Lunch

Lunch (pronounced luhnch)

(1) A light midday meal between breakfast and dinner; luncheon.

(2) Any light meal or snack.

(3) To eat lunch.

(4) In slang, as “out to lunch”, dim, vague, uselessly ineffectual.

(5) In slang as “lunchy”, old-fashioned; passé; out of style (obsolete).

(6) In slang as “eating their lunch”, outwitting an opponent.

(7) In Caribbean slang (among older folk), mid afternoon tea.

(8) In first-class cricket, the break in play between the first and second sessions (confusingly for those new to cricket, although the first session is often called the "pre-lunch session", the second is known as the "lunch session" and not the "post lunch session").

(9) In Minnesota, USA, any small meal, especially one eaten at a social gathering.

1580:  It’s never been clear which came first: lunch or luncheon.  Origin of both is thought to lie in a dissimilated variant of nuncheon, the Middle English nonechenche (noon ling meal and drink), equivalent to none (noon) + schench (from the Old English scenc or scencan (to pour out, give drink)), cognate with the Dutch and German schenken.  Apparent unrelated, Old English had nonmete (afternoon meal, literally "noon-meat").  Nonechenche was possibly altered by the northern English dialect lunch (hunk of bread or cheese) from 1590 which may be from lump or the Spanish lonja (slice, literally “loin”).  Because dinner in the sense of the biggest or main meal of the day) could be eaten either at around noon, in the evening or at night, there was a need for a meal to fill the gap between breakfast and dinner.  Lunch is a noun & verb, luncher is a noun, lunching is a noun & verb and lunched is a verb; the noun plural is lunches.

A montage of a languid Lindsay Lohan lingering over lunch.

The idea of lunch as it’s now understood took a long time to evolve, to “take a lunch” in 1786 is recorded as eating a chunk of something (perhaps evolved from lump), carved sufficiently large to constitute a filling meal and as late as 1817, the US Webster’s Dictionary offered as the only definition of lunch "a large piece of food", a meaning long obsolete and in the 1820s, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) thought it either “a vulgarism or a fashionable affectation".   Nevertheless, lunch’s intrusion into the language in the nineteenth century does suggest some sort of social change was afoot, either in the type, style or timing of meals or at least the words used to describe them.  Lunch-money was attested from 1868; lunch-time from 1821; lunch hour from 1840 and the lunch-break from 1960.  The slang phrase out to lunch in the sense of “a bit vague, dim, clueless (but some way short of actually insane) was first recorded in recorded 1955, the notion of being "not there" and instead at lunch.  The luncheon voucher was a public health measure, introduced in 1946 by the UK’s post-war Labour government (1945-1951).  It was literally a paper voucher which represented the mechanism by which the government would subsidize midday meals taken in private restaurants by employees in workplaces where there was no staff canteen.  Luncheon vouchers were an attempt to improve the national diet by encouraging the consumption of healthy, nutritious food at a time when so many basic items were still subject to the rationing imposed during wartime (indeed, some foodstuffs were subject to rationing only after the conflict ceased).  In an example of bureaucratic inertia, the scheme existed to an extent until 2013 by which time the effects of inflation had made the by then trivial subsidy inconsequential.

Receptacles in which to store one’s lunch for transport have a history.  The lunch-box is documented from 1864, the lunch-pail from 1891.  Those were descriptive nouns whereas lunch-bucket emerged in the 1990s as an adjective indicating working-class men or values, bucket presumably the best word because it was universally understood in the English-speaking world to an extent pail was not.  Lunch-bag seems never to have become a common form despite being widely used but in the 1970s, the verb brown-bag (and the related brown-bagging) referring to bringing lunch or liquor in a brown paper bag.  A long-time staple of a lunch-pail’s contents, lunch-meat (a processed form of meat-based protein produced in a size which, when sliced, was aligned with the slices of standard loaves of bread and thus convenient for making sandwiches) was first documented in 1931.  The lunch-counter (a long, elevated table or bench where customers eat standing or sitting on high stools) is an 1854 invention of US English.

The possible future of lunch: Grilled jellyfish.  Although many fish species are in decline, jellyfish numbers are growing.  The part eaten for lunch is called the umbrella. 

The portmanteau word brunch dates from circa 1890, a British student slang merging of breakfast and lunch, according to the magazine Punch (1 August 1896).  It appeared in 1895 in the defunct Hunter's Weekly, but two years earlier, at the University of Oxford, the students had drawn what must at the time have seemed an important distinction: The combination-meal, when nearer the usual breakfast hour, is "brunch" and, when nearer luncheon, is "blunch".  That’s a linguistic curiosity in that the brunch survived while blunch did not yet the modern understanding of a brunch appears to be something taken closer to the time of lunch than breakfast.  It may be that brunch was just the more pleasingly attractive word, blunch not so well rolling off the tongue.  Several spellings of luncheon were noted in the decades after the 1640s, the now standardised form not widespread until 1706.  Of uncertain origin, in the 1580s was used to describe something like the northern English dialectal lunch (hunk of bread or cheese), though influenced by the Spanish lonja (a slice, literally "loin"), blended with or influenced by nuncheon, from the mid-fourteenth century Middle English nonechenche, (light mid-day meal), from none (noon) + schench (drink), from the Old English scenc, from scencan (pour out).

The possible future of lunch: Fishcakes.  Fishcakes are a way by-products of the industrial processing of seafood can be sold as a protein source (ie make use of what would be otherwise used for agricultural feed, the pet-food business or end up a waste product.

The etymology of all these words is tangled and there are reasons to suspect the similar forms arose independently in different place rather than as forks of anything vaguely lineal, the OED discounting the notion of lunching, which dates from the 1650s, being derived from the verb lunch because that wasn’t to be attested for another century, the OED suggesting there may be some connection (by analogy) with words like truncheon etc to simulate a French origin which is speculative but such things are not unknown in ever class-conscious England.  Whatever the origin, it does seem to have been used to describe an early afternoon meal eaten by those who take dinner at noon.

Torch

Torch (pronounced tawrch)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Passing the Torch

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

Berlin, 1936.

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

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

Mexico City, 1968.

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

Lake Placid, 1980.

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

President Biden passes the torch

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Washington Post, 1 April 1968.

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

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

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

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

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

Torch Songs

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

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

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

I watch the walls around me crumble

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

So here's your last change for redemption

So take it while it lasts because it will end

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

I can't live without you

Can't breathe without you

I'm dreamin' 'bout you honestly

Tell me that it’s over

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

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

Tell me that it's over

And I'll be the first to go

Don't want to be the last to know

I won't be the one to chase you

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

I'm always stuck with these emotions

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

My tears are turning into time

I've wasted trying to find a reason for goodbye

I can't live without you

Can't breathe without you

I'm dreamin' 'bout you honestly

Tell me that its over

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

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

Tell me that it's over

And I'll be the first to go

Yeah, I'll be the first to go

Don't want to be the last to know

Over, over, over

My tears are turning into time

I've wasted trying to find a reason for goodbye

I can't live without you

Can't breathe without you

I'm dreamin' bout you honestly

Tell me that it’s over

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

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

Tell me that it's over

Tell me that it's over

Honestly tell me,

Honestly tell me,

Don't tell me that it's over

Don't tell me that it's over.

Harlot

Harlot (pronounced hahr-luht)

(1) A prostitute or promiscuous woman; one given to the wanton; lewd; low; base.

(2) By extension, in political discourse, an unprincipled person (now rare).

(3) A person given to low conduct; a rogue; a villain; a cheat; a rascal (obsolete).

(4) To play the harlot; to practice lewdness.

Circa 1200: From the Middle English harlot (young idler, rogue), from the Old French harlot, herlot & arlot (rascal; vagabond; tramp”), of obscure origin but thought probably of Germanic origin, either a derivation of harjaz (“army; camp; warrior; military leader”) or a diminutive of karilaz (man; fellow); most speculate the first element is from hari (army).  It was cognates with the Old Provençal arlot, the Old Spanish arlote and the Italian arlotto.  The long obsolete Middle English carlot (a churl; a common man; a person (male or female) of low birth; a boor; a rural dweller, peasant or countryman) is thought probably related.  Harlot was a noun and (less often) a verb, harlotry a noun and harlotize a verb; the present participle was harloting (or harlotting), the simple past and past participle harloted (or harlotted) and there’s no evidence exotic forms like harlotistic or harlotic ever existed, however useful they might have been.  Harlot is a noun & verb, harlotry is a noun, harlotish is an adjective, harlotize and harloted & harloting are verbs; the noun plural is harlots.  The adjective harlotesque is non-standard.

Harlot as a surname dates from at least the mid-late 1100s but by circa 1200 was being used to describe a “vagabond, someone of no fixed occupation, an idle rogue" and was applied almost exclusively to men in the Middle English and Old French.  Geoffrey Chaucer (circa 1345-1400) used harlot in a positive as well as pejorative sense and in medieval English texts it was applied to jesters, buffoons, jugglers and later to actors.  What is the now prevalent meaning (prostitute, unchaste woman) was originally the secondary sense but it had probably developed as early as the late fourteenth century, being well-documented by the early fifteenth.  Doubtless, it was the appearance in sixteenth century English translations of the Bible (as a euphemism for "strumpet, whore") which cemented the association.

In harlotesque mode: Lindsay Lohan in fancy dress as Suicide Squad's (2016) Harley Quinn, Halloween party, London, November 2016.  It may be a cliché but for purposes of fancy dress, fishnet stockings (or tights) are the motif of choice for those wanting the "harlot look". 

The biblical imprimatur didn’t so much extend the meaning as make it gender-specific.  The noun harlotry (loose, crude, or obscene behavior; sexual immorality; ribald talk or jesting) had been in use since the late fourteenth century and the choice of harlot in biblical translation is thought an example of linguistic delicacy, a word like “strumpet” though too vulgar for a holy text and “jezebel” too historically specific.  In this, harlot is part of a long though hardly noble tradition of crafting or adapting words as derogatory terms to be applied to women.  It has to be admitted there are nuances between many but one is impressed there was thought to be such a need to be offensive to women that English contains so many: promiscuous, skeezer, slut, whore, concubine, courtesan, floozy, hooker, hussy, nymphomaniac, streetwalker, tom, strumpet, tramp, call girl, lady of the evening, painted woman et al.  So the bible is influential although there’s a perhaps surprising difference in the translations of that prescriptive duo, Leviticus & Ezekiel: In the King James Version (KJV 1611), harlot appears in thirty-eight versus, but once in Leviticus, nine times in Ezekiel, some of the memorable being:.

Genesis 38:24: And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she [is] with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.

Leviticus 21:14: A widow, or a divorced woman, or profane, [or] an harlot, these shall he not take: but he shall take a virgin of his own people to wife.

Joshua 6:25: And Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father's household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel [even] unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho.

Isaiah 1:21: How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.

Ezekiel 16:15: But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.

Ezekiel 16:41: And they shall burn thine houses with fire, and execute judgments upon thee in the sight of many women: and I will cause thee to cease from playing the harlot, and thou also shalt give no hire any more.

Ezekiel 23:19: Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt.

Ezekiel 23:44: Yet they went in unto her, as they go in unto a woman that playeth the harlot: so went they in unto Aholah and unto Aholibah, the lewd women.

Amos 7:17: Therefore thus saith the LORD; Thy wife shall be an harlot in the city, and thy sons and thy daughters shall fall by the sword, and thy land shall be divided by line; and thou shalt die in a polluted land: and Israel shall surely go into captivity forth of his land.

Nahum 3:4: Because of the multitude of the whoredoms of the wellfavoured harlot, the mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms, and families through her witchcrafts.

Stanley Baldwin election campaign poster, 1929.

Phrases like “shameless harlot” and “political prostitution” used to be part of the lively language of politics but social change and an increasing intolerance of gendered terms of derision have rendered them almost extinct (the language of metaphorical violence is next for the chopping-block: guillotined, knifed, axed etc all on death row).  Harlot’s most notable political excursion came in 1931 when Stanley Baldwin (1867–1947; thrice UK prime-minister 1923-1937) was facing an orchestrated campaign against his leadership by the newspaper proprietors, Lords Rothermere (1868–1940) & Beaverbrook (1879-1964), the "press barons" then a potent force (Beaverbrook called them collectively the "press gang").  Before commercial television & radio, let alone the internet and social media, most information was disseminated in newspapers and their influence was considerable.  The press barons though, whatever their desires, couldn't be dictatorial, as Beaverbrook found when his long campaign for empire free-trade achieved little but they sometimes behaved as if they could at a whim move public opinion and often politicians were inclined to believe them.  Within the UK at the time, Rothermere & Beaverbrook weren’t exactly “by Murdoch out of Zuckerberg” but it’s hard to think of a better way of putting it.

Baldwin in 1931 found a good way of putting it.  His leadership of the Tory party challenged because he refused to support them in what was even then the chimera of empire free trade, he responded with a strident speech which appealed to the public’s mistrust of the press barons, using a phrase from his cousin Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936), ironically a friend of Beaverbrook.  Rothermere & Beaverbrook he denounced as wanting power without responsibility, “…the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages.”  It was the most effective political speech in the UK until 1940, Baldwin flourishing and empire free trade doomed, although Beaverbrook would keep flogging the corpse for the rest of the 1930s.  Often underestimated, David Lloyd George (1863–1945; UK prime-minister 1916-1922) and Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) would later acknowledge Baldwin as the most formidable political operator of the era.

The oratory of Lloyd-George and Churchill may be more regarded by history but Baldwin did have a way with words and less remembered lines from another of his famous speeches may have influenced climate change activist Greta Thunberg (b 2003).  Delivered in the House of Commons on 10 November 1932 in a debate on disarmament, he argued for an international agreement to restrict the development of the aircraft as a military weapon:

“I think it is well also for the man in the street to realize that there is no power on earth that can protect him from being bombed, whatever people may tell him.  The bomber will always get through…”.  “The only defense is in offence, which means that you have got to kill more women and children more quickly than the enemy if you want to save yourselves. I mention that so that people may realize what is waiting for them when the next war comes.”

Prescient about the way the unrestricted bombing of civilians would be the Second World War’s novel theatre, the phrase "the bomber will always get through" reverberated around the world, chancelleries and military high commands taking from it not the need for restrictions but the imperative to build bomber fleets, Baldwin not planting the seed of the idea but certainly reinforcing the prejudices and worst instincts of many.  That was the power of the phrase; it subsumed the purpose of the speech, the rest of which was essentially forgotten including the concluding sentences:

"I do not know how the youth of the world may feel, but it is no cheerful thought to the older men that having got that mastery of the air we are going to defile the earth from the air as we have defiled the soil for nearly all the years that mankind has been on it."

“This is a question for young men far more than it is for us…”  “Few of my colleagues around me here will see another great war…”  “At any rate, if it does come we shall be too old to be of use to anyone.  But what about the younger men, they who will have to fight out this bloody issue of warfare; it is really for them to decide. They are the majority on the earth. It touches them more closely. The instrument is in their hands.”

“If the conscience of the young men will ever come to feel that in regard to this one instrument the thing will be done.”  “As I say, the future is in their hands, but when the next war comes and European civilization is wiped out, as it will be and by no force more than by that force, then do not let them lay the blame on the old men, but let them remember that they principally and they alone are responsible for the terrors that have fallen on the earth.”

Hansard recorded Baldwin’s speech being greeted with “loud and prolonged cheers”, his enthusiasm for disarmament making him as popular as Neville Chamberlain (1869–1940; UK prime-minister 1937-1940) would briefly be in 1938 when he returned from Germany with a piece of paper bearing Hitler’s signature an a guarantee of “peace in our time”.  Soon, the views on both men would shift but historians today treat them more sympathetically.

The old and the young.

Greta Thunberg (b 2003) and Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021), United Nations, New York, September 2019.  Ms Thunberg was attending a UN climate summit Mr Trump snubbed, going instead to a meeting on religious freedom.  Proving that God moves in mysterious ways, Mr Trump took a whole new interest in evangelical Christianity when he entered the contest for the 2016 presidential election.  Ms Thunberg seems to have noted the final paragraphs of Baldwin's speech and while convinced it’s quite right to “lay the blame on the old men” and their blah, blah, blah, which she thinks insufficient to lower carbon emissions, seems confident youth will prove more receptive to doing something about us defiling the earth.

Greta Thunberg, How Dare You? (Acid house mix).

Natation

Natation (pronounced ney-tey-shuhn or na-tey-shuhn)

(1) The act of swimming

(2) The craft or skill of swimming.

1535-1545: From the Latin natātiōn(em) (nominative natātiō) (a swimming; a swimming-place) noun of action from the past-participle stem of natāre (to swim), from the primitive Indo-European root sneh & neh- (to flow, to swim).  The –ion suffix was from the Middle English -ioun, from the Old French -ion, from the Latin -iō (genitive -iōnis).  It was appended to a perfect passive participle to form a noun of action or process, or the result of an action or process.  The construct of the Latin natātiō was natō (swim, float), the construct being the frequentative of nō +‎ -tiō.  Nō was used in the sense of “to swim” or “to” and as a poetic device “to sail”, “to flow”, “to fly”) and was from the Proto-Italic snāō, from sneh-yé-ti & neh-yé-ti, from sneh & neh- (to flow, to swim).  It was cognate with the Ancient Greek νάω (náō).  In English, “swimming lessons” sound mundane but to English-speaking ears, the French leçons de notation sounds poetic; a French swimming pool is a natatorium.  Natation, natatorium, natator & natatory are nouns and natant, natatorial & natational are adjectives; the noun plural is natators.

Lindsay Lohan in a natatorial image, floating in the azure waters of the Aegean, June 2022.

Although notation does have some technical uses in scientific publications, it’s most often used as a poetic or literary device to refer to swimming, floating in water or some imagery of floating, flying, drifting etc.  In poetry, as well as often searching for words which rhyme or suit the rhythm of the text, poets need to avoid repetition unless obviously it’s a deliberate device; even in epic-length works a too frequent appearance of a distinctive word can be jarring.  Natation can hardly be thought a common word so a poet must be sparing in its use; they might speak of a subject’s slow notation through their Beoetian life.  Boeotia was a region in Ancient Greece and the cosmopolitan Athenians would disparage the place’s inhabitants as provincial, dull and lacking cultural refinement (their district was one of the “flyover” states of Antiquity).  Nor need the word be applied only to people because the “silent notation” taken by the reflection of a full moon gliding across the silvery waters of a placid lake is an image evocative enough to appeal to any poet.  While in verse natation can be used of those actually splashing about, it’s as metaphor or symbolism that it’s more effective: a life can be a natation through the endless tides of life which can wash one onto sharp rocks or a tranquil shore.  Structurally, it is too just another word and one which a poet must use to construct the sounds which build the lyrical quality of the text and the act of notation is not an abstraction because just as a swimmer can flow with the currents, they can be compelled also to fight those tides and sometimes those battles are lost; often swimmers drown in the depths.

Model Adriana Fenice (b 1995) in bikini, ready to enjoy some natation (cautiously).

One not uncommon criticism of the literary novel is that authors are sometimes inclined to use obscure or archaic words for no reason other than "showing off", what Henry Fowler (1858–1933) in his A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926) damned as "pride of knowledge".  Done well, it can make reading an exhilarating experience but over done, it becomes just hard work.  In prose, use is more difficult than in a poem because, although usually a longer form which makes repetition less intrusive, with such rare words, they're most effective if used but once in a text.  Natation is is though distinctive and can be an evocative choice , even if a reader has to turn to a dictionary, an imposition most readers of literary novels will likely forgive in exchange for an elegant passage.  It can be deployed as something merely descriptive; a synonym for “swimming”, there to add a splash of novelty but used carefully, it can convey a the quality of movement in water as well the movement: somehow the path of a swan’s natation suggests a peaceful and picturesque setting.

Two natators in a natatorium.  Mosaic floor of a bath from the Roman villa of Pompianus in Cirta, Algeria, fourth century AD.  In historical writing, being a word of Latin origin, it can be used to add a sense of authenticity: a discussion of a Roman mosaic showing athletes or soldiers swimming might mention it being a depiction of a "natatorial setting".

Patterns of use (lower case, initial capital & all capitals): Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.