Versus

Versus (pronounced vur-suhs or vur-suhz)

(1) Against, used especially to indicate an action brought by one party against another in a court of law, or to denote competing teams or players in a sporting contest.

(2) As compared to or as one of two (or more) choices; as alternative to; in contrast with.

1400–1450: From the Late Middle English, from the Latin versus (facing; literally “towards” ie “turned so as to face (something), opposite, over against) and originally the past participle of vertere (to turn, change, overthrow, destroy), from the primitive Indo-European wert- (to turn, wind) from the root *wer (to turn, bend).  Versus is a preposition, the accepted abbreviations are “v” & “vs”.  The Latin vertere being a word of conflict, it’s been predictably productive in English.  In psychology, ambivert & ambiversion were coined in 1927 to describe a "person exhibiting features of an extrovert and an introvert.  Advert was an adaptation of the mid-fifteenth century averten (to turn (something) aside) from the twelfth century Old French avertir (later advertir) (to turn, direct; turn aside; make aware, inform) from the Latin advertere (turn toward, turn to).  English restored the -d- in the sixteenth century.  Versus is a preposition.

Averse was a mid-fifteenth century form meaning "turned away in mind or feeling, disliking, unwilling", from the Old French avers (hostile, antagonistic) and directly from the Latin aversus (turned away, turned back), past participle of avertere (to direct one's attention to; give heed, literally "to turn toward”).  Averse in English is used almost exclusively in the mental sense, while averted is applied to physical acts.  Advertise was from the early fifteenth century advertisen (to take notice of (a sense now obsolete)), from the Old French advertiss-, present-participle stem of the twelfth century advertir (the earlier form was avertir) (make aware, call attention, remark; turn, turn to), again from the Latin advertere.  The mid-fifteenth century transitive sense of "give notice to others, inform, warn; make clear or manifest" was by influence of advertisement; the specific commercial meaning "call attention to goods for sale, rewards, etc" not in use until the late eighteenth century.  The idea of the adversary (unfriendly opponent, enemy) emerged originally in religious writing as a descriptor of Satan as the enemy of man.  It was from the mid-fourteenth century aduersere (hostile opponent, enemy), from the thirteenth century Anglo-French adverser and the twelfth century Old French adversarie (which in Modern French is adversaire), from the Latin adversarius (an opponent, rival, enemy) the noun use of the adjective meaning "opposite, hostile, contrary.  The Classical Latin was glossed in Old English by wiðerbroca.

The verso (reverse, back, or other side of some object," especially a printed page or book) dates from 1839 and was from the Latin verso (folio), ablative singular neuter of versus, past participle of vertere (to turn).  Retroversion was first noted in the 1580s in the sense of a “tilting or turning backward" noun of action or state from the Latin retroversus (turned or bent backwards).  The late fourteenth century controversy (disputation, debate, prolonged agitation of contrary opinions) was from the from Old French controversie (quarrel, disagreement" from the Latin controversia (a turning against; contention, quarrel, dispute), from controversus (turned in an opposite direction, disputed, turned against), the construct being contra "against" + versus (turned toward or against), past participle of vertere.  Vice versa (the order being changed) dates from circa 1600, the construct being vice, ablative of vicis (a change, alternation, alternate order) + versa, feminine ablative singular of versus, past participle of vertere.  The Century Dictionary notes the phrase has the “complete force of a proposition”, meaning “a transposition of antecedents, the consequents also transposed".

Sinister, the idea being the left being opposite the right is also involved.  When, in 1856, botanists needed a word to describe the direction of spiral structures in nature, they coined the adjective sinistrorse, from the Latin sinistrorsus (toward the left side), the construct being sinister (left) + versus (turned), past participle of vertere.  It was paired with dextrorse but, in the pre-internet age, communication between scientists in different places was slow or limited and confusion arose about what was the proper point of view to reckon leftward or rightward spiraling, both interpretations used and documented as sinistrorse.  It limited the utility of the word.  Universe dates from the 1580s in the sense of "the whole world, cosmos, the totality of existing things", from the twelfth century Old French univers, from the Latin universum "all things, everybody, all people, the whole world," noun use of the neuter of the adjective universus (all together, all in one, whole, entire, relating to all, literally "turned into one), from unus (one (from the primitive Indo-European root oi-& no- (one, unique)) + versus, past participle of vertere.

The word verse came from late Old English, replacing the earlier Old English fers which was an early West Germanic borrowing directly from Latin and meant "line or section of a psalm or canticle" which by the fourteenth century had extended to "line of poetry", from the Anglo-French and Old French vers (line of verse; rhyme, song), from the Latin versus (a line, row, line of verse, line of writing), again from the primitive Indo-European wer-.  The metaphor is of plowing, of "turning" from one line to another, in the sense of vertere (to turn) as the plowman does at the end of each furrow.  The New Testament in English translation was first divided fully into verses in the 1550s Geneva version.  The metrical composition dates from circa 1300 but, perhaps surprisingly, as the non-repeating part of a modern song (ie the text which exists between repetitions of the chorus), verse wasn’t used until 1918.  That was noted in the book Negro Folk-Songs (1918) by US ethno-musicologist Natalie Curtis Burlin (1875-1921) which documented the traditions and forms of what used to be called “negro spirituals”.  Seemingly for the first time, the structure was defined as consisting of "chorus and verses, the chorus being a melodic refrain sung by all which opens the song; then follows a verse sung as a solo, in free recitative; the chorus then repeated; then another verse, the chorus again and so on until the chorus, sung for the last time, ends the song.”

In law reporting, versus, and, & against

Carbolic Smoke Ball Company’s offer to the whole world.

In the English speaking world, in the reporting of legal actions which reach the stage of being filed by a court register (or equivalent), the convention is that the first party named is the plaintiff (appellant) and the second the defendant (respondent).  So, in the famous case in English contract law of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1892, EWCA Civ 1) before the Court of Appeal, Mrs Carlill was the appellant and the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company the respondent.  The carbolic smoke ball case remains interesting because it established in English law the principle that advertisements offering something can constitute a binding contract even if the person claiming to have entered the contact hasn’t advised the author of the offer of their intent to perform the acts required in the terms of the offer.

Doubling down: The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company wasn't discouraged by the loss in the Court of Appeal, subsequently increasing both the reward to £200 and the small print to discourage claims.

During the deadly influenza pandemic in the northern winter of 1889-1890, the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company it would pay £100 (equivalent to some £12,000 in 2021) to anyone who became ill with influenza after using their smoke ball in accordance with the instructions enclosed with the product.  Mrs Carlill was concerned enough by the flu to buy a ball which, following the instructions, she used thrice daily for some weeks but nevertheless, caught the flu.  Unable to persuade the company to pay her £100, Mrs Carlill brought an action, in court claiming a contract existed which the company denied.  At first instance, despite being represented by a future prime-minister, the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company lost, a verdict upheld unanimously by the Court of Appeal.  It was a landmark in the development of contract law, refining the long-established principles of (1) offer, (2) acceptance, (3) certainty of terms and (4) payment although, it would be decades before the implications would begin comprehensively to be realized in legislation.  Not only did Mrs Carlill secure her £100 but she survived the pandemic, living to the age of ninety-six.  On 10 March 1942, she died after catching influenza.

In the UK and most of the Commonwealth, civil cases are reported in the form of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company but in oral use spoken as Carlill and Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (although for notorious cases like this, an informal shorthand such as “carbolic” or “carbolic smoke” usually emerges).  Where a proceeding does not have formally designated adverse parties, the construct becomes “In the matter of”, spoken and written usually as “In re” or, more commonly “Re”.  In the US, the written form is the same for civil and criminal proceedings but when spoken, the “v” or “vs” is pronounced “vee” or “versus”.  Neither system appears helpful and it would be an improvement if both could agree to use “and” and “against” as required and write them in that form too.  It will never happen.

Criminal matters are written using the same convention but the “v” is spoken as “against”.  In Fagan v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (969 1 QB 439) a defendant’s conviction, for refusing to move his car after having inadvertently reversed over a policeman’s foot, was upheld.  Absurd as the facts of the case turned out to be, it was a useful illustration of the relevant legal principles.  In criminal law, there’s the requirement that both actus reus (act) and mens rea (intention) be present for a crime to take place.  Fagan argued that when he made the actus reus, because it was an accident, he had no men’s rea, but when he obtained mens rea, there was no corresponding actus reus.  There have been philosophers who would have found the logic of that compelling but the judges proved earthier, ruling that while omission cannot establish an assault, the actus reus of driving onto the foot and deciding to remain there constituted a continuing criminal act which was present when the mens rea occurred.  Mr Fagan’s conviction thus stood.

In the matter of Grand Theft Auto (GTA5): Lindsay Lohan v Take-Two Interactive Software Inc et al, New York Court of Appeals (No 24, pp1-11, 29 March 2018)

In a case which took an unremarkable four years from filing to reach New York’s highest appellate court, Lindsay Lohan’s suit against the makers of video game Grand Theft Auto V was dismissed.  In a unanimous ruling in March 2018, six judges of the New York Court of Appeals rejected her invasion of privacy claim which alleged one of the game’s characters was based on her.  The judges found the "actress/singer" in the game merely resembled a “generic young woman” rather than anyone specific.  Unfortunately the judges seemed unacquainted with the concept of the “basic white girl” which might have made the judgment more of a fun read.

Beware of imitations: The real Lindsay Lohan and the GTA 5 ersatz, a mere "generic young woman".

Concurring with the 2016 ruling of the New York County Supreme Court which, on appeal, also found for the game’s makers, the judges, as a point of law, accepted the claim a computer game’s character "could be construed a portrait", which "could constitute an invasion of an individual’s privacy" but, on the facts of the case, the likeness was "not sufficiently strong".  The “… artistic renderings are an indistinct, satirical representation of the style, look and persona of a modern, beach-going young woman... that is not recognizable as the plaintiff" Judge Eugene Fahey wrote in his ruling.  Judge Fahey's words recalled those of Potter Stewart (1915–1985; associate justice of the US Supreme Court 1958-1981) when in Jacobellis v Ohio (378 U.S. 184 (1964) he wrote: “I shall not today attempt further to define… and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so.  But I know it when I see it…”  Judge Fahey knew a basic white girl when he saw one; he just couldn't name her.  Lindsay Lohan's lawyers did not seek leave to appeal.

Lagniappe

Lagniappe (pronounced lan-yap or lanny-yap)

(1) A small gift given with a purchase to a customer, by way of compliment or for good measure; bonus (mostly southern Louisiana and south-east Texas).

(2) Something given or obtained as a gratuity (tip) or bonus

(3) A gratuity or tip.

(4) An unexpected or indirect benefit.

(5) A windfall, an unexpected turn of good fortune

1840s: An Americanism, from the Cajun French lagniappe, from the Latin American Spanish la ñapa or la yapa, the construct being la- (the feminine definite article) + a variant of ñapa or yapa (small gift or additional quantity given to a valued customer), from the Quechua (known also as Runasimi (people's language), an indigenous language family spoken by the Quechua peoples of the Peruvian Andes) yápa (addition; that which is added; increase, supplement (which existed also in the form yapay (addition; sum).  The word (in its various spellings) is found most commonly in southern Louisiana and south-east Texas but exists also in Mississippi and Trinidad & Tobago).  The synonyms include pasella (South Africa), brotus (southern US) and tilly or luck penny (Ireland).  The idea was in England institutionalized as “the baker’s dozen” whereby the standard quantity of items sold by the dozen (12) was set at 13.  The first documented record of the word dates from 1849 in the sense of “something extra, given by a merchant to a customer to reward or encourage patronage” and it was a part of transactional New Orleans Creole.  Mark Twain (1835-1910) in Life on the Mississippi (1883) noted the practice was universal among Louisiana shopkeepers and to his ear, the pronunciation was lanny-yap although variations have been noted throughout the southern US and the Caribbean.  Twain observed the practice frequently and recorded the way people would use the word wryly to describe some historic transactions: "The English were trading beads and blankets to them [the native Americans] for a consideration and throwing in civilization & whiskey 'for lagniappe'."    The alternative spellings are lagnappe, lanyap & lanyappe.  Lagniappe is a noun; the noun plural is lagniappes.

In Japanese commerce, the concept of the lagniappe was long a part of the retailing low-cost, mass-produced items and was known as御負け (omake) and while the small “giveaways” were intended originally to stimulate sales, the industry came to realize that if produced as sets the additional inclusions could in themselves become desirable collectables and it wasn’t unknown for purchases to being made not for the purpose of obtaining the notionally priced item but instead the free gift.  The highest form of this concept was wrapping or otherwise concealing the gift so that people had to keep purchasing until they managed to “snag” the missing part of the set.  Controversial among consumer organizations (especially with products appealing to children), the trick is still used, both in Japan and beyond.  A variation of the idea (as an ad-hoc form of the baker’s dozen) is the “bundle”, the classic example of which is the inclusion of extra material (tracks, interviews, deleted scenes, bloopers etc) on optical (CD, DVD, Blu-Ray) releases of films or music.  The bundle actually remains one of the most common forms of convincing consumers they’re benefiting from “added value”, the trick being that the “free” extras can be advertised as being worth their recommended retail price (which in many cases, for many reasons, the manufacturer or retailer has worked out they have few prospects of ever realizing), a value vastly higher than their actual cost or the even lower book value.  In the days when cars had vast option lists, the US manufacturers were past masters at "bundling", stocks of slow-selling items off-loaded in seemingly attractively priced "bundles".

Mean Girls Special Collector's Edition (2004) on DVD, Paramount Pictures (part number D341604D).

Bundled extras: There’s no defined standard for what is included in “special” editions of commercially released films but unlike “director’s cut” versions which to some extent change the actual content of the original releases (cinema, optical, TV or streaming), “special editions” tend to be the original plus a bundle of “extras”.  Assembled usually as “featurettes”, typically, the additional content will consist of interviews with the cast, director or writers, out-takes, bloopers, deleted scenes, advertising and other promotional material and sometimes commentaries from critics or commentators with expertise in some issue of interest.  For nerds, there’s sometimes even content about technical aspects of production, an addition most often seen with product made with much use of special effects but discussions about matters such as fashion or history might also appear.

The Mean Girls Special Collector's Edition included (1) discussions about casting, (2) an interview with Rosalind Wiseman (b 1969), author of Queen Bees and Wannabes (2002) on which the Mean Girls screenplay was based, (3) commentary by the writers and producers, (4) “Word Vomit” (the Blooper Reel), (5) deleted scenes with commentary, (6) “Plastic Fashion” (a discussion about costume design and the use of clothing as a metaphor for character development), (7) interstitials (advertising material created with original material not used in the final cut) and (8) promotional trailers for other Paramount films.

Democratic Party campaign material: 1996 US presidential election.

Lagniappe: In some countries, politicians literally buy votes with physical cash.  In this West this happens but the process is sanitized and degrees of remoteness introduced.  There are also more abstract forms such as the Democratic Party including campaign material in the 1996 US presidential election which essentially offered “a free copy of crooked Hillary with a re-elected Bill.  Whether the voters thought this “added value” isn’t clear but Bill Clinton (with some help from Ross Perot (1930-2019) won with almost 50% of the vote so there's that.  Intriguingly, whether because or despite of being bundled with free copy of crooked Hillary, polls at the time indicated that had (post-Monica) Bill been able to run in 2000 for a third term, he'd have won even more handsomely.

Solipsism

Solipsism (pronounced sol-ip-siz-uhm)

(1) An extreme preoccupation with and indulgence of one's feelings, desires etc; egoistic self-absorption.

(2) In philosophy, the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist.  The view or theory that self is the only object of real knowledge or the only thing that is real is technically, an extreme form of scepticism, a denial of the possibility knowledge can exists other than that of one's own existence.

1871: A invention of Modern English from the Latin, the construct being sōlus (alone) +‎ ipse (self) +‎ -ism.  The origin of sōlus is murky, some suggest a link with the earlier swolos, from the Proto-Italic swelos, from the primitive Indo-European swé, a reflexive pronoun from whence came se (oneself) + -los, hence the meaning "by oneself".  Another theory references solhz (whole, healthy) which would make it akin to sollus and salvus.  The third alternative is a connection with the Proto-Germanic sēliz, the Gothic sēls, (happy, good) and the Old English sēlra (better), again from the primitive Indo-European sōlhz (from whence sōlor (to console)).  Ipse (feminine ipsa, neuter ipsum; the demonstrative pronoun) was compounded from the primitive Indo-European éy and swé and, for highly technical reasons, was ipsus in the pre-classical lexicon.  Root of the –ism suffix was either the Ancient Greek -ισμός (-ismós), a suffix that forms abstract nouns of action, state, condition, doctrine; from stem of verbs in -ίζειν (-ízein) (from which English gained -ize), or was from the related Ancient Greek suffix -ισμα (-isma), which more specifically expressed a finished act or thing done.  Solipsism is a noun, solipsist is a noun & adjective, solipsistic is and adjective and solipsistically is an adverb; the noun plural is solipsisms.  For whatever reason, the potentially useful solipsismal seems never to have been coined.

Much ado about nothingness

Wanderer above the Sea of Fog (circa 1818) by Caspar David Friedrich (1774–1840).  German painters of the Romantic era weren't necessarily the most solipsistic of the era but can seem so.  They painted under the long shadow cast by G.W.F. Hegel (1770–1831). 

In casual use, solipsism is a useful word to refer to the self-obsessed and there are a lot of them about.  There is a solipsism quiz to work out the extent of one’s own tendency to the solipsistic.  Solipsism is the (ultimately wholly abstract) position in metaphysics that the mind is the only thing that can be known to exist and that knowledge of anything outside the mind is not merely false but unjustified.  It can be thought of as a sceptical hypothesis of life and, if pursued to as close to a logical conclusion as it allows, can lead only to a belief that the whole of reality and the external world and other people are merely representations of the individual self, having no independent existence of their own, and may not even exist.  It differs therefore from pure scepticism in that the solipsist is actually asserting something; it should instead be thought of as a fork of pure idealism.  In Philosophy 101 classes, it’s one of the tools to train the mind.  Lecturers find it amusing because there’s sometimes a student who takes all this seriously and starts to worry; sometimes for years.  Debates between nihilists and solipsists shouldn't of course happen but they do, descending often to a contest of onedownmanship about who holds the most extreme position.

The Mean Girls (2004) crew in their native environment.  For the modern young solipsist, there is only self and shopping.

The origins of Solipsism in western philosophy are in the writings of the Greek pre-Socratic sophist philosopher Gorgias (483–375 BC) who asserted (1) nothing exists, (2) even if something exists, nothing can be known about it and (3), even if something could be known about it, knowledge about it cannot be communicated to others.  That of course is internally perfect and can go no further but because solipsism can be neither proved nor disproved, some otherwise sensible folk felt obliged to bolt it onto the universe.  Philosopher Bishop George Berkeley (1685–1753), argued physical objects do not exist independently of the mind that perceives them and that an item truly exists only so long as it is observed (otherwise it is not only meaningless but simply non-existent).  Berkeley however argued this as part of his world-view which included God and God, even if one accepts he’s probably an Anglican, surely can’t be a solipsist although, if he is, truly we do know the mind of God.

Students seduced by his dark visions may well be tempted to describe Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) as solipsist on the basis that’s how his writings make them feel but he never really explored metaphysical solipsism and it was his radical perspectivism which causes misunderstanding.  In a sense, Nietzsche not only was not, but could not be a solipsist because while solipsism is the belief only one's own mind exists, or can be known to exist, Nietzsche viewed the self not as a separate entity from existence, but rather as an integrated part of a chaotic “will-to-power” driven reality.  In Beyond Good and Evil (1886), Nietzsche argued that “there are no facts, only interpretations”, and knowledge was subjective, created by individual perspectives, meaning there was no single “objective reality” accessible to all.  In the wake of post-modernity, that no longer sounds exceptional but in the milieu of late nineteenth century intellectual life, it was a stark vision.  Nietzsche was one of those figures upon whom students were inclined to map their own world view and that was possible because of the way he phrased things; it was that adaptability (exploited by the Nazis) which persuaded later philosophers (notably Leo Strauss (1899–1973)) to write in a manner which meant their words couldn’t be misappropriated.  For Strauss, that avoided misrepresentation but didn’t help accessibility and if reading for pleasure rather than enlightenment, Nietzsche rewards more than Strauss.  To students, being told by Nietzsche that “God is dead” could be heady stuff so they should be forgiven for thinking him a solipsist; in urging them to stop valuing the “fake” worlds of Plato (or anyone else) he did seem to imply a belief only in his own constructed reality.  After all, if God was dead, there can be no objective divine perspective so each individual must create their own sense of meaning.

Nietzsche fan boy (bottom left) on the floor of a Siemens factory, Nuremberg 1910.  In German workplaces, the rules included “No smiling” and “No laughter”.

So while it’s easy to understand why the “Nietzsche a solipsist” label is tempting, most historians would call that either a mischaracterization or misunderstanding.  Certainly, there’s little in Nietzsche’s writings which could be constructed as the defense of solipsism as a doctrine and rarely did he engage in the kind of systematic, foundational epistemology in which solipsism typically is discussed.  Of course, merely that a philosopher didn’t write of something has never prevented latter-day adherents or critics interpreting what they did say which is why the neo-Marxists managed to create a reasonably hefty volume of work covering “Marxist aspects of crime & punishment” despite Karl Marx (1818-1883) mostly being silent on both topics.  Nietzsche did not argue that only one’s mind is certain to exist so in that sense rejects the very framework underpinning solipsism and was critical of the idea a stable, self-transparent subject (the I) could serve as the foundation of knowledge; his famous quip that “there is no ‘being’ behind doing” would seem at least a nail in solipsism’s coffin.

The problem was, and remains, that while perspectivism (all knowledge is from a perspective, shaped by physiology, culture, and drives) was not the same as solipsism, but for romantic youth seduced by Nietzsche’s words, things became teleological and, as Leo Strauss concluded, Nietzsche’s texts could be said to mean whatever one wanted them to mean.  He deserves still to be read but needs to be read with care because perspectivism at least implies (and probably demands) a plurality of interpretations and viewpoints rather than collapsing things to a singularity; where the confusion lies is that there’s really no denial of the existence if external world, his point rather that man has no uninterpreted access to it; what lies beyond is real, but we can perceive and understand it only through interpretive lenses.

Noose

Noose (pronounced noos)

(1) A loop with a running knot, as in a snare, lasso, or hangman's halter, that tightens as the rope is pulled; a device to restrain, bind, or trap.

(2) A tie or bond; snare.

(3) To secure by or as by a noose.

(4) To make a noose with or in (a rope or the like).

1400-1450: From the late Middle English nose (noose, loop), of unclear origin.  Etymologists have speculated it may be from the Old French nos or Old Occitan nous & nos (both forms known also in the descendent Provençal), the nominative singular or accusative plural of nou (knot), with the meaning shifting from the knot to the loop created by the knot, the French forms from the Latin nōdus (knot; node), from the primitive Indo-European root ned (to bind; to tie).  If that’s true, it was cognate with the French nœud (knot), the Portuguese nó (knot) and the Spanish nudo (knot).  The alternative etymology (which most authorities appear to find more convincing) is it was borrowed from Middle Low German nȫse (loop, noose, snare), also of obscure origin although it may have been derived from an incorrect division of ēn' ȫse (literally “a loop”), from the Middle Low German ȫse, from the Old Saxon ōsia, from the Proto-West Germanic ansiju (eyelet, loop).  It’s possible the Saterland Frisian Noose (loop, eyelet) & Oose (eyelet, loop) may have emerged from the same process.  In English, use of noose was rare prior to the early seventeenth century.  Although it’s a popular tale, it’s a myth a hangman’s noose always has 13 coils.  The old spelling nooze is long obsolete.  Noose is a noun & verb; nooser is a verb, nooselike & nooseless are adjectives and noosed & noosing are verbs; the noun plural is nooses.

The Nazis and the noose

Soviet cartoon: Caricature of the defendants and the anticipated Nuremberg judgment (1946) by the Soviet artists known as the Kukryniksy: Porfiry Krylov (1902-1990), Mikhail Kupriyanov (1903-1991) & Nikolai Sokolov (1903-2000).  As the trial wore on, at least two of the defendants were recorded as requesting shirts with “larger collars” and on one occasion one removed his tie, explaining it was “suddenly feeling tight”.  The famous quote “Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully” appears in volume 3 of The Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. (1791) by James Boswell (1740-1795) (a biography of the English writer and literary critic Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)).

As a prelude to the main Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) of the most notable or representative Nazis, the list of two-dozen-odd defendants was assembled to be indicted variously for (1) conspiracy to commit a crime against peace, (2) planning or waging wars of aggression, (3) war crimes and (4) crimes against humanity.  Even before the trial started it was known the International Military Tribunal (IMT) enjoyed capital jurisdiction (although in his opening remarks the president of the tribunal took care to explain the legal basis of their right to impose death sentences) and the court-appointed psychologist noted from his interviews with the accused that all expected the proceedings to be nothing more than a Stalinesque “show trial” with the death penalty inevitable for all, something the assurances of their (German) defense council seemed little to assuage.  As representatives from the world’s press (not yet called “the media”) began to arrive they were reported as mostly sharing the assumption and even as the trial unfolded and the defendants came to realize that for at least some of them there was the prospect of avoiding the noose or perhaps even securing an acquittal, the straw polls among the journalists still thought the death sentence likely for the majority.

Soviet cartoon The twelfth hour of the Hitlerites by Boris Efimov (1900-2008), from the series Fascist Menagerie, Izvestiia, 1 January 1946.

The prospect of imminent death is said “to focus the mind” and among the military defendants, all more than once expressed the opinion that as soldiers, they were entitled to execution by firing squad rather than by the hangman’s noose, the gallows too associated with the fate of common criminals (although one avoided that by having hanged himself (technically by act of strangulation) before the trial began.  In the end, of those present in the dock, 11 were sentenced to be hanged by the neck until dead, Hermann Göring (1893–1946; leading Nazi 1922-1945 and Reichsmarschall 1940-1945) avoiding the indignity of the noose by committing suicide, poisoning himself on the eve of his scheduled execution in circumstances which have never been clear.  Another, Erich Raeder (1876–1960; head of the German Navy 1928-1943) lodged one of the more unusual appeals after being sentenced to life imprisonment, asking that he instead receive the death penalty, life in prison apparently a worse prospect than being hanged; his appeal was declined.  Many lurid stories about the botched nature of some of the hangings circulated in the post-war years but while some might not have caused instant death, it’s unlikely any took anything like the 17 minutes it was claimed some took to die.

Caricature of Rudolf Hess at Nuremberg (1946) by New Zealand-born UK cartoonist David Low (1891-1963).

The author Rebecca West (1892–1983) covered the trial as a journalist and wrote some vivid thumbnail sketches, noting: "Hess was noticeable because he was so plainly mad: so plainly mad that it seemed shameful that he should be tried.  His skin was ashen and he had that odd faculty, peculiar to lunatics, of falling into strained positions which no normal person could maintain for more than a few minutes, and staying fixed in contortion for hours. He had the classless air characteristic of asylum inmates; evidently his distracted personality had torn up all clues to his past.  He looked as if his mind had no surface, as if every part of it had been blasted away except the depth where the nightmares live."

The strangest case in so many ways was that of Rudolf Hess (1894–1987; Nazi Deputy Führer 1933-1941).  Before the proceedings formerly commenced, the tribunal had been considering discharging Hess because it seemed clear there was sufficient doubt his mental state was adequate to ensure a fair trial.  He went to trial only after making an extraordinary admission his display of amnesia had to that point been merely “tactical” and he was quite lucid and able to understand all that was going on; at the time, it was probably the trial's most sensational event.  He’d actually achieved the very thing sought by but denied to so many defendants yet he chose instead to be tried.  His conduct thereon was just as bizarre, declining to enter a plea (his "Nein!"the court recorded as “not guilty”), often preferring to read novels rather than follow the proceedings and when his sentence was announced, he claimed not to have listened, saying, apparently without much concern, he assumed it was death.  Actually, he was sentenced to imprisonment for life and with six others entered Berlin’s Spandau Prison where he would remain until 1987 when, aged 93, he hanged himself, having fashioned a noose from a length of electrical cable.  For the last two decades, he was the sole inmate of the huge facility designed to accommodate hundreds and, having entered captivity in 1941 after his bizarre “peace mission” to Scotland, had by the time of his death been locked-up for 46 years.

Low’s take on the official German line explaining Hess deserting the German government as “madness”.  This cartoon does represent what was then the prevailing public perception of the typical behaviour expected of those in “lunatic asylums”.  Depicted (left to right) are:

Hermann Göring: Committed suicide by by crushing between his teeth an ampule of a potassium cyanide (KCN), smuggled into his cell in circumstances never confirmed, shortly before he was to be hanged after being convicted on all four counts ((1) Conspiracy to wage aggressive war; (2) Waging aggressive war; (3) War crimes and (4) crimes against humanity.

Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945): With his wife Eva Hitler (née Braun; 1912–1945) of a few hours, committed suicide (he by gunshot and KCN, she by KCN alone) with the tanks of the Red Army only a couple of blocks from the Berlin Führerbunker.

Dr Robert Ley (1890–1945; head of the Deutsche Arbeitsfront (German Labour Front) 1933-1945): Committed suicide by hanging (by means of suffocation) himself in his cell in Nuremberg prior to the trial after for some years have made a reasonable attempt to drink himself to death.  He died with his underpants stuffed in his mouth.

Joachim von Ribbentrop (1893–1946; Nazi foreign minister 1938-1945): Hanged at Nuremberg after being convicted on all four counts.

Dr Joseph Goebbels (1897-1945; Nazi propaganda minister 1933-1945): With his wife (Magda Goebbels (née Ritschel; 1901-1945), committed suicide (by gunshot) in the courtyard above the Führerbunker, shortly after they’d murdered their six children.

Heinrich Himmler (1900–1945; Reichsführer SS 1929-1945): Captured by the British while attempting to escape disguised as a soldier, he committed suicide using an ampule of (KCN) he’d concealed in his mouth.

Burberry’s hoodie with noose, 2019, (left) and model Kylie Jenner (b 1997) wearing a Givenchy Noose Necklace, 2023.

Because of the association with suicide, slavery and the history of lynching in the century after the US Civil War (1861-1865), the noose can be a controversial thing if invoked in an insensitive way.  Controversy though is just another technique to be weaponized when there’s the need to generate publicity and in the fashion business, it’s no longer enough to just to design something elegant or otherwise pleasing to the eye because it will barely be noticed on the catwalk and probably won’t make the magazines or become clickbait.  Thus the temptation to try to shock which will guarantee the desired publicity, the added attraction being the certainty the will do its job then quickly subside.  The Givenchy Noose Necklace model Kylie Jenner wore in January 2023 at Paris Fashion Week had been see before, causing a bit of a stir on the catwalk in 2021 when it was used in the fashion house’s Spring/Summer 2022 show.  Then, on cue, The Guardian called it out as “blatantly offensive”, guaranteeing even wider coverage although Givenchy solved the short-term problem by responding to the paper’s request for a comment with an Élysée-like “The house does not have an official response on this”.  They may have learned that in such matters apologies probably make things worse from Burberry’s "We are deeply sorry for the distress caused by one of the products that featured in our Autumn/Winter 2019 collection”, issued after being condemned for showing a hoodie with a noose.

Cologne

Cologne (pronounced kuh-lohn)

(1) A Rhine River port and the largest city in the western German state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), commercially significant since ancient times.  The German name is Köln (formerly Cöln).

(2) A mildly perfumed toilet water originally the short form of eau de Cologne (Cologne water), made in Cologne since 1709.

(3) A general term for a perfumed liquid or solid made typically with 2-5% fragrant essential oils and 70-95% water & alcohol.

1709 (for the scent).  A short form of eau de Cologne (Cologne water), the name given to the original product in 1709 and such was the success of the original that imitators were soon legion and the product name (usually as bottled liquids) was by the mid-century generic.  The concoction was first brewed by Italian-born perfumier Giovanni Maria Farina (1685-1766) whose contribution to civility was by in 1844 noted in a dictionary as “a distilled spirit blended with certain essential oils so as to give off a fragrant scent”.  Founded in 38 BC as Oppidum Ubiorum, the city was renamed and made a colony in 50 AD at the request of the Emperor Claudius's (10 BC–54 AD; Roman emperor 41-54 AD) wife Agrippina the Younger (15-59 AD), becoming Colōnia Agrippīna (Agrippine Colony) in honor of his mother-in-law.  Colōnia (colony) was from colōnus (farmer; colonist), from colō (till, cultivate, worship), from quelō, from the primitive Indo-European kel (to move; to turn (around)).  From this came the French word for the city (Cologne) which seems to have been in general use in English by the early-mid eighteenth century.  Some historians Agrippina the Younger poisoned Claudius and if so, that suggests, at least, ingratitude.  By 450 AD, the name had been shortened to Colonia before eventually being Germanized, first as Cöln and later Köln.  Cologne & Cologner are proper nouns & nouns and cologned is an adjective; the noun plural is colognes.

The distinction between cologne and perfume is probably well-understood although there is some imprecision in use, the main differences being the in the concentration of fragrant oils and the intended use.  Cologne, typically contains a lower concentration of oils (usually 2-5%) which results in something lighter and less intense than other scents (most of which are now called perfume (also as Parfum or Extrait de Parfum) in which the concentration ranges most often between 15-40%.  Cologne can thus be fashioned as something subtle and refreshing and ideal for everyday wear although it’s generally not as long-lasting as perfume.  Perfumes are more intense (especially as concentrates) and can be long-lasting, their effect lingering even for hours.  As a general principle, cologne is used in greater volume although a number of perfumes are available as sprays and applied about as liberally whereas the classic concentrates should be daubed onto pulse points such as the wrists, neck and behind the ears.  Historically, cologne was thought of as something worn by men (often as a form of deodorant) rather than women but the products are now less gender-specific.

CColognes have long been marketed to women: Max Factor’s Primitif (1957 left) was explicitly labeled as cologne.  In the twenty-first century, fcuk’s friction (for him) and her (for her) were colognes but described in the marketing material as Eau De Toilette.  The fcuk advertising copy which accompanied the Lindsay Lohan campaign read: "an ultra feminine mix of hypnotic fruity florals and tantalizingly seductive vanilla that penetrate the senses.  its velvety coconut and sensual warmth will keep him coming back for more." (Original syntax in the fcuk style as printed)

Perhaps surprisingly, the European Union (EU) seems never to have sought to impose restrictions on the use of the term “cologne” in the same way they’ve successfully protected geographical indications (GI) like Cognac, Champagne, Parma Ham etx.  Geographical indications (GIs) are protected under EU law to prevent misuse and imitation of traditional products with a specific geographical origin (especially if traditional methods of production are involved).  The rationale is that protection helps maintain the quality and reputation of these products and supports the local communities involved in their production and the EU does not seek to prevent winemakers anywhere making champagne (anyone free to adopt méthode champenoise); they insist only it can’t be marketed as “Champagne”.  Cologne has never been afforded this protection because of the long history of use, both in Europe and around the world.  It long ago became generic.

Cologne Capris leading and following a BMW CSL “Batmobile”, European Touring Car Championship, Salzburgring, 1974.

The Ford “Cologne Capris” used to contest European touring car racing in the 1970s were so named because while Ford of England focused on the international rally championships, the Cologne-based arm of Ford Europe prepared the cars for use on the circuits.  The first version was a fairly modest (by later standards) modification of the RS 2600 which used a 2.6 litre (158 cubic inch) version of the German built V6 which over time was gradually increased in capacity to take advantage of the three litre (183 cubic inch) class limit.  With exotic cylinder heads and a rear suspension which somehow complied with the letter of the law while obviously being a clause passing through a loophole, it was at once successful but Ford’s spies were aware BMW was preparing one of the era’s great homologation specials, the be-winged 3.0 CSL which, powerful and significantly lightened, so gained the nickname “Batmobile”.

Cologne Capris and BMW CSL “Batmobiles”, European Touring Car Championship, Nürburgring, 1974.

The lawyers at in Munich proved as adept as those in Cologne at reading the rulebook and increased the production CSL’s engine displacement to just over three litres, permitting a larger capacity version to be used in competition and the factory produced a 3.5 litre version of the straight-six for the track.  Ford’s answer was a run of 3.1 litre (189 cubic inch) V6 Capris as road cars which meant a 3.4 litre (207 cubic inch) version could be built for competition.  Based this time on the English “Essex” V6, to meet the BMW threat it was fitted with double overhead camshaft (DOHC) heads with four valves per cylinder, a configuration BMW would soon match.  The competition between the Cologne Capris and the Batmobiles was much anticipated as all the ingredients for a stellar season were in place but unfortunately the contests were rare because the Oil Crisis of 1973-1974 meant both Ford and BMW scaled down their competition departments and Ford in late 1974 cancelled the entire programme, the Batmobiles, now with less opposition, continuing to enjoy success on both sides of the Atlantic for several more seasons.