "extremely" (ultralight (as used in aviation)) and was in common use from the early nineteenth century, the popularity of use apparently triggered by the frequency with which it was used of political groupings in France.  As a stand-alone word (in the sense now used of the most rabid followers of Italian football teams) meaning "extremist", it dates from 1817 as a shortening of ultra-royaliste (extreme royalist (which at the time was a thing))."  The independent use of ultra (or shortening of words prefixed with it) may also have been influenced by nē plūs ultrā (may you) not (go) further beyond (this point), said to be a warning to sailors inscribed on the Pillars of Hercules at Gibraltar.  This legend comes not from Greek mythology but dates from the resurrection of interest in antiquity which began during the Renaissance, influenced by Plato having said the lost city of Atlantis “lay beyond the Pillars of Hercules” and the most useful translations of nē plūs ultrā probably something like "go no further, nothing lies beyond here".

As a prefix, ultra- has been widely appended.  The construct of ultra vires (literally "beyond powers") was ultra (beyond) + vires (strength, force, vigor, power) and is quoted usually by courts and tribunals to describe their jurisdictional limits, something ultra vires understood as "beyond the legal or constitutional power of a court".  In political science, the term ultranationalism was first used in 1845, a trend which has ebbed & flowed but certainly hasn't died.  The speed of light being what it is, ultralight refer not to optics but to very small (often home-built or constructed from a kit) aircraft, the term first used in 1979 although it was (briefly) used in experimental physics in the late 1950s.  Ultrasound in its current understanding as a detection & diagnostic technique in medicine dates from 1958 but it had been used in 1911 to mean "sound beyond the range of human hearing", this sense later replaced by ultrasonic (having frequency beyond the audible range) in 1923, used first of radio transmission; the applied technology ultrasongraphy debuted in 1960.  Ultraviolet (beyond the violet end of the visible spectrum) was first identified in 1840 and in 1870 ultra-red was coined to describe what is now known as infra-red.  First identified in the 1590s, ultramarine (blue pigment made from lapis lazuli) was from the Medieval Latin ultramarinus ("beyond the sea"), the construct being ultra +  marinus (of the sea) from mare (sea, the sea, seawater), from the primitive Indo-European root mori- (body of water), the name said to be derived from the mineral arriving by ship from mines in Asia.  Ultramontane has a varied history and was first used in the 1590s.  It was from the Middle French ultramontain (beyond the mountains (especially the Alps)), from the early fourteenth century Old French, the construct being ultra + the stem of mons (hill), from the primitive Indo-European root men- (to project) and was used particularly of papal authority, though the precise meaning bounced around depending on context.  The acronym UHF (ultra-high frequency) was coined in 1937 although the technology using radio frequencies in the range of 300-3000 megahertz (Mhz) became available in 1932.  Other forms (ultramodern, ultra-blonde etc) are coined as required and survive or fall from use in the usual way English evolves.

The Ultras

The prefix ultra- occurred originally in loanwords from Latin, meaning essentially “on the far side of, beyond.”  In relation to the base to which it is prefixed, ultra- has the senses “located beyond, on the far side of” (eg ultraviolet), “carrying to the furthest degree possible, on the fringe of” (eg ultramodern) or “extremely” (eg ultralight); nouns to which it is added denote, in general, objects, properties, phenomena etc that surpass customary norms, or instruments designed to produce or deal with such things (eg ultrasound).  The more recent use as a noun (usually in the collective as “the ultras”) applied to members of an extreme faction dates from early nineteenth-century English parliamentary politics and is associated also with the most extreme supporters of certain Italian football (soccer) teams.

Although never formally a faction in the modern sense of the word, the ultra Tories (the ultras) operated from 1827 (some political scientists insists the aggregation coalesced only in 1828) as a formal as a loose and unstructured grouping of politicians, intellectuals, and journalists who constituted, in embryonic form, the “extreme right wing” of British and Irish politics.  Essentially reactionary conservatives unhappy with changes associated with the Enlightenment, the industrial revolution and urbanization, they regarded the 1689 protestant constitution as the unchangeable basis of British social, economic and political life and treated all their opponents with a rare obsessional hatred.  In another echo of recent right-wing politics, the ultras showed some scepticism of economic liberalism and supported measures designed to ameliorate the hardships suffered by the poor during the early industrial age.  Like a number of modern, nominally right-wing populist movements, the ultras were suspicious of “free trade” and the destructive consequences these policies had on industries vulnerable to competition from foreign producers.

Portrait of the Duke of Wellington (1769-1852) by Francisco Goya (1746–1828), circa 1812–14, oil on mahogany panel, National Gallery, London.

The previously inchoate ultras coalesced into a recognizable force in the period of instability which followed the death in 1827 of a long-serving prime-minister.  Their first flexing of political muscle, which proved unsuccessful, was an attempt to deny the premiership to a supporter of Catholic emancipation but the ultras emerged as a powerful influence in Tory politics although many claimed to belong to the Whig tradition.  Their annus mirabilis (a remarkable or auspicious year) came in 1830 when the ultras brought down the Duke of Wellington’s government (1828-1830) but the need for reform was unstoppable and while the label was for decades to be applied to the far-right of the Conservative Party, the latter iterations never matched the political ferocity of the early adherents.

Ultra Blonde product.

Although there are packaged products labeled as such and the phrase "ultra-blonde" is far from uncommon, there's no precise definition of such a thing and while some blondes are blonder than others, on the spectrum, there is a point at which going further means the color ceases to anymore to be blonde and becomes some shade which tends to grey, white or the dreaded yellow.  For that reason, some hairdressers prefer to describe platinum as a stand-alone color rather than the usual "platinum blonde", noting that the end result will anyway usually to some degree differ, depending on the shade and physiology of the hair to be treated.  They also caution the idea of ultra blonde isn't suitable for everyone and base their recommendations of whether a client's skin is warm or cool toned, the practical test being to assess the veins visible in the wrist; if they're mostly blue and purple (source of the word "blue-blooded" which was based on the notion of those with obviously blue veins being rich enough not to have to work in the fields), then the undertone is cool, if mostly green then it's warm and if a mix of both, the undertone is neutral.

Lindsay Lohan had an ultra-blonde phase but for her Playboy photo shoot in 2012, wore a blonde wig; many would call this "ultra blonde" but to a professional hairdresser it's a "pale".

The undertone interacts with skin tone, paler, pinky skin tones suit cool, delicate blondes like ash, beige or baby-blonde whereas darker or more golden-toned skins suit honey hues described often as butter, golden or caramel.  For perfectionists, there's also eye color to consider and here the trick is to achieve the desired degree of contrast; soft, multi-tonal shades better complementing lighter colours whereas deeper, richer blondes flatter the darker eye.  Those especially obsessive can use non-optically corrective contact lens, eye color often easier to change than hair.  So, while hairdressers think of ultra blonde as shifting concept rather than a specific color, most agree (whatever the sometimes extraordinary proliferation of imaginatively named products on manufacturers' color charts), there are essentially four stages of blondness and they’re usually described as something like: medium, light, pale & platinum.  In each of those categories, it's possible to be an "ultra" though hairdressers will readily admit their technical distinctions resonate little with customers whose expectation of "ultra" is simply the limit of what's physically possible.

Boulle

Boulle (pronounced bool)

(1) In woodworking, furniture design, cabinet making and bibelots, denoting or relating to a type of marquetry of patterned inlays of brass and tortoiseshell (and occasionally other metals such as pewter or silver), widely used in French (and later Italian) furniture from the late-seventeenth century.

(2) Something ornamented with such marquetry; furniture having ornamentation of this kind.

Circa 1680s: Named after André Charles Boulle (1642–1732), the French cabinet-maker much associated with the style although Boulle was noted also for his work in the intarsia (an Italian form of decorative wood inlaying (and (in knitting) a design resembling a mosaic)) of wood.  The alternative spellings are buhl and the less common boule; Boulle (and buhl) are the common short forms for the product (often with an initial capital letter) but among historians of furniture, antique dealers etc, boullework, boulle work & boulle-work are all used as descriptors.  Boulle is a noun & proper noun and an adjective, the verb form usually spelled bouled; the noun plural is boulles.

Armoire (circa 1700) by André-Charles Boulle, Royal Collection Trust, London.

Variation of the type of marquetry which came to be known as boulle work had been around for centuries before it was brought to an extraordinary standard fineness and intricracy by French cabinetmaker André Charles Boulle (1642–1732).  His most memorable creations were veneered furniture with tortoiseshell inlaid primarily with brass, pewter and silver, his elaborate designs often incorporating arabesques.  The large pieces by Boulle and his imitators are a staple of museums and the high-end of antique market but the technique was used also on countless bibelots.  Those personally crafted by Boulle are the most prized but because (1) the sheer volume of the eighteenth and nineteenth century imitations and (2) Boulle not signing or imposing some verifiable marking, it can at the margins be difficult definitively authenticate the works.  For this reason, the sign “attributed to André-Charles Boulle” is often seen in museum collections and is not unknown in antique shops.

Pair of oak cabinets by Pierre Garnier (circa 1726-1806) a Master Ébéniste, veneered with ebony and boulle marquetry in brass, pewter and tortoiseshell, representing a later neoclassical rendering of the Boulle technique, Royal Collection Trust, London.

Boulle was appointed furniture-maker, gilder and sculptor to Louis XIV (1638–1715; le Roi Soleil (the Sun King), King of France 1643-1715) and his work adorned the palaces and other royal places of the L'Ancien Régime but most of the furniture in the Royal Collection made by, or attributed to, Boulle was later acquired by George IV (1762–1830; King of the UK 1820-1830).  A Francophile and noted for the extravagance of his tastes, the king had been furnishing the royal palaces with French furniture since the 1780s and this habit he was able to indulge more and more after the French Revolution (1789) because, for a variety of reasons, in the aftermath of that and during the Napoleonic years, much more fine French furniture came onto the market, much of it shipped to England.

A boulle tortoise shell inkwell with brass inlays, circa 1870.

Marquetry is the use of small pieces of different materials (including burl timber, tortoiseshell, pewter, silver, brass, horn, mother-of-pearl) to create elaborate designs inlaid upon furniture.  So skilled was Boulle at pictorial marquetry he became known as a “painter in wood” but it was his use of tortoiseshell and brass that made his reputation and established him as a favourite of royalty and the nobility.  Pewter or brass inlay on tortoiseshell was known as premier-partie, while tortoiseshell inlay on brass or pewter was contre-partie but the most sumptuous pieces included mother-of-pearl, stained horn and dyed tortoiseshell.

Anhedonia

Anhedonia (pronounced an-hee-doh-nee-uh)

In psychiatry, the lack of desire for or the capacity to experience pleasure.

1896: From the French anhédonie (an inability to feel pleasure (and an antonym of analgesia)), the construct being the Ancient Greek ἀν (an) (in grammar, the privative prefix, indicating negation or absence) + ἡδονή (hēdonḗ) (pleasure) + -ia (the abstract noun ending).  Hēdonḗ’s better known gift to the language was hedonist (one who seeks pleasure).  The an- prefix was an alternative form of on-, from the Middle English an-, from the Old English an- & on- (on-), from the Proto-Germanic ana- (on).   It was used to create words having the sense opposite to the word (or stem) to which the prefix is attached; it was used with stems beginning either with vowels or "h".  The word was coined in either 1896 or 1987 by French psychologist Professor Théodule-Armand Ribot (1839-1916).  Anhedonia is a noun and anhedonic is an adjective; the noun plural is anhedonias.  Unexpectedly, given the profession's propensity to intricate categorization, anhedonism seems not to exist.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

The term anhedonia encompasses a range symptoms related to a reduction in desire for or ability to experience pleasure.  It is a generalized condition which is diagnosed only in those where the experience is universal and does not apply to those with aversion to specific activities, this something (usually) considered healthy and not unusual.  The original model in clinical psychiatry was limited to an inability to experience pleasure but this was later extended to a reduction in motivation even to seek experiences which most would find pleasurable.  The fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR (2022)) defines anhedonia as a “lack of enjoyment from, engagement in, or energy for life’s experiences; deficits in the capacity to feel pleasure and take interest in things”.  In modern practice, clinicians distinguish between anticipatory and consummatory anhedonia.  Anticipatory pleasure involves the prediction of pleasure from future reward and the experience of pleasure associated with a positive prediction while consummatory pleasure involves the reward that is the actual moment of experience.  Thus, anticipatory anhedonia is reflects an inability to predict the future experience of pleasure as well as lower motivation to take action toward achieving pleasure and consummatory anhedonia is the lack of pleasure in what’s experienced (ie synonymous with the original definition of anhedonia).

Specific instances usually are not of necessity anhedonic (although an inability to derive any enjoyment from listening to country & western music seems indicative of little more than good taste).  The exception to this seems to be the range of activities clinicians have on their “suspect categories” list including things like sex and human friendship and this view may reflect the long shadow Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) has cast over the profession.  Although in both Western theology and philosophy there's a discernible tradition of what verges on an insistence that humans are social creatures and that interaction with others should be both sought and enjoyed, Freud raised the bar by suggesting every form of sexual behavior among humans was "natural" (though some might be neither lawful or desirable) except the absence of such interest.       

Anhedonia accompanies a range of neuropsychiatric conditions and is frequently associated with depression although it’s not an essential component.  Clinically, anhedonia needs to be suffered as a generalised condition, not as the common phenomenon of losing interest in something specific, something a normal part of the human condition.  There are no specific treatments for anhedonia and there are some dissident psychiatrists and psychologists who suggest this is a tacit admission it may be a normal part of the spectrum of human behaviour.  It is commonly treated alongside the condition of which it’s a part including depression, bipolar disorder (the old manic depression), schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and the various anxiety disorders.  This association with schizophrenia is striking, the medical orthodoxy being that up to 80% of those with schizophrenia may experience anhedonia and because it’s classified as a negative symptom (indicative of the absence of something that occurs in most healthy individuals), it’s considered more difficult to treat.