Hegemony

Hegemony (pronounced hi-jem-uh-nee or hej-uh-moh-nee)

(1) Leadership or predominant influence exercised by one nation over others, as in a confederation.

(2) Aggression or expansionism by large nations in an effort to achieve world domination (especially among smaller nations).

(3) As cultural hegemony, ascendancy or domination of one (class, ethnic, linguistic etc) group over others.

1560–1570: From the Ancient Greek ἡγεμονία (hēgemonía) (leadership, authority, supremacy), the construct being ἡγεμών (hēgemon-) (stem of hēgemṓn) (leader) + -ia (the suffix forming abstract nouns of feminine gender, from the New Latin, from the Classical Latin -ia and the Ancient Greek -ία (-ía) & -εια (-eia)); the rarer form was ἡγέομαι (hēgeisthai) (to lead).  The root of hēgeisthai is unknown but a link has been suggested to "to track down," from the primitive Indo-European sag-eyo- from the root sag- (to seek out, track down, trace).  The forms antihegemonic & counterhegemonic were creations in political science to describe the tactics and strategies adopted to oppose a hegemon.  Hegemony, hegemon, hegemonization & hegemonist are nouns, hegemonized, hegemonizing & hegemonize are verbs, hegemonic is an adjective and hegemonically is an adverb; the noun plural is hegemonies.

The noun hegemonism dates from 1965 and refers to a policy of political domination, based to some extent on the model of imperialism.  The noun hegemonist was first used in 1898 in a discussion of the particular role of Prussia in the German (con)federation (the joke of the time being that while there were many states with an army, Prussia was an army with a state).  The noun hegemon had been used a year earlier, describing the unique position of Great Britain in the world as a maritime power with a far-flung world-wide empire, quite distinct historically from the models of the previous two millennia which had tended to be continental or at least contiguous.  The adjective hegemonic had emerged as early as the 1650s and was older still, noted in oral use in the 1610s.

Gramsci's legacy

Hegemons at lunch.

Mean Girls (2004) has been analysed as a series of case-studies deconstructing the ways an individual or group can asset a cultural hegemony but it's also been subject to the critique that as a piece of cinema, it's emblematic of the way the industry reinforces white supremacy and white privilege.  The original sense of hegemony, dating from the 1560s, was in reference to the predominance of one city state over another in Ancient Greece and was used also to mean the literal authority or sovereignty of one city-state over a number of others, as Athens in Attica or Thebes in Boeotia and generally to the Hellenic League (338 BC), a federation of Greek city–states created by Philip II of Macedon (382–336 BC; king (basileus) of Macedonia 359-336) to facilitate his access to and use of Greek armies against the Persian empire.  It was first used in a modern sense in geo-politics during the 1850s to describe the position of Prussia in relation to other German states and came to be applied, sometime misleadingly, to the European colonialism imposed upon the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Australasia.  In the twentieth century, political scientists (not only those from the left although the idea was most developed by neo-Marxists) extended the denotation of hegemony to include cultural imperialism, the domination, by a ruling class (or culture), in a socially stratified society.  The core of the theory was that by manipulating cultural values and mores, thereby constructing a dominant ideology, the ruling class intellectually can dominate the other classes by imposing a worldview (Weltanschauung) that, ideologically and structurally, justifies the social, political, and economic status quo to the point where it’s viewed as normal, inevitable and perpetual, with no possible alternative.

Antonio Gramsci

It was Italian politician and Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci’s (1891–1937) discussions in the 1920s of the nature of hegemony which provided the framework upon which others built their theories.  Gramsci was interested in the survival, indeed the flourishing of the capitalist state in the most advanced Western countries, despite the social and economic convulsions which earlier theorists had suggested should have threatened the system’s survival.  Gramsci understood the supremacy of a class and that the reproduction of its associated mode of production could be obtained by brute domination or coercion but his key observation was that in advanced capitalist societies, the perpetuation of class rule was achieved largely through consensual means.  A hegemonic class is thus one able to attain the consent of other social forces, and the retention of this consent is an ongoing project.  His work continues to underpin most critical analysis of apparently disparate systems such as The People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the US, systems in which tiny ruling classes (the Communist Party (CCP) in the former and the (somewhat misleadingly named) one percent in the latter), maintain and enhance a system entirely in their own interest with support from the masses ranging mostly from resigned acquiescence to actual enthusiasm.  In the CCP, this manifests as most of the population supporting the suppression of their political rights; in the US, they’re convinced to act against their own economic interests.  Under capitalism (ie the system used by both PRC and the US), Gramsci observed the relentless contribution of the institutions of civil society to the shaping of mass cognitions.

Gramsci wasn’t a theorist only of structures but was interested also in revolutionary strategy.  He noted the acquisition of consent prior to gaining power as an obvious implication but this he refined by offering a distinction a war of manoeuvre (the full frontal assault on the bourgeois state) and one of position (engagement with and subversion of the mechanisms of bourgeois ideological domination).  Others were taken with the concept, notably German-American political theorist Herbert Marcuse (1898–1979) of the Frankfurt School of critical theory and German Marxist sociologist Rudi Dutschke (1940–1979), best remembered for the idea, inspired by Gramsci, of a “long march through the institutions”.  The strategy was inspired, the tactics flawed.  The institutions through which the revolutionaries were allowed (some say encouraged) to march turned out to be art galleries, theatre trusts and other structures on the margins.  The institutions which controlled the economy and the security of the state remained under the control of the hegemon.

Occidental & Oriental

Occidental (pronounced ok-si-den-tl)

(1) Of, relating to, or characteristic of the Occident or its natives and inhabitants (usually initial capital letter).

(2) A literary or formal word for Western.

(3) A native or inhabitant of the Occident (usually initial capital letter).

(4) An artificial language, created by Baltic German mathematician Edgar de Wahl (1867-1948), later renamed Interlingue shortly before the publication of Interlingua (1949) (always initial capital).

1350–1400: A Middle English borrowing from the Old French occidental from the Latin occidentālis (western), the construct being occident- + -ālis.  The Latin occidentalis was from occidēns (west), the present active participle of occidō (I fall down; pass away).  Occidental is a noun & adjective, occidentalism, occident & occidentalist are nouns and occidentally is an adverb; the noun plural is occidentals.

Oriental (pronounced awr-ee-en-tl or ohr‐ee-en-tl)

(1) Of, relating to, or characteristic of the Orient, or East; Eastern (usually initial capital letter).

(2) Of the orient, or the eastern region of the world.

(3) In geography, belonging to a geographical division comprising southern Asia and the Malay Archipelago as far as and including the Philippines, Borneo, and Java (initial capital letter).  (In pre-modern geography, pertaining to the regions east of the Mediterranean, beyond the Roman Empire or the early Christian world).  Oriental is a noun & adjective, orientalism, orient & orientalist are nouns and orientally is an adverb; the noun plural is orientals (often correctly used with initial capital).

(4) In jewelry, designating various gems that are varieties of corundum: Oriental aquamarine; Oriental ruby (usually initial capital letter).

(5) Designating certain natural saltwater pearls found especially in Asia.

(6) Of a pearl or other precious stone: having a superior lustre.

(7) A breed of slender muscular cat with large ears, long legs, and a long tail.

(8) A native or inhabitant of the Orient (usually initial capital letter).

(9) In astronomy and astrology), pertaining to the eastern part of the sky; happening before sunrise.

(10) Designating various types of aromatic tobacco grown in Turkey and the Balkans (post-nineteenth century use).

(11) A lily cultivar of a widely varied group, with strong scent.

(12) In any context, eastern or of the eastern part (obsolete except as a literary or poetic device).

1350–1400: Middle English from the Middle French $ Anglo-Latin oriental from the Latin orientālis (eastern), from oriēns (rising (of the sun)), present active participle of orior (I rise), the construct being orient- (east, the east) –ālis.  The suffix –ālis was added to a noun or numeral to form an adjective of relationship; it was from the primitive Indo-European -li-, which later dissimilated into an early version of –aris, perhaps connected to hzel- (to grow).  The neuter form was –āle.

Edward Said

Controversial even in the post-colonial milieu of the time, Edward Said’s (1935-2003) Orientalism (1979) was a critique of a particular construct of the historic Western treatment of things eastern.  It dealt with not only academic orientalists but also seminal figures of western social science such as Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Max Weber (1864-1920) whose writings emphasized fundamental differences between East and West.  It’s regarded still, by some, as a dangerous book, blamed for the schism in the field of modern Middle Eastern studies which coalesced into the polarized factions of the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) and its newer rival, the Association for the Study of the Middle East and Africa (ASMEA).  The stylistic patchwork Said adopted perhaps made criticism inevitable.  Within a scholarly framework, the author laid bare his outage at the reductionist objectification of the Western tradition in its treatment of the other, his words construed as political and polemic.

Even the book's covers attracted comment and varied according to the market in which it was sold although, unlike some controversial titles, it was apparently never necessary anywhere to offer it in a plain, brown wrapper. 

Detractors and admirers alike all were aware of the significance of Orientalism and it’s regarded still as “one of the most influential scholarly books published in English in the last half-century”, even by some who documented its flaws.  The book was one of those rare texts in historiography which stirred up a stormy debate in and beyond academia, the idea of authors in the West having a skewed and condescending view towards the East finding a sympathetic audience.  So incendiary was the reaction that not only was the book controversial but so was the nature of the reaction although, despite the claims of some, the pattern of the responses appeared not to align with the ethnicity or religious orientation of the scholars and intellectuals but with their attitude to history and the modern and post-modern philosophical ideas (deconstruction, truth as illusion, intellectual hegemony et al).

In a sense, it was Said himself who created the structure for the criticism which would follow because he defined Orientalism in three ways: (1) the academic profession, (2) the world view and (3) a mode of hegemony.  The first was the most readily understood, an academic Orientalist was anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient, whether they be an anthropologist, sociologist, historian, philologist or literary critic.  That did not imply the world view of Orientalists was monolithic but Said did contend that their views were almost invariably dictated by a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between the “the Orient” and “the Occident” (ie between Eastern & Western culture) and this applied also to poets, novelists, philosophers, political theorists and economists, their position a direct inheritance from the ideas spread by European imperial administrators, travellers and explorers; whether in simple or elaborate form, the theorists, novelists and poets all worked within the same framework of “difference”.  Finally, Said defined Orientalism by the actual political and colonial relations constructed in “the West” epistemologically, based on the earlier definitions; it was this construct with which the West conducted itself with the Orient.  Perhaps predictably, the academics appeared more upset at what they perceived as Said’s attack on the accuracy of their research and their intellectual impartiality than what was done with what he claim they created, even if unknowingly. 

One concept he introduced was the notion of “the distinction between the latent and manifest orientalism”, the latent being a general unconscious certainty the Orient was the way it has been described by the practitioners while the manifest was the supremacy of American imperialism as practiced since in the post-war years they assumed the hegemony in things east of Suez from the British and French: “The distinction I am making is really between an almost unconscious (and certainly an untouchable) positivity, which I shall call latent Orientalism, and the various stated views about Oriental society, languages, literatures, history, sociology, and so forth, which I shall call manifest Orientalism”.  The idea of the latent and manifest wasn’t wholly new but was one which later would be picked up and developed in critical race theory (CRT).

An occidental in the orient: Long-time resident Lindsay Lohan creating a photo opportunity with the Dubai Police, thanking them and the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for their ongoing support during the Covid-19 pandemic, Dubai, April 2020.

That the critics found faults in both Said’s historiography and theoretical inconsistencies in his framework clearly pleased them but appeared to do little to affect the impact of Orientalism, something probably at least partly attributable to his deconstruction of the Western filter through which things eastern were viewed being built with the tools provided by some of the cult favourites in late twentieth century Western philosophy: Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) (representation and the thing-in-itself), Michel Foucault (1926–1984) (discourse, power, knowledge, episteme and truth regimes), Antonio Gramsci (1891–1937) (cultural hegemony) and Jacques Derrida (1930-2004) (deconstruction).  Said was a subtle thinker but to try to synthesize something from applying the thoughts of that lot would of necessity need some intellectual brutishness just to make it fit and it’s not surprising there were those who faulted him for occupying “…theoretical positions which are mutually contradictory”.  Still, if anything the effect of that was stimulative and Orientalism was one of those books which people read and found it confirmed their own views about the West or the West’s critics.  It’s doubtful Orientalism changed many minds and there were flaws which the critics were right to identify but regardless of how ultimately it will be remembered as an academic text, it remains a literary classic.

Surplus

Surplus (pronounced sur-pluhs)

(1) Something that remains above what is used or needed.

(2) In agricultural economics, produce or a quantity of food grown by a nation or area in excess of its needs, especially such a quantity of food purchased and stored by a governmental program of guaranteeing farmers a specific price for certain crops.

(3) In accounting, the excess of assets over liabilities accumulated throughout the existence of a business, excepting assets against which stock certificates have been issued; excess of net worth over capital-stock value.

(4) In public finance, an excess of government revenues over expenditures during a certain financial year.

(5) In international trade, an excess of receipts over payments on the balance of payments.

(6) In economic theory, an unsold quantity of a good resulting from a lack of equilibrium in a market.  For example, if a price is artificially high, sellers will bring more goods to the market than buyers will be willing to buy.  In classical economics, the opposite of shortage.

(7) In Chancery law (and its successor courts), the remainder of a fund appropriated for a particular purpose.

1325–1375: From the Middle English surplus, from the Old French sorplus (remainder, extra), from the Medieval Latin superplūs (excess, surplus), the construct being super (over) + plūs (more).  Surplus in Italian is a borrowing from modern French where surplus has existed since the twelfth century.  In English, surplus has been used as an adjective since the fourteenth century.  Enjoying the same pronunciation, surplice and surplus are often confused.  A surplice is a liturgical vestment of the Christian Church, usually styled as a tunic of white linen or cotton material, with wide sleeves and often some lace embellishment or embroidered edges.  Lengths vary; in medieval times it reached almost to the ground but tends now to be shorter; some still retain the longer garments for the ceremonial.  As surplis, it was a thirteenth century Middle-English borrowing from the Anglo-French surpliz, a syncopated variant of Old French surpeliz, derived from the Medieval Latin superpellīcium (vestīmentum) over-pelt (garment), neuter of superpellīcius.  Construct was super (over) + pellīt(us) (clothed with skins or fur) + -ius (the adjectival suffix).  A clerical surplice is thus a kind of frock; a clerical surplus means too many priests.

Surplus Repression

German-American Herbert Marcuse (1898–1979) was a sociologist and philosopher, highly influential in the mid-late twentieth century.  Even today, Marcuse enjoys a cult following.

A critique of capitalism’s culture and economic arrangements, Marcuse's book Eros and Civilization (1655) drew, inter alia, from Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) and described an alternative structure for society.  He didn’t reject Freud’s idea that repression of mans’ instinctive desires was necessary for civilization to endure but Marcuse distinguished between basic (or necessary) repression and surplus repression, detailing the differences between the biological vicissitudes of the instincts and the socially imposed.  His construct was that basic repression is that which man suppresses to permit peaceful societies to form; a repression or modification of the instincts being necessary “…for the perpetuation of the human race in civilization.”  Surplus repression meant those “…restrictions necessitated by [the] social domination” of the particular ruling-class or hegemony.  The purpose of surplus repression was to shape the instincts of individuals to conform to the requirements of modern capitalism, a surrender to what Marcuse called the “performance principle”, a construct building on Marx’s theories of alienation and surplus value.

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

Marcuse's writing did have the attraction of being more accessible than that of Marx or Freud (and certainly that of many neo-Marxists or Freudians) but that also meant it was easier for critics to cherry pick the points they found most objectionable.  For an explanation of why society need to be organized the way it was, conservatives seemed to prefer the rationalization of the "harsh but deliciously clever" English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) best known for his book Leviathan (1651) in which appeared the memorable passage describing the life of man in a world where there existed no restraining authorities forcing people to repress their worst instincts:

In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

Such a culture Hobbes called the "state of nature" by which he meant not an environmentally sustainable hippie commune but a place in which there was bellum omnium contra omnes (war of all against all) and murder went unpunished except by another murder.  Although the distinction is now an unfashionable one to draw, conservatives liked the way Hobbes seemed to know not all cultures were civilizations and that a little surplus repression was a small price to pay for for its benefits.  Hobbes lived through troubled times and his views on the importance of stable, strong governance should be understood as the writings of one who had seen what the alternative looks like but as a list of exculpatory bullet-points, it's something which can be ticked off by by the Ayatollahs in Tehran or the Chinese Communist Party.  Marcuse is not so transportable.

Sometimes, it really was read for the articles.  Michael G Horowitz's profile of Marcuse was published in the September 1970 edition of Playboy.

Marcuse’s work was acknowledged as a landmark in the synthetization of Marxist and psychoanalytic theories but was criticized for being just another of the utopian visions written of since antiquity, work cut adrift from the moorings of the political reality which seemed in the 1960s more urgently to demand attention.  Marcuse acknowledged the distance of his work from reality and conceded his theories could reach actualization only by revolution or gradual infiltration of the structures of the power-elite and, after the disappointments of the moments in 1968 when revolution fleeting was in the air, he preferred the latter.  German student activist Rudi Dutschke (1940–1979) had advocated a "…march through the institutions of power", radically to change society from within government and cultural institutions by becoming part of the machinery and structures under which capitalism operated.  This too owed a debt to the theories of hegemony and Marcuse wrote to Dutschke in 1971 saying he “regarded your notion of the "march through the institutions" as the only effective way.”  It all failed.  It was the highly unusual coincidence of circumstances in the post war (1948-1973) Western world which briefly in 1968 made the system seem internally vulnerable and the hegemony learned the lesson: they would control who manned the institutions that matter and the troublemakers could march through things like theatre trusts, literary festivals and art gallery committees.

Simile, Metaphor & Analogy

Simile (pronounced sim-uh-lee)

(1) A figure of speech expressing the resemblance of one thing to another of a different category usually introduced by as or like.

(2) An instance of such a figure of speech or a use of words exemplifying it.

1393: From the Middle English simile, from the Latin simile (a like thing; a comparison, likeness, parallel), neuter of similis (like, resembling, of the same kind).  The antonym is dissimile and the plural similes or similia although the latter, the original Latin form, is now so rare its use would probably only confuse.  Apart from its use as a literary device, the word was one most familiar as the source of the “fax” machine, originally the telefacsimile and there was a “radio facsimile” service as early as the 1920s whereby images could be transmitted over long-distance using radio waves, the early adopters newspapers and the military.

The simile is figure of speech in which one thing is explicitly compared to another, usually using “like” or “as”; both things must be mentioned and the comparison directly stated.  For literary effect, the two things compared should be thought so different as to not usually appear in the same sentence and the comparison must directly be stated.  Dr Johnson (Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)) thought a simile “…to be perfect, must both illustrate and ennoble the subject." but many long ago became clichéd and far removed from nobility.

It went through me like an armor-piercing shell.
Slept like a log.
Storm in a tea cup.
Blind as a bat.
Dead as a dodo.
Deaf as a post.

Metaphor (pronounced met-uh-fawr)

(1) A figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance.

(2) Something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.

1525-1535:  From the Middle French métaphore & the (thirteenth century) Old French metafore from the Latin metaphora, from the Ancient Greek μεταφορά (metaphorá) (a transfer, especially of the sense of one word to a different word; literally "a carrying over”), from μεταφέρω (metaphérō) (I transfer; I apply; I carry over; change, alter; to use a word in a strange sense), the construct being μετά (metá) (with; across; after; over) + φέρω (phérō, pherein) (to carry, bear) from the primitive Indo-European root bher- (to carry; to bear children).  The plural was methaphoris.  In Antiquity, for a writer to be described in Greek as metaphorikos meant they were "apt at metaphors”, a skill highly regarded: “It is a great thing, indeed, to make a proper use of the poetical forms, as also of compounds and strange words. But the greatest thing by far is to be a master of metaphor. It is the one thing that cannot be learnt from others; and it is also a sign of genius, since a good metaphor implies an intuitive perception of the similarity in dissimilars" (Aristotle (384-322 BC), Poetics (circa 335 BC)).

The words metaphor, simile and analogy are often used interchangeably and, at the margins, there is a bit of overlap, a simile being a type of metaphor but the distinctions exist.  A metaphor is a figure of figure of speech by which a characteristic of one object is assigned to another, different but resembling it or analogous to it; comparison by transference of a descriptive word or phrase.  It’s important to note a metaphor is technically not an element or argument, merely a device to make a point more effective or better understood.  It’s the use of a word or phrase to refer to something other than its literal meaning, invoking an implicit similarity between the thing described and what is denoted by the word or phrase.  It has certain technical uses too such as the recycling or trashcan icons in the graphical user interfaces (GUI) on computer desktops (a metaphor in itself).  The most commonly used derivatives are metaphorically & metaphorical but in literary criticism and the weird world of deconstructionism, there’s the dead metaphor, the extended metaphor, the metaphorical extension, the mysterious conceptual metaphor and the odd references to metaphoricians and their metaphorization.  Within the discipline, the sub-field of categorization is metaphorology, the body of work of those who metaphorize.  

This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,--
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

William Shakespeare (1564-1616), Richard II (circa 1594), Act 2 scene 1.

Analogy (pronounced uh-nal-uh-jee)

(1) A similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based:

(2) A similarity or comparability.

(3) In biology, an analogous relationship; a relationship of resemblance or equivalence between two situations, people, or objects, especially when used as a basis for explanation or extrapolation.

(4) In linguistics, the process by which words or phrases are created or re-formed according to existing patterns in the language.

(5) In logic a form of reasoning in which one thing is inferred to be similar to another thing in a certain respect, on the basis of the known similarity between the things in other respects.

(6) In geometry, the proportion or the equality of ratios.

(7) In grammar, the correspondence of a word or phrase with the genius of a language, as learned from the manner in which its words and phrases are ordinarily formed; similarity of derivative or inflectional processes.

1530-1540: From the Old French analogie, from the Latin analogia, from the Ancient Greek ἀναλογία (analogía), (ratio or proportion) the construct being ἀνά (aná) (upon; according to) + λόγος (logos) (ratio; word; speech, reckoning), from the primitive Indo-European root leg- (to collect, to gather (with derivatives meaning “to speak; to pick out words”).  It was originally a term from mathematics given a wider sense by Plato who extended it to logic (which became essentially “an argument from the similarity of things in some ways inferring their similarity in others”.  The meaning “partial agreement, likeness or proportion between things” fates from the 1540s and by the 1580s was common in mathematics; by the early seventeenth century it was in general English use.  The plural is analogies and the derived forms include the adjective analogical and the verbs analogize & analogized.  In critical discourse there’s the “false analogy” and the rare disanalogy.

An analogy is a comparison in which an idea or a thing is compared to another thing that is quite different from it, aiming to explain the idea or thing by comparing it to something that is familiar.  Further to confuse, metaphors and similes are tools used to draw an analogy so an analogy can be more extensive and elaborate than either a simile or a metaphor.

The day is done, and the darkness

Falls from the wings of Night,

As a feather is wafted downward

From an eagle in his flight.

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1807-1882), The Day Is Done (1844).

“They crowded very close about him, with their hands always on him in a careful, caressing grip, as though all the while feeling him to make sure he was there. It was like men handling a fish which is still alive and may jump back into the water.”

George Orwell (1903-1950), A Hanging (1931).

The Mean Girls mall scene, at the water hole in the jungle clearing where the “animals gather when on heat”.

Similes, metaphors & analogies are used frequently as devices in fiction including in Paramount Production’s Mean Girls (2004) and the similes were quite brutish including “You smell like a baby prostitute”; “She's like a Martian”; & “Your face smells like peppermint”.  The metaphors were obvious (this was a teen comedy) but worked well.  The “Plastics” implied the notion of things artificial, superficial, and shiny on the outside but hollow inside while “Social Suicide” would to the audience have been more familiar still.  The idea of the “Queen Bee” (a metaphorical position of one individual as the centre of the hive (school) around which all dynamics and activities revolve) was one of several zoological references.  The idea of it being “…like a jungle in here” was a variation of the familiar metaphorical device of comparing modern urban environments (the “concrete jungle” the best known) with a jungle and in Mean Girls stylized depictions of wild animals do appear, the school’s mascot a lion, a link to the protagonist having come from the African savanna.  There was also the use of a malapropism in the analogy “It's like I have ESPN or something”, the novelty being it used an incorrect abbreviation rather than a word.  The Mean Girls script is not the place to search for literary subtleties.

Of Pluto

The New Zealand physicist Lord Rutherford (1871-1937), who first split the atom (1932), explained its structure by drawing an analogy with our solar system.  Rutherford always regarded physics as the “only true, pure science” while other disciplines were just expressions of the properties or applications of the theories of physics.  In 1908, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry “…for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances.”  It was said he was amused by the joke.

This image includes Pluto as a planet.  Historically, the Galileian satellites of Jupiter were initially called satellite planets but were later reclassified along with the Moon.  The first observed asteroids were also considered planets, but were reclassified when became apparent how many there were, crossing each other's orbits, in a zone where only a single planet had been expected.   Pluto was found where an outer planet had been expected but doubts were soon raised about its status because (1) it was found to cross Neptune's orbit and (2) was much smaller than had been the expectation.  The debate about the status of Pluto went on for decades after its discovery in 1930 and the pro-planet faction may have become complacent, thinking that because Pluto had always been a planet, it would forever be thus but, after seventy-six years in the textbooks as a planet, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) in 2006 voted to re-classify Pluto as a dwarf planet on the basis that the icy orb failed to meet a set of criteria which the IAU claimed had for decades been accepted science.

To be a planet, the IAU noted, the body must (1) orbit a star, (2) be sufficiently massive to it pull itself into a sphere under its own gravity and (3), “clear its neighbourhood” of debris and other celestial bodies, proving it has gravitational dominance (cosmic hegemony in its sphere of influence by political analogy) in its little bit of the solar system.  Pluto fails the third test.  Because it orbits in the Kuiper Belt (a massive ring of asteroids and planetoids that stretches beyond the orbit of Neptune), Pluto is surrounded by thousands of other celestial bodies and chunks of debris, each exerting its own gravity.  Pluto is thus not the gravitationally dominant object in its neighborhood and therefore, not a planet and but a dwarf (a sort of better class of asteroid).  The IAU’s action had been prompted by the discovery in the Kuiper Belt of a body larger than Pluto yet still not meeting the criteria for planethood.  Feeling the need to draw a line in the sky, the IAU dumped Pluto.

However #plutoisaplanet is a thing and Pluto’s supporters have a website, arguing that while it’s universally accepted a planet should be spherical and orbit the Sun, the “clearing the neighbourhood” rule is arbitrary, having appeared only in a single paper published in 1801.  The history is certainly muddied, Galileo having described the moons of Jupiter as planets and there are plenty of other more recent precedents to suggest the definitional consensus has bounced around a bit and there are even extremists really to accept the implications of loosening the rules such as the moons of Earth, Jupiter and Saturn becoming planets.  Most however just want Pluto restored.

The most compelling argument however is that the IAU are a bunch of humorless cosmological clerks, something like the Vogons (“…not actually evil, but bad-tempered, bureaucratic, officious and callous.”) in Douglas Adams' (1952–2001) Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979-1992) and that Pluto should be restored to planethood because of the romance of the tale.  Although lacking the lovely rings of Saturn (a feature shared on a smaller scale by Jupiter, Uranus & Neptune), Pluto is the most charming of all because it’s so far away; desolate, lonely and cold, it's the solar system’s emo.  If for no other reason, it should be a planet in tribute to the scientists who, for decades during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, calculated possible positions and hunted for the elusive orb.  In an example of Donald Rumsfeld's (1932–2021; US secretary of defense 1975-1977 & 2001-2006) “unknown knowns”, the proof was actually obtained as early as 1915 but it wasn’t until 1930 that was realized.  In an indication of just how far away Pluto lies, since the 1840s when equations based on Newtonian mechanics were first used to predict the position of the then “undiscovered” planet, it has yet to complete even one orbit of the Sun, one Plutonian year being 247.68 years long.

Inculcate

Inculcate (pronounced in-kuhl-keyt)

(1) To implant ideas, opinions or concepts in others, usually by forceful or insistent repetition or admonition; persistently to teach.

(2) To cause or influence others to accept an idea or feeling; to induce understanding or a particular sentiment in a person or persons.

1540s: From the Latin inculcātus past participle of inculcāre (to trample, impress, stuff in, force upon) and perfect passive participle of inculcō (impress upon, force upon).  The construct of inculcāre was in- + calcāre (to trample), from calcō (to tread upon), from calx (heel).  The Latin prefix in- was from the Proto-Italic en-, from the primitive Indo-European n̥- (not), the zero-grade form of the negative particle ne (not) and was akin to ne-, nē & nī.  In Modern English it is from the Middle English in-, from Old English in- (in, into), from the Proto-Germanic in, from the primitive Indo-European en.  The meanings in English upon adoption in the mid-sixteenth century (act of impressing upon the mind by repeated admonitions; forcible or persistent teaching) are agreed but some etymologists note the source of the noun inculcation might have been different, coming directly from the Late Latin inculcationem (nominative inculcatio), the noun of action from past-participle stem of inculcāre.  Inculcate is a verb, inculcation & inculcator are nouns, inculcates, inculcating, & inculcated are verbs and inculcative & inculcatory are adjectives; the most common noun plural is inculcations.

Inculcation and inculcators

The word inculcate sits on the spectrum of descriptors of the process by which an individual or institution can attempt impose a doctrine, belief or construct of reality on others, the range extending from suggestion & persuasion to instill, ingrain, propaganda, inculcation & brainwashing.  It thus belongs in the class called loaded words (those which, usually for historic or associative reasons, have come to possess implications “loading” the meaning beyond the technical definition.  For most purposes, those who wish to apply the process of inculcation for some purpose usually cloak their intent with other words; "inspire" often appears in vapid corporate mission-statements but is tainted by its association with advertising and a better choice is the less obviously manipulative "instil".

Professor Noam Chomsky.

The classic examples of inculcation are the totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century which existed as political entities during the brief few decades when states could (1) control the mass distribution of ideas and information while (2) simultaneously restricting and dissemination of alternatives.  Such states still exist but technological changes have rendered their attempts less effective.  Political and linguistic theorists have developed constructs describing the way by which, even in nominally non-totalitarian states, corporate and political interests can inculcate collective values and opinions.  One celebrated discussion of the process is in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988) by Noam Chomsky (b 1928; Laureate Professor of Linguistics at the University of Arizona & Institute Professor Emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)) and US economist Edward S Herman (1925-2017).

The phrase "the manufacture of consent" had appeared in the book Public Opinion, published in 1922 by US journalist Walter Lippmann (1889–1974), a work which explored the interaction between the mass of the public and the techniques of inculcation used by government (and others) to shape collective opinion and expectation.  Public Opinion remains text useful for its analysis and the structural models presented although now few would (at least publicly) agree with his elitist solutions to the problems identified.  Like Chomsky & Herman’s Manufacturing Consent, it is a helpful reminder that inculcation is a set of techniques not restricted to the totalitarian regimes with which it tends most to be associated.  The message may differ but a hegemony will always attempt to ensure the world view essential to their survival is the one which prevails, the notion of “consent” so important because as British colonial official Thomas Pownall (1722-1805; Governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay 1757-1760) repeatedly warned his uncomprehending government during the rumblings which would lead to the American Declaration of Independence: “You may exert power over, but you can never govern an unwilling people.”.  That is something understood, whether by a president in the Oval Office, an ayatollah in his chamber or the führer in his bunker although some accept that if they can’t be governed, they can be suppressed and, as long as the resource allocation remains possible, that can for decades work.

Inculcation begins at school.

The best documented case study in inculcation on a population-wide scale remains that undertaken by the Nazi State (1933-1945) in Germany and many memoirs of era record the way Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) would acknowledge what he’d learned of this from the Roman Catholic Church, even at times admitting it was inevitable the two-thousand year old institution (and their many schools) would still be flourishing in Germany long after he had departed the Earth.  He also understood how critical it was the process began young because it was in school he had been inculcated with the framework on which later he would build his awful intellectual structures.  Social Historian Richard Grunberger (1924-2005) in A Social History of the Third Reich (1971) reported that although Hitler had scant regard for most of his school teachers, he had high regard for his history master, Leopold Pötsch (or Poetsch) (1853–1942), a rabid German Nationalist (like many who lived in Upper Austria).  From Dr Poetsch the future Führer imbibed the heady cocktail of a romanticized tale of Germany from Charlemagne (748–814; (retrospectively) the first Holy Roman Emperor 800-814) to Otto von Bismarck (1815-1989; Chancellor of the German Empire 1871-1890).

In Mein Kampf (My Struggle, 1925), Hitler would write that his favorite teacher: “...used our budding nationalistic fanaticism as a means of educating us, frequently appealing to our sense of national honor. By this alone he was able to discipline us little ruffians more easily than would have been possible by any other means. This teacher made history my favorite subject. And indeed, though he had no such intention, it was then that I became a little revolutionary. For who could have studied German history under such a teacher without becoming an enemy of the state which, through its ruling house, exerted so disastrous an influence on the destinies of the nation? And who could retain his loyalty to a dynasty which in past and present betrayed the needs of the German people again and again for shameless private advantage?”  Upon assuming power in 1933, Hitler almost immediately deployed the education system for the purpose of inculcating the youth with Nazi ideology, the institution ideal for the purpose because it was hierarchical and didactic.  Education in “racial awareness” (the core Nazi tenant) was based on the notion of “racial duty to the national community”, that there were “worthy & unworthy" races” and while it’s misleading to suggest there’s a lineal (and certainly not a planned) path to the Holocaust, the connection must be noted.  If the entire Nazi project of inculcation can be reduced to just two themes, it’s (1) the sense of race struggle and (2) the readiness for the coming war.

Pragmatic

Pragmatic (pronounced prag-mat-ik)

(1) Of or relating to a practical point of view or practical considerations.

(2) Advocating behavior that is dictated more by practical consequences than by theory or dogma

(3) In philosophy, of or relating to pragmatism.

(4) Of or relating to pragmatics.

(5) In historiography, treating historical phenomena with special reference to their causes, antecedent conditions, and results.

(6) Of or relating to the affairs of state or community (archaic).

(7) An officious or meddlesome person, especially a priest (archaic).

(8) In logic, the branch of semiotics dealing with the causal and other relations between words, expressions, or symbols and their users.

(9) In linguistics, a sub-field in which the analysis of language in terms of the situational context within which utterances are made, including the knowledge and beliefs of the speaker and the relation between speaker and listener.

1580-1590: From the Middle French pragmatique, from Late Latin prāgmaticus (relating to civil affair and in Latin (as a noun) used to describe a person versed in the law who furnished arguments and points to advocates and orators (a kind of attorney although also used in general of “practical men” (as opposed to theoreticians)), from the Ancient Greek πραγματικός (pragmatikós) (active, versed in affairs), from πρᾶγμα (prâgma) (a thing done, a fact) which, in the plural was πράγματα (prágmata) (affairs, state affairs, public business etc (something like the modern “current events”)) from πράσσω (prássō) (to do) of which the Modern English “practical” is the descendent).  Pragmatic is a noun & adjective, pragmatist is a noun & adjective, pragmatize, pragmatizing & pragmatized are verbs, pragmaticality, pragmaticalization, pragmatism & pragmaticalness are nouns, pragmaticistic is an adjective and pragmatically is an adverb, the noun plural is pragmatics (pragmatisms & especially pragmatists the more commonly used). 

Shoes can be "pragmatic".  Who knew?  Lindsay Lohan's promotion for the collaboration between German fashion house MCM & Crocs, introducing the "pragmatic" Mega Crush Clog.

In the sense of the meddlesome priest, use dates from circa 1610 in the sense of “meddling; impertinently busy" and was either short for earlier pragmatical, or from the fifteenth century French pragmatique, from the Latin pragmaticus (skilled in business or law) from the Ancient Greek pragmatikos (fit for business, active, business-like; systematic) from pragma (genitive pragmatos) (a deed, act; that which has been done; a thing, matter, affair," especially an important one; also a euphemism for something bad or disgraceful; in plural, "circumstances, affairs" (public or private, often in a bad sense, "trouble"), literally "a thing done") from the stem of prassein & prattein (to do, act, perform), related to the modern practical.  From the 1640s, pragmatic came to be used in the sense of "relating to the affairs of a state or community" and the modern sense of "matter-of-fact, treating facts systematically and practically" is from 1853; influenced by the use in nineteenth century German philosophy of pragmatisch.  The noun pragmaticism, which as late as 1865 could be used to mean "officiousness", by 1905 had been adopted by American philosopher CS Peirce (1839-1914) to refer to the doctrine that abstract concepts must be understood in terms of their practical implications; he coined the use to distinguish his philosophy from pragmatism.  The 1540s adjective pragmatical (pertaining to material interests of a state or community) by the 1590s had extended to "concerned with practical results", the formation from the Latin pragmaticus.  It was, during the 1600s & 1700s often applied in the negative (unduly busy over the affairs of others) which is how pragmaticism same to be associated with “intrusive officiousness” and meddling from the 1610s, the layer of "busy over trifles” or “self-important" noted in 1704.  The noun pragmatism had by 1825 assumed something like its modern sense, then meaning “matter-of-fact treatment" borrowed from the Greek pragmat- (stem of pragma) as "that which has been done".  As a philosophical doctrine, it was used in the English language by 1898 and generally accepted as a borrowing from the 1870s German Pragmatismus.  Despite that, it wasn’t accepted as the name a political theory until 1951 although the historical record can be misleading, a pragmatist being a "busybody" from circa 1630 yet by 1892, noted as an "adherent of a pragmatic philosophy”.

Pragmatics in Theoretical Linguistics

Pragmatics exists in what practitioners in the field call the symbiosis of linguistics and semiotics; essentially the study of the ways in which context either is or can be vital to understanding the meaning(s) of text.  Highly technical, it has built a number of models (sometimes called codes) which, if (sometimes cumulatively, sometimes lineally) applied, can determine meaning(s) which may not be obvious or confused by ambiguity.  Pragmatics studies how the transmission of meaning depends not only on the structural and linguistic knowledge of both speaker and listener, but also on the context in which the words are used, all pre-existing knowledge of those involved, and matters of implication and inference.  Properly applied, the ability to understand another intended meaning is called pragmatic competence.  Word nerds are especially pleased by the word grammaticopragmatic (of or relating to grammar and pragmatics).

Basically the product of squabbles between academics anxious to become dominant in some aspect of the suddenly sexy discipline of linguistics, pragmatics was created in reaction to the structuralist linguistics models of the 1960s.  Pragmatics both borrows from structuralism and builds its own critique, especially from the way structuralism tended towards finding all meaning at least can come purely from the abstract space language creates.  It probably was a useful discussion to have but it’s never been entirely clear where semantics ends and pragmatics begins or if that’s even a helpful way to think about meaning.  The discipline seemed never to move in the direction of making pragmatics a toolbox of use to those beyond the field.  Instead, there emerged mysterious forks such as indexicals, intuitionistic semantics and computational pragmatics, all of which appear weird beyond immediate understanding.

The Pragmatic Sanction of 1713

Archduchess Maria Theresia (1727) by Andreas Møller (1684–circa 1762), oil on canvas, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna.

There have been quite a few pragmatic sanctions, the first known to be that issued in Constantinople in 554 by Justinian I (Justinian the Great, 482-565; Byzantine emperor 527-565).  Nearly twelve centuries later, the Sanctio Pragmatica (Pragmatic Sanction) was an edict issued in 1713 by Charles VI (1685-1740; Holy Roman Emperor 1711-1740); it was a device to ensure the Habsburg hereditary possessions, could be inherited by his eldest daughter, the sanction necessitated by the lack of a male heir and a law which precluded female inheritance.  However, for Charles to promulgate the sanction was one thing, having it respected by others was another and, immediately upon the accession to the throne in 1740 of his daughter, the archduchess Maria Theresa (1717-1780), the predicted War of the Austrian Succession (1740-1748) began.  Had the pretext of female succession not existed, the desire of other European states, notably France, Bavaria and Prussia, anxious to gain territorial and commercial advantage over the Habsburgs, conflict would likely soon anyway have arisen.  The British became involved because of their geopolitical interests and the Dutch because they wished to rid themselves of French hegemony; as the war widened, Spain, Sardinia, Saxony, Sweden and Russia became involved in what was soon a multi-theatre affair on land and at sea.  It was a textbook case of mission-creep.

Charles VI, Holy Roman Emperor (circa 1707) by Francesco Solimen (1657–1747), oil on canvas, in a private collection.

The war was concluded by the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748.  Maria Theresa was recongised as Archduchess of Austria and Queen of Hungary but, regardless of the impressive but isolated tactical victories which typified European wars of the era, so inconclusive had been the battlefield that, except for the Royal Navy’s notable success in the blockade of French ports, things ended in such a series of stalemates that most of the treaty’s signatories were hardly content with the terms.  Even Maria Theresa, whose throne had been the ostensible reason for the spilling of so much blood, resented having to cede what she did though was mollified by the horse-trading of the Treaty of Füssen (1745) which permitted her husband to be elected Holy Roman Emperor as Francis I (1708-1765).  The British, although satisfied with the commercial rights gained, would spend years glumly counting the cost.

In geopolitical terms however, the consequences were profound.  In what came to be known as the Diplomatic Revolution of 1756, the central dynamics in European affairs became the alliances between Austria and France and between Prussia and Great Britain, creating a template for the shifting military and political relationships which would be maintained, adjusted and sundered all through the eighteenth century in an attempt to maintain the balance of power.  The newly built coalitions, with Russia augmenting the Austro-Franco alliance, would fight the Seven Years War (1756-1763) in which Britain and Prussia would prevail, only because of something of a Prussian miracle and the Royal Navy’s control of the seas.  Under Germanic linguistic influence, the word assumed a handy role as a kind of political shorthand; article seven of the 1712 Croatian Constitution being remembered to this day as the Pragmatic Sanction.  The clause permitted a Habsburg princess to become hereditary Queen of Croatia despite, in a typical Balkan squabble, opposition from both the Hungarian parliament and royal court.  Considered ever since a symbol of Croatian independence, the Pragmatic Sanction is included still in the preamble of the Constitution of Croatia.