Dysmorphia

Dysmorphia (pronounced dis-mor-fiah)

(1) In clinical anatomy, characterized by anatomical malformation.

(2) In general medicine, having or exhibiting an anatomical malformation.

(3) In psychology and psychiatry, the perception of anatomical malformation; any of various psychological disorders whose sufferers believe that their body is wrong or inadequate, such as anorexia, bulimia, and muscle dysmorphia (bigorexia).

(4) As Dismorphia astyocha, a butterfly in the family Pieridae, found in both Argentina & Brazil.

From Ancient Greek δυσμορφίᾱ (dusmorphíā) (misshapenness, ugliness), the construct being δυσ- (dus-) (hard, difficult, bad) + μορφή (morphḗ) (shape, form) + -ίᾱ (-íā).  The prefix dys- was from the New Latin dys-, from Ancient Greek δυσ- (dus-), (hard, difficult, bad”) and was used to convey the idea of being difficult, impaired, abnormal, or bad.  Morph was a back-formation from morpheme & morphism, attested since the 1950s, from the Ancient Greek μορφή (morphḗ) (shape, form) and related to the German Morph, from Morphem (although dating only from the 1940s).  It’s probably now most familiar in (1) formal grammar & linguistics as a physical form representing some morpheme in language (it exists as a recurrent distinctive sound or sequence of sounds), (2) in linguistics as an allomorph (one of a set of realizations that a morpheme can have in different contexts) and (3) in digital image processing where shapes are changed from one form to another with the use of specialized software, a popular type being that which wholly or (especially) partially blends two images.  The plural is dysmorphias and, in clinical use, the synonym is dysmorphosis.

The word dysmorphia first appeared in the Histories of the Greek historian Herodotus (circa 484–circa 425 BC) when he referred to the myth of the “ugliest girl in Sparta”.  Herodotus, even in his lifetime, was criticized for making an insufficient distinction between legend and historical fact but the veracity of much of his work, subject to forensic analysis by modern archeologists and archivists, has been established.  The story of the “ugliest girl in Sparta” however, Herodotus acknowledges as “a magical myth” in which a baby girl, born in Sparta, was terribly disfigured (which he described as dysmorphia (meaning “misshapenness” or “ugliness”).  Fortunately, she was from a well-connected family and her nanny suggested taking her to the shrine of Helen of Troy on hilltop of Therapne, and there pray for a cure.  There the nurse sat with the baby and while praying before the agalma (a carved image of Helen), from nowhere a apparition of Helen appeared and smiling, laid her hand upon the child’s head.  As the years passed, the disfigured infant would grow to become the most beautiful girl in the kingdom.

Body Dysmorphic Disorder

Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) is a mental disorder.  It’s defined as an individual’s obsession with the idea that some aspect of their appearance is severely flawed and warrants exceptional measures to hide or rectify the offending part(s).  In BDD's delusional variant, the flaw is imagined and if some minor imperfection exists, its importance is severely exaggerated.  Sufferers find the symptoms of BDD pervasive and intrusive, symptoms including excessive attention to the perceived defect, social avoidance, camouflaging with cosmetics or apparel, the seeking of verbal reassurances, avoiding mirrors, repetitively changing clothes or restricting eating.

Italian physician Enrico Morselli (1852-1929) in 1886 reported a disorder he termed dysmorphophobia, a term still sometimes used in European literature to describe BDD.  Use spiked in academic literature in the 1950s although it wasn’t until 1980, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) recognized the condition in the third edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III).  The APA classified it as a distinct somatoform condition (characterized by symptoms suggesting a physical disorder but for which there are no demonstrable organic findings or known physiological mechanisms) and in 1987 replaced dysmorphophobia with body dysmorphic disorder as the preferred descriptor.

With the 1994 publication of DSM-IV, the APA noted BDD was a preoccupation with an imagined or trivial defect in appearance, one causing social or occupational dysfunction, and not better explained as another disorder such as anorexia nervosa but in DSM-5 (2013), it was reclassified as an obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorder, adding diagnostic criteria including repetitive behaviors and intrusive thoughts.  Although the World Health Organization's (WHO) current International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10 (1994)) described BDD as just another hypochondriacal disorder, the revised ICD-11 (2019) aligned for all functional purposes with the DSM-5.

The DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for BDD requires the following:

(1) A preoccupation with appearance: The individual must be preoccupied with one or more nonexistent or slight defects or flaws in their physical appearance and “Preoccupation” is usually defined as thinking about the perceived defects for (in aggregate) at least an hour a day.  A distressing or impairing preoccupation with real and obvious flaws in appearance (anything easily noticeable such as obesity) is not diagnosed as BDD, being instead classified with “Other Specified Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders.”

(2) Repetitive behaviors: Repetitive and compulsive behaviors must manifest in response to the concern with appearance.  These compulsions can be behavioral and thus observed by others (such as either excessively standing before or avoid a looking-glass, frequent grooming, skin picking, reassurance seeking or repeatedly changing clothes.  Other BDD compulsions include mental acts, the most often diagnosed being an individual frequently comparing their appearance with that of other people.  The DSM-5 included the note for clinicians cautioning that subjects meeting all diagnostic criteria for BDD except this one are not diagnosed with BDD; they are diagnosed with “Other Specified Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorder.”

(3) Clinical significance: The preoccupation must cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important aspects of functioning.  This criterion was included to differentiate the disorder BDD, which requires treatment, from more normal appearance concerns that typically do not need to be treated with medication or therapy.  This has been one of the more controversial revisions because of concerns it may exclude from helpful treatment some who have developed better coping mechanisms while still suffering from the underlying condition.

(4) Differentiation from an eating disorder: If the appearance preoccupations focus on being too fat or weighing too much, it may be that the appropriate diagnosis is an eating disorder and this applies especially if the subject’s only concern with their appearance focuses on excessive weight; provided the diagnostic criteria for an eating disorder are otherwise met, that should be the diagnosis, not BDD.  If not, BDD can be diagnosed, as concerns with fat or weight in a person of normal weight can be a symptom of BDD and it’s not uncommon for subjects to have both an eating disorder and BDD.

There are specifiers to BDD and following diagnosis, the subject should be sub-classified using the two (DSM-5) BDD specifiers:

(1) Muscle dysmorphia: Muscle dysmorphia is the (predominately male) concern that the build of their body is too small or insufficiently muscular, something which not untypically manifests with preoccupations with other body areas; the muscle dysmorphia specifier should still be used in such cases.  Studies have shown that among those diagnosed with BDD, those with muscle dysmorphia suffer the highest rates of suicidality and substance use disorders, as well as poorer quality of life.  Accordingly, the DSM-5 notes their treatment regimes may require some modification.

(2) Insight specifier: This specifier indicates the degree (not directly frequency although this is a factor in the analysis) of a subject’s insight regarding their BDD beliefs (eg “I look ugly”; “I look deformed”), an expression of how convinced the subject is that their beliefs about the appearance of the disliked body parts is true.  The DSM-5 levels of insight are (2a) with good or fair insight, (2b) with poor insight and (3), with absent insight/delusional beliefs (which are to be diagnosed as BDD, not as a psychotic disorder.

BDD has often been misdiagnosed, most often as one of the following disorders:

(1) Obsessive Compulsive Disorder: If preoccupations and repetitive behaviors focus on appearance (including symmetry concerns), BDD should be diagnosed rather than OCD.

(2) Social anxiety disorder (social phobia): If social anxiety and social avoidance are due to embarrassment and shame about perceived appearance flaws, and diagnostic criteria for BDD are met, BDD should be diagnosed rather than social anxiety disorder (social phobia).

(3) Major depressive disorder: Unlike major depressive disorder, BDD is characterized by prominent preoccupation and excessive repetitive behaviors. BDD should be diagnosed in individuals with depression if diagnostic criteria for BDD are met.

(4) Trichotillomania (hair-pulling disorder): When hair tweezing, plucking, pulling, or other types of hair removal is intended to improve perceived defects in the appearance of body or facial hair, BDD should be diagnosed rather than trichotillomania (hair-pulling disorder).

(5) Excoriation (skin-picking disorder): When skin picking is intended to improve perceived defects in the appearance of one’s skin, BDD should be diagnosed rather than excoriation (skin-picking disorder).

(6) Agoraphobia: Avoidance of situations because of fears that others will see a person’s perceived appearance defects should count toward a diagnosis of BDD rather than agoraphobia.

(7) Generalized anxiety disorder: Unlike generalized anxiety disorder, anxiety and worry in BDD focus on perceived appearance flaws.

(8) Schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: BDD-related psychotic symptoms (ie delusional beliefs about appearance defects or BDD-related delusions of reference) reflect the presence of BDD rather than a psychotic disorder.

(9) Olfactory reference syndrome: Preoccupation with emitting a foul or unpleasant body odor is a symptom of olfactory reference syndrome, not BDD (although these two disorders have many similar characteristics).

(10) Eating disorder: If a normal-weight person is excessively concerned about being fat or their weight, meets other diagnostic criteria for BDD, and does not meet diagnostic criteria for an eating disorder, then BDD should be diagnosed.

(11) Dysmorphic concern: This is not a DSM diagnosis, but it is sometimes confused with BDD.  It focuses on appearance concerns but also includes concerns about body odor and non-appearance related somatic concerns, which are not BDD symptoms.

One aspect of the condition BDD is that it’s not uncommon for subjects to be reticent in revealing their concerns or BDD symptoms to a clinician because of embarrassment or being negatively judged as vain or too concerned with trivial matters.  Case notes do suggest there is a pattern of subjects hinting at their issues and clinicians should thus be encouraged to respond by explicitly asking about BDD symptoms.

Although the brand-name is, strangely, no longer used, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, Chubbettes was a fashion-house supplying “slenderizing designs… designed to make girls 6 to 16 look slimmer” and therefore become “as happy and self-assured as her slimmer schoolmates”.  With a target market including those with eating disorders or BDD as well as the naturally chubby, Chubbettes helpfully offered with its fashion catalog a free booklet, Pounds and Personality.  Intended for parents of a chubby girl and written by Dr Gladys Andrews of New York University’s School of Education, it was packed with helpful hints about “understanding her problems, talent development, shyness, tactless remarks & the “game” of dieting etc."  Chubettes’ clothing range was said to be “available, coast to coast at stores that care”; the parent company was L Gidding & Co Inc, 520 Eighth Avenue, New York City.

Times certainly have changed and with them the perception of body shapes.  Parents who would now regard young ladies of the type pictured in the Chubbette advertisements as being chubby might now be suspected of having Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSbP).  In the mind of the girl herself, a similar perception wouldn't necessarily alone be enough for a diagnosis of BDD but might be considered in the context of other behaviors.  

Crooked Hillary Clinton, the Hamptons, August 2021.

Paradoxically, although in the early twenty-first century there’s a larger than ever market for what Chubbettes once served as a niche, the brand is long gone and a revival seems unlikely.  Many factors including more sedentary lifestyles and a higher consumption of processed food, the sugar content of which has risen alarmingly, means demand for more accommodating clothing will likely continue to increase but many manufacturers have stepped into the Chubbette void and customers enjoy a wide choice.

Muliebrity

Muliebrity (pronounced myoo-lee-eb-ri-tee)

(1) The condition of being a woman.

(2) Femininity; womanly nature or qualities.

(3) Effeminacy, softness

(4) In physiology, the state of puberty in the human female (rare).

1585–1595: From the Late Latin muliēbritās (womanhood) from muliēbris (womanly) from mulier (woman).  The original meaning in the 1590s was "womanhood, state of puberty in a woman", this corresponding to virility in men.  The Latin source mulier (a woman) has for centuries been held to be comparative to the stem of mollis (soft, weak) to which there have long been phonetic objections, but no alternative theory has been offered.  This was the source also in the oldest known customary and common law texts of the sense of mulier being "a woman; a wife" and, as an adjective, "born in wedlock."  Related was muliebral (of or pertaining to a woman) and muliebrious (effeminate), both documented from the 1650s.  The later mulierosity (an excessive fondness for women) is perhaps a more attractive term than those many would prefer.  In pre-modern medicine, in early anatomy and medical texts, the pudenda muliebria was euphemistic for "vagina"; in later use in physiology it came to refer simply to the state of puberty in a female.  In early literary use it had the sense of “the state of attainment of womanhood following maidenhood” but well before the twentieth century had come instead to be a general expression of youthful feminine beauty.  The –ity suffix was borrowed from the French -ité, from the Middle French -ité, from the Old French –ete & -eteit (-ity), from the Latin -itātem, from -itās, from the primitive Indo-European suffix –it.  It was cognate with the Gothic –iþa (-th), the Old High German -ida (-th) and the Old English -þo, -þu & -þ (-th).  It was used to form nouns from adjectives (especially abstract nouns), thus most often associated with nouns referring to the state, property, or quality of conforming to the adjective's description.  Muliebrity is a noun and muliebral & muliebrile are adjectives, the noun plural is muliebrities.  Muliebrity long ago shifted in meaning from its late sixteenth century origins and is now probably most seen (or un-seen) in the diary entries of young ladies who read Wuthering Heights at a young age and never quite recovered.

Shakespeare on difficult women

There is in William Shakespeare (1564–1616), much to be found, one modern critic said even to have claimed him as “the noblest women’s rightist of them all”.  There may be something in this and Shakespeare created some memorably defiant women who asserted themselves in ways we don’t, erroneously or not, associate with the social mores of his age but, while some flourish, not all go unpunished for their transgressive behavior, although some didn’t need to be that difficult to be punished; few who try to map proto-feminism onto Shakespeare mention Katherine (The Taming of the Shrew; circa 1590) who apparently suffered her fate just for being a funny, fierce man-hater.  Seemingly, at least sometimes in Shakespeare, the more muliebrious the better.

Olivia Hussey (b 1951) as Juliet in Franco Zeffirelli's (1923-2019) film of Romeo and Juliet (1968).

He certainly didn’t stick to the defined role-models of his time, Helena (All's Well That Ends Well; circa 1600), although she spends most of her time moping about in anguish at the indifference of a man she wants, was a talented doctor who delicately repairs the king's anal fistula.  So, in Shakespeare, there’s sometimes ambivalence.  Juliet (Romeo & Juliet; circa 1595) got equal billing with Romeo and while they’re both equally vital to the plot, Juliet, while head over heels in love, at least remains a bit more grounded than the poetic Romeo, a bit of an emo who likes talking about the moon.  Romantic she may be but it’s Juliet to whom the bard gave the long soliloquy about how much she lusts for sex with her lover-to-be and there’s no sense she’s demonized for having normal womanly, human longings.

Crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947).

Lady Macbeth (The Tragedie of Macbeth; 1606) draws actresses like few other characters of the stage; Shakespeare’s most fierce female, it’s not hard to see the attraction.  Lady Macbeth is childless, probably less a statement of proto-feminism or a rejection of societal expectations than the bard constructing her as one noted more for manipulation than muliebrity and just so the audience gets it, there’s her monologue (Act 1, scene 5) imploring the spirits to “Stop up the access and passage to remorse” (gender dysmorphia and commitment issues) and “Come to my woman’s breasts, and take my milk for gall” (less succorance; more bile).  Without these womanly distractions, Lady Macbeth knows she’ll have the strength herself to murder King Duncan even if her husband does not.  Though it is Macbeth who murders Duncan, it was the wife who put the blade in his hand and in the end, Shakespeare punishes her too.

Imogen Stubbs (b 1961) as Viola in Trevor Nunn's (b 1940) film of Twelfth Night (1996).

Although both survive a shipwreck, Viola (Twelfth Night; circa 1601) and her twin brother Sebastian each believe the other dead and, once ashore, everyone thinks she is her brother and her brother is her.  Making the best of a bad situation Viola, in an act of feminist temerity, anticipates changes in the nature of female workforce participation (which won’t be seen for centuries) by, rather than enduring the misery of domestic servitude, dresses as a boy and goes to work for the Duke of Orsino (with whom she falls in love).  That’s where it gets complicated because the duke sends Viola to court the Countess Olivia on his behalf but Olivia falls for Viola and, with the twin Sebastian having shown up, a flood of mistaken identity ensues, and, after a few shenanigans, Sebastian and Olivia wed.  Viola then reveals she really is a girl and marries the duke.  If Shakespeare hadn’t had something else in mind, he might have called Twelfth Night, All’s well that ends well.

Lindsay Lohan as Elizabeth Taylor (1932-2011) as Cleopatra in Lloyd Kramer's (b 1947) made-for-TV Liz & Dick (2012).

Although Cleopatra (The Tragedie of Anthonie, and Cleopatra; circa 1607) was another of Shakespeare’s women who ended up dead, while she lived she was quite something, a woman with her own bank account who ruled a nation.  Complex, strong and vulnerable, she’s another one actresses like to play, her tragedy in death offering a bit more scope that Portia’s triumph in victory.  Cleopatra explored Mediterranean sexual realpolitik too, toying with an Antony who is just one of the many men she outsmarts; no stereotypes of subservience there.  Still, things do end badly for her, even if in her noble death she denies Caesar Octavius one more triumph, his primacy assured is by the play’s extraordinary death-toll and, with no political foes left standing, he sails for Rome to be crowned Emperor.

Katharine Hepburn (1907-2003) as Portia in American Shakespeare Theatre's production of The Merchant of Venice (1957).

Portia (The Merchant of Venice; circa 1597) seems at first an improbable feminist model, the first scene one in which the heiress watches potential suitors sit the tests devised by her father to find one worthy of her hand in marriage.  But the patriarchy is no match for Portia who twists the tests to ensure the winner is her preferred beau, one who would never otherwise have attracted her father’s approval; Portia is smart and tough.  She undermines gender-stereotyping and the patriarchy beyond the family too, cross-dressing to appear in court at a time when women weren’t permitted to be counsel.  For feminist anti-Semites too there’s a strong role-model, Portia’s legal sophistry rescuing good Christian Antonio from the grim fate demanded by the Jewish money-lender.

Elisabeth Bergner (1897-1986) as Rosalind in Paul Czinner's (1890-1972) film of As You Like It (1936).

After being exiled, strong-willed Rosalind (As You Like It ;circa 1599) adopts the disguises of the male shepherd Ganymede and goes to live in the Arcadian forest of Ardenne.  There, inter alia, she becomes a sort of life-coach, focused on teaching men to be more progressive in their attitudes towards women; not exactly making them metrosexuals but certainly less late-medieval.  It works for her too for the previously uncouth Orlando learns better how to woo her and they wed in the happy group marriage at play’s end and in being taught by Rosalind to get in touch with his female side, Orlando takes part is what is probably Shakespeare’s most overt deconstruction of gender roles.  There is however an undercurrent of class awareness in the allocation of happiness.  Of the four couples, it’s the peasant pair, Phoebe & Silvius, who end up married even though his love for her remains surely unrequited; Shakespeare may have felt his clever women of the better classes deserved happiness more than peasant shepherdesses.  Structurally it’s interesting too for in As You Like It, it’s Rosalind who delivers the play’s epilogue, a thing Shakespeare traditionally reserved for a man and that may be Rosalind’s most post-modern transgression.

Blazon

Blazon (pronounced bley-zuhn)

(1) In heraldry, an escutcheon or coat of arms or a banner depicting a coat of arms.

(2) In heraldry, a description (verbal or written or in an image) of a coat of arms.

(3) In heraldry, a formalized language for describing a coat of arms (the heraldic description of armorial bearings).

(4) An ostentatious display, verbal or otherwise.

(5) A description or recording (especially of the good qualities of a person or thing).

(6) In literature, verses which dwelt upon and described various parts of a woman's body (usually in admiration). 

(7) Conspicuously or publicly to set forth; display; proclaim.

(8) To adorn or embellish, especially brilliantly or showily.

(9) To depict (heraldic arms or the like) in proper form and color.

(10) To describe a coat of arms.

1275-1300: From the late thirteenth century Middle English blazon (armorial bearings, coat of arms), from the twelfth century Old French blason (shield, blazon (also “collar bone”).  Of the words in the Romance languages (the Spanish blason, Italian blasone, Portuguese brasao & Provençal blezo, the first two are said to be French loan-words and the origins of all remain uncertain.  According to the OED (Oxford English Dictionary), the suggestion by nineteenth century French etymologists of connections with Germanic words related to English blaze is dubious because of the sense disparities.  The verb blazon (to depict or paint (armorial bearings) dates from the mid sixteenth century and was either (or both) from the noun or the French blasonner (from the French noun).  In English, it had earlier in the 1500s been used to mean “descriptively to set forth; descriptively” especially (by at least the 1530s) specifically “to vaunt or boast” and in that sense it was probably at least influenced by the English blaze.  Blazon & blazoning are nouns & verbs, blazoner, blazonry & blazonment are nouns and blazoned & blazonable are adjectives; the noun plural is blazons.

A coat of arms, possibly of dubious provenance. 

The now more familiar verb emblazon (inscribe conspicuously) seems first to have been used around the 1590s in the sense of “extol” and the still common related forms (emblazoning; emblazoned) emerged almost simultaneously.  The construct of emblazon was en- +‎ blazon (from the Old French blason (in its primary sense of “shield”).  The en- prefix was from the Middle English en- (en-, in-), from the Old French en- (also an-), from the Latin in- (in, into).  It was also an alteration of in-, from the Middle English in-, from the Old English in- (in, into), from the Proto-Germanic in (in).  Both the Latin & Germanic forms were from the primitive Indo-European en (in, into).  The intensive use of the Old French en- & an- was due to confluence with Frankish intensive prefix an- which was related to the Old English intensive prefix -on.  It formed a transitive verb whose meaning is to make the attached adjective (1) in, into, (2) on, onto or (3) covered.  It was used also to denote “caused” or as an intensifier.  The prefix em- was (and still is) used before certain consonants, notably the labials “b” & “p”.

Google ngram: It shouldn’t be surprising there seems to have been a decline in the use of “blazon” while “emblazoned” has by comparison, in recent decades, flourished.  That would reflect matters of heraldry declining in significance, their appearance in printed materials correspondingly reduced in volume.  However, 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.

Self referential emblazoning: Lindsay Lohan's selfie of her modeling a sweater by Ashish, her visage emblazoned in sequins, London, November 2014.

Impressionistically though this assumption is, few would doubt “blazon” is now rare while “emblazoned” is far from uncommon.  While “emblazon” began with the meaning “that which the emblazoner does” (ie (1) to adorn with prominent, (2) to inscribe upon and (3) to draw a coat of arms) it evolved by the mid-nineteenth century with the familiar modern sense of “having left in the mind a vivid impression” (often in the form “emblazoned on one’s memory”).  In English, there’s nothing unusual in a derived or modified form of a word becoming common than its original root, even to the point the where the original is rendered rare, unfamiliar or even obsolete, a phenomenon due to changes in usage patterns, altered conventions in pronunciation or shifts in meaning that make the derived form more practical or culturally resonant.  That’s just how English evolves.

Other examples include (1) ruthless vs. ruth (ruth (pity; compassion) was once a common noun in Middle English but has long been extinct while ruthless, there being many who demand the description, remains popular), (2) unkempt vs kempt (kempt (neatly kept) would have been listed as extinct were it not for it finding a niche as a literary and poetic form and has also been used humorously or ironically), (3) disheveled vs sheveled (sheveled was from the Old French chevelé (having hair) and was part of mainstream vocabulary as late as the eighteenth century but, except in jocular use, is effectively non-existent in modern English) and (4) redolent vs dolent (redolent (evocative of; fragrant) was from dolent (sorrowful), from the Latin dolere (to feel pain)); redolent both outlived and enjoyed a meaning-shift from its root.

Etymologists think of these as part of the linguistic fossil record, noting there’s no single reason for the phenomenon beyond what survives being better adapted to cultural or conversational needs.  In that, these examples differ from the playful fork of back-formation which has produced (1) combobulate (a back-formation from discombobulate (to confuse or disconcert; to throw into a state of confusion) which was a humorous mock-Latin creation in mid-nineteenth century US English) (2) couth (a nineteenth century back-formation from uncouth and used as a humorous form meaning “refined”), (3) gruntled (a twentieth century back-formation meaning “happy or contented; satisfied”, the source being disgruntled (unhappy; malcontented) and most sources indicate it first appeared in print in 1926 but the most celebrated example comes from PG Wodehouse (1881–1975) who in The Code of the Woosters (1938) penned: “He spoke with a certain what-is-it in his voice, and I could see that, if not actually disgruntled, he was far from being gruntled.”  Long a linguistic joke, some now take gruntled seriously but for the OED remains thus far unmoved and (4) ept (a back-formation from inept (not proficient; incompetent or not competent (there is a functional difference between those two)) which was from the Middle French inepte, from the Latin ineptus).

Literary use

In literary use, “blazon” was a technical term used by the Petrarchists (devotes of Francis Petrarch (1304-1374), a scholar & poet of the early Italian Renaissance renowned for his love poems & sonnets and regarded also as one of the earliest humanists).  Blazon in this context (a subset of what literary theorists call “catalogue verse”) was adopted because, like the structured and defined elements of heraldic symbolism, Petrarch’s poems contained what might be thought an “inventory” of verses which dwelt upon and detailed the various parts of a woman's body; a sort of catalogue of her physical attributes.  Petrarch’s approach wasn’t new because as a convention in lyric poetry it was well-known by the mid thirteenth century, most critics crediting the tradition to the writings of Geoffrey of Vinsauf, a figure about whom little is although it’s believed he was born in Normandy.  In England the Elizabethan sonneteers honed the technique as a devotional device, often, in imaginative ways, describing the bits of their mistresses they found most pleasing, a classic example a fragment from Amoretti and Epithalamion (1595), a wedding day ode by the English poet Edmund Spenser (circa 1552-1599) to his bride (Elizabeth Boyle) in 1594:

Her goodly eyes like sapphires shining bright.
Her forehead ivory white,
Her cheeks like apples which the sun hath rudded,
Her lips like cherries charming men to bite,
Her breast like to a bowl of cream uncrudded,
Her paps like lilies budded,
Her snowy neck like to a marble tower,
And all her body like a palace fair.

Two bowls of cream uncrudded.

So objectification of the female form is nothing new and the poets saw little wrong with plagiarism, most of the imagery summoned salvaged from the works of Antiquity by elegiac Roman and Alexandrian Greek poets.  Most relied for their effect on brevity, almost always a single, punchy line and none seem ever to attempt the scale of the “epic simile”.  As can be imagined, the novelty of the revival didn’t last and the lines soon were treated by readers (some of whom were fellow poets) as clichés to be parodied (a class which came to be called “contrablazon”), the London-based courtier Sir Philip Sidney (1554–1586) borrowing from the Italian poet Francesco Berni (1497–1535) the trick of using terms in the style of Petrarch but “mixing them up”, thus creating an early form of body dysmorphia: Mopsa's forehead being “jacinth-like”, cheeks of “opal”, twinkling eyes “bedeckt with pearl” and lips of “sapphire blue”.

William Shakespeare (1564–1616) however saw other possibilities in the blazon and in Sonnet 130 (1609) turned the idea on its head, listing the imperfections in her body parts and characteristics yet concluding, despite all that, he anyway adored her like no other (here rendered in a more accessible English):

My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun;
Coral is far more red than her lips' red;
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.
I have seen roses damasked, red and white,
But no such roses see I in her cheeks;
And in some perfumes is there more delight
Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks.
I love to hear her speak, yet well I know
That music hath a far more pleasing sound;
I grant I never saw a goddess go;
My mistress, when she walks, treads on the ground.
   And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare
   As any she belied with false compare.

Button

Button (pronounced buht-n)

(1) A small disk, knob, or the like for sewing or otherwise attaching to an article, as of clothing, serving as a fastening when passed through a buttonhole or loop.

(2) Anything resembling a button, especially in being small and round, as any of various candies, ornaments, tags, identification badges, reflectors, markers, etc.

(3) A badge or emblem bearing a name, slogan, identifying figure, etc., for wear on the lapel, dress, etc.

(4) Any small knob or disk pressed to activate an electric circuit, release a spring, or otherwise operate or open a machine, small door, toy, etc.

(5) In botany, a bud or other protuberant part of a plant.

(6) In mycology, a young or undeveloped mushroom or any protuberant part of a fungus.

(7) In zoological anatomy, any of various small parts or structures resembling a button, as the rattle at the tip of the tail in a very young rattlesnake.

(8) In boxing slang, the point of the chin.

(9) In architecture, a fastener for a door, window, etc., having two arms and rotating on a pivot that is attached to the frame (also called turn button).

(10) In metallurgy, when assaying, the small globule or lump of metal at the bottom of a crucible after fusion.

(11) In fencing, the protective, blunting knob fixed to the point of a foil.

(12) In horology, alternative name for the crown, by which watch is wound.

(13) In the graphical user interface of computers and related devices, a small, button-shaped or clearly defined area that the user can click on or touch to choose an option.

(14) Slang term for the peyote cactus.

(15) A small gathering of people about two-thirds of the drinks are spiked with LSD.  Those who drink the un-spiked are the buttons responsible for babysitting the trippers (1960s west coast US use, now extinct).

(16) A series of nuts & bolts holding together a three-piece wheel.  Such wheels are very expensive because of the forging process and the ability to stagger offsets to create large lips.

(17) In boiler-making, the piece of a weld that pulls out during the destructive testing of spot welds

(18) In rowing, a projection around the loom of an oar that prevents it slipping through the rowlock.

(19) South African slang for methaqualone tablet.

(20) A unit of length equal to one twelfth of an inch (British, archaic).

(21) Among luthiers, in the violin-family instrument, the near semi-circular shape extending from the top of the back plate of the instrument, meeting the heel of the neck.

(22) In the plural (as buttons), a popular nickname for young ladies, whose ability to keep shirt buttons buttoned is in inverse proportion to the quantity of strong drink taken.

1275-1325: From the Middle English boto(u)n (knob or ball attached to another body (especially as used to hold together different parts of a garment by being passed through a slit or loop)), from the Anglo-French, from the Old & Middle French boton (button (originally, a bud)), from bouter & boter (to thrust, butt, strike, push) from the Proto-Germanic buttan, from the primitive Indo-European root bhau- (to strike); the button thus, etymologically, is something that pushes up, or thrusts out.  Records exist of the surname Botouner (button-maker) as early as the mid-thirteenth century (and the Modern French noun bouton (button) actually dates from the twelfth century).  It was cognate with the Spanish boton and the Italian bottone.  The pugilistic slang (point of the chin) was first noted in 1921.  First use of button as something pushed to create an effect by opening or closing an electrical circuit is attested from 1840s and the use in metallurgy and welding is based by analogy on descriptions of mushrooms.  The verb button emerged in the late fourteenth century in the sense of "to furnish with buttons" which by the early 1600s had extended (when speaking of garments) to "to fasten with buttons".  The button-down shirt collar was first advertised in 1916.  In fields in which there are structures or entities which in part or in whole are “buttonlike” in appearance, there are many uses of “button” as a descriptor (button mushroom, button seal, button willow, button quail etc), botany, zoology anatomy, architecture, cooking and engineering all using the word thus.  There are also a number of idiomatic forms including “cute as a button” (very cute), “on the button” (correct) and “buttoned down (or up)” (conservative to the point of being repressed.Button is a noun & verb, buttoning is a noun & verb, buttoned is a verb & adjective, buttonize is a verb, and buttonlike & buttonable are adjectives; the noun plural is buttons.

John Button (1987) (1933-2008; senator for Victoria (ALP (Australian Labor Party) 1974-1993), oil on canvas by Andrew Sibley (1933–2015), National Portrait Gallery, Canberra, Australia.

New uses continue to emerge as technology evolves:  The phrase button-pusher to describe someone "deliberately annoying or provocative" was first recorded in the 1970s and hot-button issue appeared in political science journals as early as 1954, apparently a derivation of the brief use in the press of big red-button and hot-button to (somewhat erroneously) describe the mechanics of launching a nuclear attack.  Hot button issues can be useful for political parties to exploit but what the button triggers can shift with generational change: As late as the 1990s the Republican Party in the US used "gay marriage" as a hot button issue to mobilize their base but within 25 years the electoral universe had shifted and the issue no longer had the same traction; there had been generational change.  In the 1980s, the now mostly extinct button-pusher had been co-opted as a somewhat condescending description of photographers both by journalists and snobby art critics, the former suggesting some lack of affinity with words, the latter, an absence of artistic skill. 

How it came to be done: 2022 Mercedes-Benz EQS 56 inch (1.42 m) single-panel screen.  There are no physical buttons on the dashboard, something which provoked a reaction and, for certain critical features, there's been a welcome "button revival".

In cars, as in aircraft, the shifting of controls for core and ancillary systems from individual buttons and switches to combined or multi-function controllers began to accelerate during the 1960s, a reaction to the increasing number of electrically activated functions being installed to the point where, if left individualised, in some of the more electronic vehicles, space for all the buttons would have been marginal and ergonomics worse even than it was.  Some very clever designs of multi-function controllers did appear but in the twenty-first century, by the time LED flat-screen technology had become elsewhere ubiquitous, it became possible to integrate entire system control environments into a single screen which, able to display either one or a combination of several sub-systems at a time, meant space became effectively unlimited, arrays of virtual buttons and switches available in layers.  That didn't mean thing became easier or more convenient to use but production costs were lower.  Of late, in response to consumer pressure, some manufacturers have admitted the approach went to far and what might be appropriate for someone sitting at their desk using a desktop PC (and the only way things can be done on a phone), might not be a good idea when driving a car at speed, in traffic.  Thus, for core critical functions (ie those drivers most often perform) such as adjusting settings on entertainment and HVAC (heating, ventilation & air conditioning) systems, buttons are making a welcome comeback.

For those who can remember the ways things used to be done: 1965 Jaguar Mark X 4.2 with burl walnut & red leather.  Jaguar's cockpits in the 1960s were among the most atmospheric of the era although, even at the time, the less than ideal ergonomics attracted criticism.  Something has been lost with the decline of the sensual, tactile, analogue world of buttons, knobs & switches.

There were buttons and there were switches.  Jaguar used toggle switches until US safety regulations in 1967 compelled a change to rocker switches with softer edges and less forward projection, similar concerns resulting in the top section of the dashboard gaining a padded vinyl covering.  Indeed, at the time, there was in the UK and Europe a suspicion US regulators might ban the use of decorative timber in car interiors and the models Mercedes-Benz released in 1971 & 1972 had none but the austerity didn't last, the veneers soon restored.  The functionality of the rocker switches was exactly the same as that of the toggles and they were certainly less prone to damage but for some the tactile experience was lacking, the ASMR less satisfying.  ASMR (Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response) describes the physical & psychological pleasure derived from specific stimuli (usually a sound).  A highly segmented market, among the aficionadi there are niches as varied as those who relish the clicking of an IBM Seletric typewriter or Model M keyboard, the mechanical precision of the fore-end slide of pump-action shotgun being operated, the flicking of toggle switches or the sight & sound of South Korean girls on TikTok eating noodles.

Portrait of Lord Byron (circa 1820), oil on canvas by Théodore Géricault (1791–1824), Musée Fabre, Montpellier, France.

The fetishistic attraction to watching or listening to women eat is presumed to be almost exclusively a male preserve though not all share the fondness and others have been far from indifferent.  In his short life, the Romantic poet Lord Byron (1788–1824) divided opinion (social & literary) like few at the time but critics and detractors all agreed one thing he couldn’t stand was women eating in his presence.  The aversion was well-documented, the literary critic Leigh Hunt (1784–1859) in Lord Byron and some of his Contemporaries (1828) recalling the poet mentioning he especially disliked the sight because “they always had the wings of the chicken.”  That presumably was related to wings being “finger food” rather than handled with a knife and fork.  Byron also developed tactic to avoid being affronted by the sight, the poet Samuel Rogers (1763–1855) in Recollections of the Table-Talk of Samuel Rogers (1856) recounting Byron had declined his invitation to join him and the French novelist Madame de Staël (Anne Louise Germaine de Staël-Holstein (1766–1817) “…at my house, au dinner.  Subsequently, if ever I invited him without mentioning what other company would attend, he always replied with a note asking ‘if I had invited any women’.”  Now almost forgotten, Rogers was once one of England’s most highly regarded poets but such are the shadows cast still by his colleagues among the Romantics (notably John Keats (1795–1821), Byron, William Wordsworth (1770–1850) & Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834)) that he now merits only the odd appearance in anthologies.  Rogers was a victim of a thing now rarely suffered by poets: The curse of plenty.  Rich from his career as a banker, he devoted much time to collecting art, his life never sufficiently tortured to produce poetry likely to endure.  The most revealing passage about Byron’s distaste for masticating women came in a letter of 13 May, 1824 from the painter English painter Benjamin Robert (“B.R.”) Haydon to the poet Mary Mitford (1787–1855): “Luncheon was brought in-veal cutlets etc.  Lady Byron began to eat.  Byron turned round in disgust and said: ‘Gormandizing beast!’ and taking the tray, threw the whole luncheon into the hall.”

Poets are of course good with words and, pleasingly for the Freudians, Byron’s use of “gormandizing” (to eat food in a gluttonous manner; to gorge; to make a pig of oneself) is thought triggered by memories of his mother, apparently the source of both his own “hang-ups” with food & weight and his conceptions of the essence of feminine delicacy, things that would manifest throughout his life.  The poet Thomas Medwin (1788–1869) in Conversations of Lord Byron (1824) wrote how Byron had said: “I have peculiar ideas. I do not like to see women eat” adding darkly that Lady Byron had not respected this preference.  Analysts (amateur & professional) have pondered this and the conclusion seems to be the view was both aesthetic and sexual, an idealised conception of women as a source of pleasure to be admired as almost ethereal, delicate and imagined without the intrusion of ordinary natural functions such as eating.  One reviewer of Medwin’s work, commenting of Byron’s “excessive refinement” supposed he thought them so perfect it offended him to think they “live on mutton”.  Byron might now be diagnosed with anorexia nervosa and almost certainly he’d be thought to suffer from an eating disorder (though maybe not body dysmorphia, his interests preventative rather than corrective), his extremely restrictive dietary regimes (vinegar-soaked potatoes, hard biscuits and water the most notorious) alternated with occasional binges of spectacular indulgence.  Feminists note also he may have been as troubled by what came out of their mouths as what went in; he no more enjoyed seeing them eat than he did listening much to what they had to say.  While infamously he enjoyed women on his terms, those socially or intellectually active (including his own wife, the vivacious Annabella Milbanke (1792–1860) he found challenged those sensibilities; women he thought objects of aesthetic contemplation rather than autonomous beings with thoughts and appetites.  Ironically though, Byron seems to have been a generous host; while he may have eaten sparingly, few guests complained his table was austere.

Portrait of Mrs Catherine Gordon Byron (Lord Byron's mother, undated), oil on canvas by Thomas Stewardson (1781–1859).  Portraitists are known to "flatter" their subjects.

What delights the Freudians is the origin of Byron’s curious relationship with women eating in his presence may be in the tempestuous relationship he had with his mother (the Scottish heiress Catherine Gordon (1765–1811)).  His mother was, in a phrase of the time “short and stout” and while surely partly a thing of genetics, habits must have contributed to her girth; in one letter to her he expressed his disgust: “I want to know why you eat so much. All the time eating, eating, eating...”  From this background it is theorized his anorexia nervosa and bulimia sprang.  Terrified of “becoming his mother” and deeply insecure about his club foot, he spent his short life obsessed with appearance and projected these insecurities and concerns onto any woman in his presence.  He did though concede some nutrition was essential and in a letter to Lady Caroline Lamb (1785-1828 and a former lover; it may have been her who summed him up as “mad, bad and dangerous to know”) complained of his new wife’s healthy appetite for chicken wings and custards, stating: “A woman should never be seen eating or drinking, unless it be lobster salad and champagne, the only truly feminine and becoming viands.”  Were he alive today, it may be assumed Lord Byron would not be stalking TikTok’s ASMR content looking for South Korean girls noisily slurping noodles. 

The accounting departments of car manufacturers liked the change to touch-screens because it was cheaper to produce and install the things rather than an array of individual buttons, switches, instruments and lights, behind each of which ran at least one and sometimes several wires or lines, requiring schematics that could be baffling even to experts who needed sometimes to track (literally) miles of cabling.   While now using sometimes even more wiring, the new systems are capable although their long-term reliability remains uncertain and in many cases, a button or switch is both easier to use and falls more conveniently to hand; that makes sense because with buttons one's sense of touch (finger-tips most sensitive) effortlessly can distinguish whereas all of a touchscreen feel the same.  It would be possible to make a a touchscreen "feedback" different vibrations or sounds depending on which icon is touched but that may create more problems than it solves and is anyway a complicated solution to a simple problem.   It's better just to provide some switches.  

1991 Mercedes-Benz 600 SE (W140).

Built on the SWB (short-wheelbase) platform, the 600 SE was offered only during the W140's first year, the V12 sedans subsequently available only as the LWB (long-wheelbase (V140)) 600 SEL (S 600 after 1993 when the corporate naming system changed).  The duplication on the glovebox of the trunk (boot) lid badging was also a single-year fitting and even if a buyer opted for the "badge delete option" the characters on the glovebox remained.  The badge delete option had existed for a long time but enjoyed a spike in popularity beginning during the 1970s when it became obvious the more expensive models were more likely to attract the eye of terrorists, kidnappers and such.  While outfits like the Baader–Meinhof Gang (technically the RAF (Red Army Faction)) had some fondness for stealing smart cars (the BMW 2002 ti_i and Porsche 911S apparently their favorites), they didn't approve of those driving (or being driven in) conspicuously expensive vehicles.  On the 450 SEL 6.9 (V116, 1975-1980), the factory's delete option code was 261 and in the FRG (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany) 1949-1990) it was ticked by those who like to go fast on the Autobahn but not attract the attention of kidnappers or assassins.  One advantage the 6.9 did confer was, if pursued by kidnappers, one could outrun the BMWs and all but the fastest Porsches.

The noun buttonology genuinely does exist.  It was a calque of the Swedish knappologi and used to refer to the fashion for pedantic and often pointless systematization.  The construct followed the Swedish model (knapp (button) +‎ -ologi, coined by Swedish author August Strindberg (1849–1912) and appearing in the short story De lycksaliges ö (The Isle of the Blessed) which although written in 1884, wasn’t published until 1891 when it appeared in the compilation Svenska öden och äventyr (Swedish Destinies and Adventures).  Buttonology is used most often as a generic term to decry the exaggerated, obsessive or pointlessly pedantic systematization, especially of trivial subjects but literally it can describe the study or categorization of buttons (in the sense of clothing fasteners).  In a light-hearted vein, in the training of software engineers and designers, it’s the component of the course focusing on user interfaces (where there can be many buttons).  In US military slang, buttonology is used of user interfaces generally.

Button porn: Centre console in 1991 Mercedes-Benz 600 SEL (V140).

Although a sight to delight button-nerds, "peak button" unfortunately coincided with the "biodegradable wiring incident" (1991-1995) in which the soy-based insulation for the cables deteriorated some decades before the supplier's projected end-of-life, the issue exacerbated by the taste of soy which would attract rodents and other creatures happy to chew on the stuff for a quick snack.  The basic shape of the gear selector knob dates from one introduced in 1971, the design a product of analysing data from the Swedish government's mandatory post mortems (autopsies) of road-accident fatalities (under Swedish law, such corpses were for 48 hours the property of the state).  What the pathologists' findings revealed was lives could be saved if engineers could devise as a shift lever handle too large to penetrate the eye socket.  While there's an element of the macabre in such research and it wasn't something the factory choose widely to publicize, the design was a classic example of what's called "passive safety".

1997 Mercedes-Benz S 600 overhead console.

Those in the front seats of a W140 who wanted “more buttons” could look up and see the overhead console that contained the buttons controlling the various interior lights and the sunroof (option code 414).  Those in the back seat had buttons for the windows and seat adjustment (code 223) but for cars fitted with the rear air-conditioning (code 582) there were three thumbwheel controls that specialists in the HVAC (Heating, Ventilation & A/C (Air Conditioning)) business listed as KRTs (knurled rotary thumbwheel).  The thumbwheel was a masterpiece of functionality, the knurled edges making it easier to rotate with a thumb or forefinger than a conventional knob and, being mostly recessed into its housing, it was not at all prone to damage or excessive wear.

1986 Rolls-Royce Camargue Limited Edition.  The controls for the “bi-level ACC System” was simple, intuitive and ergonomically impressive but lacked the visual impact of the array of buttons installed by the Germans.

Especially in the US, automotive A/C made great advances in the post-war years and by the 1960s had been brought to a high level of effectiveness, the icy blast able a short notice to be summoned from the vents of Cadillacs in the era quite awesome and doubtless welcome during long, hot summers, south of the Mason-Dixon Line.  By mid-decade, things had been further refined with the release of ACC (automatic climate control), a “set and forget” approach which emulated the thermostatically controlled systems familiar in buildings.  That was however a “single-zone” implementation (ie the one temperature for the whole cabin) and, as is well documented, men and women tend to like different levels, the latter preferring things a few degrees warmer.  It was Rolls-Royce that was first with a “bi-level” system (a marvellously complex apparatus developed over almost a decade and reputedly costing as much to manufacture as a small family car) that first appeared in the Camargue (1975–1986), the most memorable shtick for which was it being “the world’s most expensive car”.  That might have seemed a strange marketing approach in the mid-1970s but the rather portly coupé (a “two-door saloon” according to Rolls-Royce) had been developed when the economy was rather more buoyant.  Still, the A/C was state-of-the-art although its two “zones” were “upper” and “lower” rather than “driver” and “passenger” a design reflecting the traditional approach of car heaters.

1992 Mercedes-Benz 600 SEL rear-seat ACC controls.

It was the Germans and Americans who did most for matrimonial harmony, BMW in the mid 1980s the first to introduce a system with a zonal split between left and right and over the next decade in both Europe and the US, such systems had appeared on upper-range models before “trickling down” the price list.  The distinction enjoyed by Mercedes-Benz W140 was being the first car commercially available with a four-zone ACC, separate temperature settings available for passengers left & right, front & rear.  KRTs were one of the cost-cutting industry’s victims in moving to controls to touch-screens but customers found them less convenient while regulators objected because, lacking tactility, they demanded attention being diverted from the road; while the screens remain, knobs, buttons and KRTs are making a welcome comeback.

A tanned young lady in a bikini with a piece of belly button jewellery (sold also as "navel jewellery").

The 140-series sedans (1991-1998) and companion coupé (C140, 1992-1999) were peak-button and it won't happen again, touch-screens now much cheaper to install and although buttons are making something of a comeback, they'll not again be seen on such a grand scale.  The 140-series cars were end-of-era stuff in many ways and the last of the old-style exercises in pure engineering with which Mercedes-Benz re-built its reputation in the post-war years; what followed would increasingly show the influence of accountants and the dreaded "sales department".  Most charismatic of the 140s were the early, 402 bhp (300 kw) 600s tuned for top end power; the 6.0 litre (365 cubic inch) V12 (M120; 1991-2001 (although it would appear in cars by other manufacturers until 2012)) would later be toned-down a little with a greater emphasis on mid-range torque and thoughts of the 8.0 litre V16 and W18 prototypes entering production were shelved as the economic climate of the early 1990s proved less buoyant than had been expected.  Subsequent concerns about climate changed doomed any hope of resurrection but as something of a consolation, AMG for a while offered larger versions of the V12 (as big as 7.3 litres (445 cubic inch)).  Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) died in her hotel's hire-car (S 280 with a 2.8 litre straight-six (171 cubic inch)) version of the 140.

Coincidently, it was in the "peak button" era that Mercedes-Benz revised the convention of model nomenclature, inverting the alpha-numeric placement which had evolved since the 1920s.  Until the 1980s, old nnn.xxx convention (mostly) made sense once the logic behind the sequence had been explained but even then there had long been inconsistencies with the letters doing "double duty" and the numerals not always aligning with displacement (as well as one off aberrations like "219") but by the 1990s the proliferation of ranges and models had made the old system more or less unmanageable.  Every series of cars was changed but most affected were the various C140s and they were especially unusual in being the last of the “SECs” and the first of the “CLs” with a mid-life spent as an “S”, the confusing alpha-numeric trajectory of the C140 600 being:

1992 600 SEC (Not sold in North America)

1993 600 SEC (Global)

1994-1995 S 600 (Global)

1996-1997 S 600 (North America) & CL 600 (RoW (rest of the world))

1998 CL 600 (Global)

1999 CL 600 (North America only)

1993 Cadillac Allanté in standard form (left) and with “wood grain kit” fitted (right).

Cadillac in the peak-button era did its bit and for most owners the look either was “enough” or “too much” but although the Allanté was then a very different sort of Cadillac targeting a demographic younger than the marque’s usual buyer profile, third party suppliers (which for generations had been selling all sorts of Cadillac accessories of dubious taste such as Rolls-Royce style grills & badges in anodized gold or “neo-classical” external spare tyre housings) saw possibilities and offered “wood grain kits”, pieces of plastic appliqué which could be added atop accommodating interior surfaces.  Never fitted by the factory, the “plastic wood” must have had a certain appeal because Allantés so adorned are not uncommon and at least four different companies at times produced the kits which were offered in Dark Cherry, Medium Cherry, Burlwood, Oak and Teak.  Some Cadillac dealers did carry the kits as “dealer-fitted accessories” and to gain a sale, the staff would sometimes bundle the supply and fitting with the purchase price.  If sold subsequently, there the usual “fitting fee” but being self-adhesive, it wasn't a difficult or time-consuming task.  The impressive Delco-GM/Bose Symphony Sound System (a US$905 option in any other Cadillac) was fitted to the Allanté for its first six seasons (a 100 watt unit used 1987-1990, upgraded to 200 for 1991-1992) while the models built in 1993 received the cheaper Delco-GM/Bose Premium Symphony Sound System; for audiophiles, the difference was obvious.  Despite that and other examples of cost-cutting “de-contenting” such as the loss of the genuine Recaro seats, the 1993 Allantés are preferred by some because of the use of the 4.6 litre (281 cubic inch) Northstar V8 which was (mostly) a good design except for a design flaw which meant head gaskets often failed.  The fix was simple but time-consuming (and thus expensive) and there was also the quirk of the starter-motor being located under the induction; that demanded removing the fuel-injection apparatus were a replacement needed.  

1991 Cadillac Allanté: Although the lines were neither adventurous or innovative, it was an accomplished design.

The Cadillac Allanté (1987-1993) was an ambitious project, a two-door, two-seater roadster produced in an expensive, travel & labor-intensive process which required trans-Atlantic transport (in modified Boeing 747 freighters) for the bodies from Pininfarina’s Italian factory to Cadillac’s assembly line in Detroit where final assembly was undertaken.  The US industry had in the 1950s & 1960s dabbled with this approach and even then it made little financial sense but it was a time when indulgences could be tolerated as a part of “image building”.  The economics of the late 1980s were very different but Cadillac early in the decade had, with a mix of jealousy and lust, been pondering the numbers achieved by the Mercedes-Benz R107 SL roadster (1971-1989), then quite ancient in automotive terms yet still habitually selling in numbers which belied its high price and vintage design.  Sharing mechanical components with higher-volume models and with the tooling for the structure long since amortized, Cadillac knew the thing was absurdly profitable despite being visually almost unchanged since its debut.

1988 Cadillac Allanté: One tangible advantage was the Allanté's removable hard-top was of aluminum and thus a relatively svelte 58 Lbs (26 kg) compared with the R107's steel unit which weighed in at a hefty 96 (44).  Roof-mounted hoists were popular with R107 owners.

Thus the Allanté, the company’s first two-seat roadster since the 1930s and one with the exclusivity of being built by an Italian coach-builder famous for having designed some of the most admired Ferraris.  Mechanically, the Allanté was unchallenging in that it was built on a shortened version of an existing platform which meant the use of FWD (front wheel drive) and the 4.1 litre (250 cubic inch) HT-4100 V8, both factors which meant there was no need to build new assembly lines or make expensive changes to existing facilities.  While the notion of an expensive “FWD roadster” may now seem strange, dynamically it made less difference than might be imagined because the Mercedes-Benz R107 was no sports car and for the Allanté’s intended market, the advantage of more interior space was thought more important than behaviour on a skid-pan.  The HT engine however proved more troublesome although that was a product of design flaws, not its placement in the Allanté.

Buttons come in many shapes, shades and sizes although most still are circular.  A button with four "sew holes" is called a "four-eye button".

The critical response was unexpectedly favorable.  In a comparison test published in the in February 1989 edition of C&D (Car and Driver magazine, not noted for being lavish in its praise of the US industry’s output), the writers declared it a better car than the Mercedes-Benz 560 SL (which may seem a slight achievement given the R107 was then some 18 years old and on a platform which had been designed in the late 1960s) and didn’t much dwell on either the Cadillac being some 15% cheaper nor it delivering slightly better fuel economy; their judgement was all about the driving experience likely to be typical of buyers (many of whom probably wouldn't notice the difference between FWD and RWD) although perhaps the sight of the “Pininfarina” script on the flanks lent some rose-tinting to their spectacles.  The testers noted the US-Italian hybrid was better suited to the urban conditions where most people would be operating most of the time, finding the Allanté more nimble and decidedly more modern although what was left unstated was it was remarkable the trans-continental effort managed to be only slightly better in some aspects than what was a design two decades old and in its final months.

Last days of the baroque: 1989 Mercedes-Benz 560 SL in Light Ivory over Brasil Dark Brown leather.

The RoW (rest of the world) R107s & C107s didn't suffer the disfiguring modifications (headlights for the whole model life, bumper bars after 1973) fitted to the NA (North America) market cars to ensure compliance with various US regulations.  In the US, there's now a minor industry importing the RoW headlights and bumper bars to restore cars to the appearance the designers intended.  Although the R107 lacked the delicate elegance of its predecessor (the W113 “Pagoda”; 230/250/280 SL, 1963-1971) the design has aged well and despite the large volume made, retain a following, the most sought being the rare 350 SLs with a four-speed manual transmission, the 500 SLs (the most powerful) and the 560 SLs (the most refined).  As a quirk of use, although the R107 also has a removable hardtop which uses the pagoda motif, it's only the W113 which is referred to thus.

In one area though, the 560 SL proved its mettle, the 5.5 litre (338 cubic inch) V8 out-running the Cadillac by 10 mph (16 km/h) in top speed and effortlessly out-accelerating it in any range about 25 mph (40 km/h), the advantage increasing as speeds rose.  Despite all the effort and expense, in some seven years, fewer than 21,500 Allantés were built while Mercedes-Benz shipped 237,287 R107s plus 62,888 LWB coupés (C107, 1971-1981) on the same platform, an average annual build rate over 18 years of some 17,000, two-thirds of which were exported to North America where, in places like Los Angeles, they were for decades the preferred (one suspects almost obligatory) transport for types such as interior decorators, successful hairdressers, the wives of cosmetic surgeons and bare-shouldered Hollywood starlets.  Had Lindsay Lohan in 1989 been of age, she'd have been at the wheel of a 560 SL.  Cadillac has had its failures (infamously the Cimarron) but it's believed never to have booked more of a loss on a single model than was the accountants' final reckoning of the (by then virtual) red-ink in which the Allanté's numbers were written.  By comparison, the write-down suffered with the cancellation of the division's remarkable Blackwing V8 (2018-2020) was relatively modest.  

1933 Cadillac 355C Coupe Convertible.  In 1933, Cadillacs had buttons but not many because there was then not so much stuff to activate although a valve-radio was on the options list.  As a nice touch (and a hint Cadillac understood their target market), a “golf bag compartment” was fitted behind the passenger’s door.  The external trunk and folding luggage rack were optional extras.

Introduced for 1931 as a lower cost range because the effects of the Great Depression drastically had reduced demand for Cadillac’s V12 & V16 lines, the V8-powered 355s (1931-1935) were, until the Allanté in 1987, the last Cadillac to be offered as a two-seat convertible although La Salle (its lower-cost stable mate) would offer the style as late as 1940, the year the brand was retired after a seven year stay of execution.  Cadillac called the coachwork a “Convertible Coupe” because “roadster” was associated with smaller, lighter machines; had it been built in England this would be dubbed a DHC (drop head coupé) while continental manufacturers would have preferred “cabriolet”.  In the elaborate Mercedes-Benz naming system it would be a “Cabriolet A” which designated “a two, door, two seat cabriolet with no rear quarter glass panes”.  The existence of supplemental passenger accommodation in the rumble seat does not affect the use of “Cabriolet A” because (1) Daimler-Benz never created a designation to describe the configuration (although “Cabriolet E” seems not to have been allocated if the factory is in the mood for retrospection) and (2) “Cabriolet A” anyway included certain models with provision for a third occupant in the rear of the passenger compartment. 

1933 Cadillac 355C Coupe Convertible. 

Somewhat unusually for the industry, Cadillac’s alpha-numerics were from day one locked in (355A (1931), 355B (1932), 355C (1933), 355D (1934) & 355E (1935)) so the “A” was not a retrospective appendage, unlike the Chrysler 300A which (informally) became the description of the 1955 C-300 only after, impressed by the sales of what had been intended as a one-off model to homologate parts for use in competition, the company for 1956 released the 300B.  Retiring the 355 range after 1935 meant Cadillac in 1939 never had to face the problem which afflicted not only Chrysler (when updating the 300H) but also bra manufacturers (what to slot-in between a 32H & 32J?) and the USAF (US Air Force) (when updating the Boeing B-52H).  The issue always was the desire to avoid an “I” being confused with a numeric “1”.  Chrysler and Boeing solved the problem by skipping the letter “I” and going straight to “J” while in the bra business there are very few “I cups”, the usual convention being to offer an “HH” (“double-H” in retail slang) or a “J”.  Although nominally a two-seater, three (snugly) could be accommodated and two more could fit in the rumble seat, the so-called “mother-in-law seat”, an appellation which makes most sense if she’s put there while the soft-top is in the raised position.  Unlike the Allanté, the 355 Coupe Convertibles were bodied in the US by Fisher, a GM (General Motors) coach-building division which was shuttered in 1984.

Reset button on early (clone) PC.

The stability of the PC (personal computer) has improved since August 1981 when the first IBM PC-1 appeared, triggering several waves of transformative changes which profoundly have altered the world; the AI (artificial intelligence) cycle is merely the latest of these “revolutions” and is unlikely to be the last.  One feature common on PCs during their first two decades of existence was the “reset button”, an oft-resorted to device because of the propensity of the things to “freeze” or lock-up, rendering the keyboard (until the late 1980s, mice were rare, expensive and used mostly by a lunatic fringe) useless.  While it might seem a redundant feature given each machine came with an on/off switch or button, the two performed distinct functions related to the limitations of the hardware and operation systems of the era.  The on/off switch performed a “cold start”, cutting and then restoring power to all components, an inherently slow and potentially stress-inducing process.  By contrast, the reset button triggered a “warm reset” which electrically asserted the CPU’s (central processing unit) RESET line (which, as implemented by many manufacturers, also often often reset the system bus) without cutting power; what it did was immediately restart execution at the firmware’s entry point (BIOS (basic input output (I/O) system) on genuine IBM PCs) while leaving the power-flow to the system uninterrupted.  The most obvious practical advantage of using the reset button was a faster restart and a reduction in mechanical wear on hard & and floppy drives by not subjecting them to spin-down & spin-up cycles.

Front panel on early (clone) PC.

The key (to the right, below the on/off power switch) enabled users to "lock" the keyboard, preventing use of the machine.  This mechanical security layer was required because the early operating systems had no accounts requiring a login and no password protection, meaning anyone who turned the thing on had unfettered access (very few programs offered application-level security).  The "Turbo" button was there to permit users to "throttle-back" to CPU to the 4.77 MHz speed used by the 8086 & 8088 CPUs in the original PCs.  That was needed to ensure some older software (especially games) would still run on newer hardware, running at a dazzling 7.16 or 9.54 MHz.  

Because almost all the early operating systems (PC/MS-DOS, CP/M-86 and the various UNIX ports) had no memory protection and only primitive fault recovery, a single misbehaving program could (1) disable the interrupts upon which hardware depended, (2) corrupt the system state and (3) make the keyboard wholly unresponsive.  Not only did all these things happen, they happened with some frequency so the advantages of the reset button offered were a real benefit to users.  The hardware also enjoyed a protection layer because the power switches on early PCs were "hard mechanical mains" switches, often directly switching line voltage which meant rapid power cycling could stress the power supply, cause voltage transients harmful to expansion cards and risk data corruption or loss because robust “parking” mechanisms were rare on the early hard drives.  As operating systems gained protected mode, multitasking, and graceful reboot mechanisms, the need for reset buttons diminished and gradually they disappeared from the standard specification.

Wall of 1000 buttons (actually 1,048) at Shimada Electric Manufacturing Company's OSEBA button theme park.

It’s not known how many theme parks currently operate around the planet but it’s estimated there are at least hundreds and there may be more than a thousand.  What can however be said with certainty is (1) all theme parks will have some buttons and (2) the world has only one “button-themed park”.  Opened in 2024 (presumably with the “press of a button”) OSEBA is operated by the Shimada Electric Manufacturing Company, a company founded in 1933 and specializing in elevator buttons which has for decades maintained an enviable reputation for producing high-quality equipment for elevators, both standard items and customized, decorative fittings.  The theme park’s appeal is essentially twofold: (1) the remarkable variation in appearance of buttons and (2) the tactile joy of pushing buttons.  Shimada was encouraged to enter the theme park business after noting the tours of its factory had for some time massively been over-subscribed with the company having the capacity to satisfy less than 1% of demand for places.  OSEBA is located in the city of Hachiōji and sits next to Shimada’s factory, the advertising noting it is a convenient 15-minute walk from the Keio-Hachioji Train Station.

Inside the OSEBA button theme park.

Thoughtfully designed in the Japanese manner, the theme of the experience is (predictably) “pressing buttons” but as well as being interactive, things are done in a way which builds anticipation because although the standard instruction is: “Push the button, and something will begin”, one can never predict quite what.  Sometimes it’s as simple as various pairs of choices (food, anime characters and such) with cumulative totals appearing, allowing visitors to understand how their preferences align with those of others.  It sounds simple but it’s popular although apparently not as addictive as the “wall of a thousand buttons” (there are actually 1,048 because symmetry is important in Japan) where one “races the clock” to press as many buttons as possible within 30 seconds ; in a country renowned for serious weird hobbies, it’s almost conventional.  More visually intriguing is the immersive “Infinite Elevator Box” which uses dynamic, colorful visuals to create a feeling of movement, even while remaining static.  Apart from the “Play” stuff, OSEBA also has a “Learn” area which focuses on the company’s history and craftsmanship.

Reset button: Sergey Lavrov (left) and crooked Hillary Clinton, Geneva, 2009.  The delicious irony is that one of crooked Hillary's few diplomatic successes came from a mistake in translation.  

Having failed in 2008 to secure the Democratic Party’s nomination to contest that year’s presidential election, crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947) between 2009-2013 to the consolation prize of becoming US secretary of state, the job she decided was a prelude to her becoming POTUS in 2016, a position to which she believed she was entitled.  Things didn’t quite work out as she’d hoped and her tenure at Foggy Bottom was marked by scandal (related, predictably, to her chronic untruthfulness) but one potential “diplomatic incident” was allowed to pass without adverse comment on the basis “she meant well”.  Following a not untypically troubled recent past, Barack Obama (b 1961; POTUS 2009-2017) decided to try to improve Washington’s relations with the Kremlin.  As a gesture in this vein, in 2009, crooked Hillary presented Sergey Lavrov (b 1950; Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs since 2004) with a red button (of the type often used in heavy machinery as an “emergency stop”) on which was printed “Reset” and a Roman alphabet transliteration of the Russian Cyrillic перегрузка (peregruzka).  The idea was, with the arrival in Washington of a new administration, the two states should “re-start” their relationship and try to pretend to forget as much as possible of the past.  Unfortunately, the department got the translation wrong and used the Russian word for “overload”; it should have read перезагрузка (perezagruzka).  Mr Lavrov however was also at the time anxious to improve things and accepted the gift in the spirit in which it was intended, he and crooked Hillary pushing the button simultaneously for several photo opportunities.

Lindsay Lohan’s belly button adorned  with belly button jewellery, Los Angeles, 2009.

The noun buttonology genuinely does exist.  It was a calque of the Swedish knappologi and used to refer to the fashion for pedantic and often pointless systematization.  The construct followed the Swedish model (knapp (button) +‎ -ologi, coined by Swedish author August Strindberg (1849–1912) and appearing in the short story De lycksaliges ö (The Isle of the Blessed) which although written in 1884, wasn’t published until 1891 when it appeared in the compilation Svenska öden och äventyr (Swedish Destinies and Adventures).  Buttonology is used most often as a generic term to decry the exaggerated, obsessive or pointlessly pedantic systematization, especially of trivial subjects but literally it can describe the study or categorization of buttons (in the sense of clothing fasteners).  Obviously, practitioners of buttonology are buttonologists.  In a light-hearted vein, in the training of software engineers and designers, it’s the component of the course focusing on user interfaces (where there can be many buttons).  In US military slang, buttonology is used of user interfaces generally.

Childless cat lady Taylor Swift (b 1989) with Ragdoll Benjamin Button, named after the eponymous character in the movie The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008), Time Magazine cover for “Person of the Year” edition, 25 December, 2023.  Ragdoll cats make good stoles because (attributed to a genetic mutation), they tend to “go limp” when picked up.

An owner of three most contented felines, gleefully, Ms Swift in 2024 embraced the appellation “childless cat lady” after wide publicity of its earlier use as a slur by James David (J.D.) Vance (b 1984; VPOTUS since 2025), something prompted by Mr Vance being named as Donald Trump’s (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) running-mate in the 2024 US presidential election.  The now famous phrase had been used in a 2021 interview with then Fox News host Tucker Carlson (b 1969) when he lamented the decline in the state of the nation: “…we are effectively run in this country via the Democrats, via our corporate oligarchs, by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too.”  Mr Vance may have struck an electoral chord because while Kamala Harris (b 1964; US vice president 2021-2025) presumably gained the childless cat lady vote, the Trump-Vance ticket won the election: 77,302,580 (49.8%) to 75,017,613 (48.3%) in the popular vote and 312 to 226 in the Electoral College on a turnout of 64.1%.

Pressed or pushed, many buttons needed.

The literal (physical) button-hole was noted in tailoring first during the 1560s, the figurative sense "to detain (someone) unwillingly in conversation” dating from 1862, a variation of the earlier button-hold (1834) and button-holder (1806), all based on the image is of holding someone by the coat-button so as to detain them.  The adjectival push-button (characterized by pressing a button used to activate something) emerged in 1945 as a consequence of the increasing public appreciation of the extent to which military weapons systems had become electronically controlled.  The earlier form “push-buttons" was from 1903, a modification of the noun push-button (button pressed with the finger to effect some operation) from 1865, then applied to mechanical devices.  The earlier adjectival form was “press-button” (1892) derived from the noun (1879).  For no apparent reason, it was the earlier “press of a button” which tended in the 1950s & 1960s to be preferred to “push of a button” to express the concern felt at the ease with which the US and USSR could trigger global thermo-nuclear war although “flick of a switch” also achieved much currency.  None were exactly usefully descriptive of a complex chain of events but it’s true that in a launch of nuclear weapons, many buttons and switches still are involved.

Highly qualified content provider Busty Buffy (b 1996) during “button-theory” test session.

Button theory involves trying on “button-up” tops of various sizes and subjecting each to normal human movement, the test “passed” when no buttons “pop open”.   In fashion (and, especially, content provision), the number of a top’s buttons “left undone” is a signifier of various things and the range extends from “all done up” to “all undone”, the latter usually restricted to catwalks and red carpets when stability of fabric sometimes is achieved with the use of adhesive, double-sided tape or the industry's ever-dependable tool of last resort: the safety pin.  While not culturally specific, the meanings signified by the number left undone (usually from top-to-bottom) can differ depending on certain circumstantial variables (time, place, temperature, wearer, presence of paparazzi etc).

No fear of button theory: Button theory suggests buttons can be done-up or undone.  Noted empiricist Lindsay Lohan has for some years been undertaking a longitudinal study to test theory.

The fear of buttons is koumpounophobia, the construct being the Modern Greek κουμπί (koumpí) +‎ -phobia and the word, like many describing phobias is a neologism.  Koumpi was from the Ancient Greek κομβίον (kombíon) translates as button in its two literal senses (a fastener for clothing or a device for instrument or remote mechanical control).  A button in Greek is thus κουμπί (koumpí) (the plural κουμπιά) and the verb is κουμπώνω (koumpóno).  In the Ancient Greek the lexemic unit koump- didn’t exist although it did have κομβίον (kombíon (which exists in Modern Greek as komvíon)) which meant buckle.  It may seem as strange omission because Ancient Greek had κουμπούνω, (koumpouno) which meant “to button” but the root was κύαμος (komos or koumos) meaning “broad bean” and, because there were no buttons in the Greece of Antiquity, they used appropriately sized & shaped beans as clothes fasteners.  The construct of koumpouno (to button) koum(os) + + πονέω (poneo) (to work; to exert), the idea of a bean which is used again and again.  The suffix -phobia (fear of a specific thing; hate, dislike, or repression of a specific thing) was from the New Latin, from the Classical Latin, from the Ancient Greek -φοβία (-phobía) and was used to form nouns meaning fear of a specific thing (the idea of a hatred came later).  In medicine, the absence of the belly button is a rare congenital defect, the medical term for which is omphalocele, usually something ultimately of no physiological significance but because it can cause psychological distress, plastic surgeons can re-construct one, a relatively simple procedure.  The alternative for an omphalocelic is to shun omphalophiliacs and hook up with someone who suffers omphalophobia (fear of the belly button); they should live happily ever after.  The phobia koumpounophobia is unrelated and references only the manufactured objects.

Lindsay Lohan in trench coat buttons up.  As fashionistas know, with a trench the belt is tied, only the military buckling up.

So, in the narrow technical sense, an etymologist might insist koumpounophobia is the fear of clothing fasteners rather than buttons of all types but that seems not helpful and it’s regarded as a generalised aversion and one said sometimes associated with kyklophobia (the fear of circles or other round objects) and especially the surprisingly common trypophobia (fear of holes (particularly if clustered or in some way arranged in a pattern)).  Estimates of the prevalence of the condition have been given by some but these are unverified and it’s not clear if those who for whatever reason prefer zips, Velcro or some other fastener are included and with phobias, numbers really should include only those where the aversion has some significant impact on life.  The symptoms suffered can include (1) an inability to tolerate the sight, sound, or texture of buttons, (2) feelings of panic, dread, or terror when seeing or thinking about buttons, (3) an acknowledgment that the fear is either wholly irrational or disproportionate to the potential danger.  Koumpounophobia reactions are usually automatic & uncontrollable and the source may be unknown or experiential (exposure to some disturbing imagery or description of buttons or an actual event involving buttons such as swallowing one when a child).  Like many phobias, the physical reactions can include a rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, trembling, excessive sweating, nausea, dry mouth, inability to speak or think clearly, tightening of stomach muscles, and an overwhelming desire to escape from button-related situations.  All are likely to involve an anxiety attack to some extent and the recommended treatment is the staggered exposure therapy used for many phobias; the patient slowly learning to wear, use and live with buttons; antidepressants, tranquillisers & beta-blockers are now considered medications of last resort.

Buttons are hard to avoid.

What is sometimes treated as koumpounophobia can be a manifestation of a different phobia.  In the literature there are examples of buttons triggering anxiety when touched or viewed but the reaction was actually to texture, color or a resemblance to something (typically a face, mouth or teeth as in many instances of pareidolia).  The button is thus incidental to the reaction in the same way that those with mysophobia (in popular use the germophobic) may react to buttons because of the association with uncleanliness.  One documented aspect of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) is that many sufferers immediately wash their hands after touching a button; the increased prevalence of this behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to buttons touched by other (keyboards, elevators etc) is not thought indicative of a phobia but would be if it manifests as life-long behaviour.

Apple Magic Mouse, Multi-Touch Surface in white @ US$99.00 (left), Logitech Signature M650 L, full-size wireless two-button Scroll Mouse with Silent Clicks in blue @ US$37.99 (centre) and Steve Jobs' vision of hell: Canon 5565B001 X Mark I Slim 3-in-1 wireless mouse with keypad calculator @ US$49.95. 

Steve Jobs (1955-2011; co-founder, and sometime chairman & CEO of Apple) was said to have an aversion to buttons, something linked to his fondness for button-free turtleneck clothing but given he spent decades using keyboards without apparent ill-effect, it’s doubtful a clinician would diagnose koumpounophobia and it's more likely he was just convinced of the technological advantages of going button-less.  Without buttons, manufacturing processes would be cheaper, water-proofing devices like iPhones would become (at least theoretically) possible and upgrades would no longer be constrained by static buttons, the user interface wholly virtualized on one flat panel, able to be changed (the industry's term for "change" is "upgrade" although users don't always agree there has been an improvement) purely in software.  It apparently started with the button-less Apple mouse, the industry legend being Mr Jobs saw a prototype (which the designers regarded as nothing more than speculative) and insisted it become Apple’s standard device.

Whether or not it happened that way, the story is illustrative of the way business was done at Apple and it’s notable his veto on offering a stylus with which to interact with apps or the operating system didn’t survive his death.  His response to the idea of a stylus was reportedly “yuk” and he seems to have decided all his users would think the same way and probably he was right, Apple’s users tending usually to do what Apple tells them to do.  Indeed, one of reasons Apple has found the Chinese market so receptive to the iPhone is that the company's approach accords with "the Chinese way": First, their parents tell them what to do, then their teachers tell them what to do, then the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) tells them what to do; Apple found it most agreeable they also did what it told them to do.  However, for those who find the sleek Apple mouse better to behold than use, third-party products with buttons and scroll wheels are available, sometimes for half the cost of the genuine article.  Since the death of Mr Jobs, Apple has relented on the "stylus question".

Shiny on the outside: Finished in Bianco Avus over black leather with Rosso Corsa (racing red) instruments, of the 400 Ferrai Enzos (2002-2004) chassis 133023 (2003) was the only one the factory painted white.  Some Ferraris really suit white, notably the elegant 365 GT4 2+2 and the successor 400 and 412 models (1972-1989).

The dreaded “Ferrari sticky buttons” is a well-known phenomenon, the stickiness coming from the rubberized material preferred by the factory because of the superior feel offered.  However, under just about any climatic conditions, continuous use will induce a deterioration which resembles melting, "mushiness" the final outcome.  The internet is awash with suggestions, the simplest of which involves products like rubbing alcohol (the use of which can cause its own destructiveness) and the consensus seems to be that in many cases only replacement buttons will produce a satisfactory result.  The choice is between obtaining the real Ferrari part-number (if available) with the knowledge the problem will re-occur or use third-part replacements which are made of a more durable material, the disadvantage being the feel won’t be quite the same and there’s a reluctance among some to use non-factory parts, an attitude enforced by the "originality police". 

Sticky on the inside: Ferrari 485 California F1 gearbox buttons, sticky (left) and not (right).

Ferrari does use the suspect material for a reason and it’s applied to interior components such as trim, bezels, buttons & switches, and heating, ventilation & air-conditioning panels.  The coatings are usually referred to as “soft-touch” and designers like them for the soft, velvet-like feel imparted.  Used also on computer mice and electronic remote controls, the low gloss sheen is in cars helpful because being absorptive, glare is reduced and Ferrari uses both a clear and black finish.  It’s an issue not exclusive to Ferraris although owners of those do seem most concerned and while using rubbing alcohol might sound a tempting Q&D (quick & dirty) fix, for those with sticky buttons this is probably a job best left to experts of which there are now a few and they're finding business good.