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.

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 Late Latin prāgmaticus, (practical), from the Ancient Greek prāgmatikós (practical) equivalent to prāgmat, stem of prâgma (act) from prā́ssein (to do).  Related forms are the nouns pragmaticality & pragmaticalness and the more common adverb pragmatically.

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.

Basically the product of squabbles between academics anxious to become dominant in some aspect of the surprisingly 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 Maria Theresa (1717-1780), the expected 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, 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.

Dagmar

Dagmar (pronounced dag-mahr)

(1) The stage-name adopted by Virginia Ruth "Jennie" Lewis (née Egnor; 1921-2001), a star of 1950s US television (initial upper case).

(2) Slang term for the symmetrically-paired bumper extensions used by a number of US vehicle manufacturers and associated mostly with Cadillac 1946-1958 (initial lowercase).

(3) In the study of marketing, as DAGMAR, the acronym of Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising Results (usually all upper case).

(4) A female given name from the Germanic languages and of Norse origin, in occasional use since the last nineteenth century (initial upper case).

Pre-1000: A given name of Scandinavian origin, almost always female.  It was the name of a queen of Denmark (1185–1212), a Czech by descent, originally Dragomíra (related to the contemporary Slovak Drahomíra), the construct being the Old Church Slavonic dorgb (dear) + mirb (peace), rendered in medieval Danish under the camouflage of dag (day) + már (maid).  In Danish the meaning is listed as “day” and “glory” and it’s used also in Slovakia, Poland (Dagmara), the Netherlands, Estonia and Germany.  The ultimate source was the the Old Norse name Dagmær, the construct being dagr (day) + mær (daughter; mother; maiden).

The Tsarina (Princess Dagmar; 1847–1928) in 1885 (colorized).

Maria Feodorovna  was known before marriage as Princess Dagmar of Denmark.  She became Empress of Russia upon marriage to Alexander III (1845-1894; Tsar 1881–1894) and was the mother of the last Tsar, Nicholas II (1868–1918; Tsar 1894-1917).  Historians regard Maria Feodorovna as the most glittering of all the Tsarinas.  Renowned for her beauty, her dark eyes were mentioned in both poems and diplomatic dispatches and a glance was said to be able to "fix men to the spot".  She was also one of the most admired "clothes horses" in Europe, her statuesque, slender figure ("tall, thin and sort or weird looking" as the fashion photographers describe their ideal) of the type seen today on catwalks and in London, Paris and Milan, couturiers in the fashion houses  would write letters to the Russian court (including sketches), sometimes offering their services in exchange for nothing more than the royal imprimatur.

The evolution of Cadillac’s dagmars, 1941-1959

Lockheed P-38 Lightning (left) & 1949 Cadillac (right).

On first looking at the 1949 Cadillac, a borrowing of the motif of the tail fins and propeller hubs from the Lockheed P-38 Lightning (first flown in 1939 and built 1941-1945) does seem obvious but while it appears to be true of the fins, all contemporary evidence suggests the conical additions to the front bumper bar were intended by the stylist Harley Earl (1893–1969; then Vice President of Design at General Motors (GM)), to evoke the idea of a speeding artillery shells.  In the twenty-first century, it may seem curious to use the imagery of military munitions in the marketing of consumer goods but that's the way things were once done.  GM claimed also they afforded additional collision protection but given it wasn’t until the 1970s that regulations existed to require front and rear bumpers to be the same height, in many impacts, it’s likely they acted more like like battering rams used on medieval siege engines.

1941 Cadillac.

The bumper guards (later called over-riders) on the 1941 Cadillac were neither novel nor unique but, being on a Cadillac, they were bigger and shinier than many.  Nor was the linking bar unusual, offered by many manufacturers and emulated too by aftermarket suppliers, used often as a mounting bracket for accessory head lamps.  There was nothing unusual about the idea of additional bumper guards (or over-riders) which were not unknown in the early days of the automobile in the nineteenth century and similar devices, entirely functional as protective protuberances can be identified on horse-drawn and other forms of transport dating back centuries.  It was only in the twentieth century they became a styling feature.

1942 Cadillac.

A chromed pair, recognizably dagmaresque, made their debut in the 1942 model year, production of which began in September 1941.  Just as stylists had drawn from earlier influences such as aeronautical streamlining and art deco architecture, Cadillac’s designers, although the US was not yet a belligerent in what was still a European war, picked up a motif from the military: the conical shape of the artillery shell, presumably to invoke the imagery of speed and power rather than destruction.  One quirk of the early dagmars was that after the US entered the war in December 1941, the government immediately imposed restrictions on the use of certain commodities for consumer goods and this affected chrome plating so the last of much of the the 1942 production runs left the factory with painted bumpers.  Automotive production for civilian sale in the US ceased on 22 February 1942, the  manufacturing capacity converted rapidly to war purposes.

1946 Cadillac.

Although the administration had allowed car production to continue until April, most of the output was used to create a stockpile of over half a million cars and light trucks, made available for the duration of the war to those deemed essential.  The sale of cars to private buyers was frozen from 31 December 1941 by Office of Production Management (OPM) although, upon application, local rationing boards could issue permits for cars to be delivered if the contract had been executed before 1 January.

By April 1944, only some thirty-thousand new cars remained in the stockpile and the manufacturers received authorization to undertake preliminary work on experimental models of civilian passenger cars with the proviso there must be no interference with war work and limits were imposed on the resources allocated.  At this stage, the invasion of mainland Europe had not happened and although progress on the atomic bomb was well-advanced, it was top-secret and not even tested so planning continued with the expectation conflict would continue into 1946 or even 1947.  The war instead ended in August 1945 and that month, Cadillac finished its last M-24 tank, the production lines reverting to cars as soon as September.  By the first week of October, car production was in full swing, the 1946 models essentially the 1942 range with a few detail differences.  The dagmars were retained and re-appeared also on the 1947 line.  Even by 1942 Americans had become accustomed to annual updates to the appearance of automobiles but such was the pent-up demand from the years of wartime restrictions that people in 1946-1947 queued to fill the order books for what were "new" versions of 1942 cars.  In the special circumstances of the time the approach worked in a way recycling for 2016 crooked Hillary Clinton's failed candidacy for the 2008 nomination didn't work for the Democratic party.

1948 Cadillac.

Smaller and more agile, Studebaker was the first manufacturer with a genuinely new post-war range and reaped the benefits although there was some resistance to the modernist lines which seemed then so radical.  GM was more conservative but nobody would mistake the 1948 Cadillacs for something earlier although while the bodies were new, the drive-train substantially was carried over.  Tail-fins weren’t entirely new to cars because the aviation influence had been seen pre-war but this was the model which began Detroit’s tail-fin fetish which, although starting modesty, would grow upwards (and occasionally outwards) for more than a decade.  Although inspired by the P-38 Lightning, the fins served no aerodynamic purpose, but unlike Mercedes-Benz’s later claim the fins on the 1959 Heckflosse were Peilstege (parking aids), Cadillac never bothered to suggest they were there to assist those reversing; at the front, a tribute to the Lockheed's twin propeller hubs seemed to compliment the fins.  The fins were mostly admired but the big news for 1949 was the new overhead valve (OHV) V8 which marked the start of a power race which would run for almost a quarter century before environmental concerns, safety issues and the first oil crisis (1973-1974) wrote finis for such things for a generation.

In a manner echoing pre-war practice, the new 331 cubic inch  (5.4 litre) V8 was actually smaller than its predecessor; that would not be the post-war trend and Cadillac’s V8s would grow to 500 cubic inches (8.2 litre) until reality bit in the 1970s and that reality did intrude on what was planned.  When Cadillac introduced their 331 V8 in 1949 it was designed with expansion in mind, able to be enlarged to around 430 cubic inches (7.0 litres), a displacement expected not ever to be required, such had been the advances in efficiency of internal combustion engines compared with pre-war units.  However, the American automobile became bigger & heavier while the highway network expanded, ushering in high-speed motoring, meaning the demand for more powerful engines grew too and by 1964, the Cadillac V8, then enlarged to 429 cubic inches (7.0 litres) had reached the end of its development potential and it was known both Chrysler and Ford would soon release V8s of even greater capacity.  Accordingly, in late 1967 they trumped the Chrysler 440 (7.2) and Ford's 462 (7.6) with the Cadillac 472 (7.7), a block designed to be able to grow to a remarkable 600-odd cubic inches (circa 10 litres), the precaution taken to ensure the corporation was ready for whatever market trends or regulatory impositions (fuel economy standards weren't envisaged in an era of "cheap, limitless oil") might emerge.  It was a shame because the Cadillac 429 was (by Detroit's seven litre standards) a compact and economical unit.  As things transpired, after growing in 1970 to 500 cubic inches, progressively the behemoth was down-sized to 425 (7.0) and 368 (6.0) before being retired in 1984 when it was the last of the US "big block" V8s still in passenger car use.  If Greta Thunberg (b 2003) thinks such things are bad now, she may be assured they used to be worse.  

1949 Ford "single spinner" (left) & 1951 Ford "twin spinner" (right).

The industry’s inspiration certainly came originally from the military, influenced either by artillery and aviation.  The first new Fords of the post-war years came to be known as “single spinners” and “twin spinners”, referencing the slang term for propeller and that use was a look back, jets, missiles & rockets providing designers with their new inspirations, language soon reflecting that.

"Dagmar", Virginia Ruth "Jennie" Lewis (née Egnor, 1921–2001).

Television was the great cultural disrupter of the post-war years, creating first a national and eventually an internationally shared experience unimaginable in the diverse media environment of the twenty-first century.  Television needed content and, beginning in 1949, some of it was provided by Dagmar.  Ms Lewis adopted the persona of the "dumb blonde" but soon proved to be no airhead, becoming the star of the show on which she'd been hired as the supporting act, parlaying her fame to become one of the celebrities of the era.  She was also impressively pneumatic which may have accounted for her popularity with at least some of the audience and the vague anatomical similarity to the Cadillac's chromed pieces quickly saw them nicknamed "dagmars".  She was said to be amused by the connection, exploiting it whenever possible and Harley Earl's notion of speeding explosive shells was soon forgotten.

Art and Engineering: The automobile, the sweater, the "bullet" or "torpedo" bras and the cross-over of techniques from the structural to the decorative; from jet aircraft & rockets to fashion, in the 1950s, the industry had no shortage of inspiration and role models.  Unfortunately, Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) didn't live to see the dagmars sprout from cars and while it may be assumed he'd have thought them worthy of analysis, probably he'd have conceded "sometimes a bumper is just a bumper".

1951 Cadillac.

For 1951, the dagmars not only grew but evolved stylistically from their bolt-on beginnings to become visually integrated with the bumper itself although, technically, they remained separate parts.  The growth of the dagmar is illustrative of Charles Darwin's (1809-1882) theory of natural selection; beneficial mutations within the genetic code that aid an organism's survival will be passed to the next generation.  The sales performance of the brand in the post-war years would proved Darwin correct, the increasing bulk of Cadillacs rewarded on the sales charts and for much of Cadillac’s next twenty-five years, bigger would be better.  While the dagmars soon would reach an evolutionary dead-end and go extinct, for a (human) generation or more, size would continue to matter.

1953 Cadillac.

Whether or not Cadillac was influenced by the cultural impact of Ms Lewis isn’t documented but in one way the anthropomorphism became a little more explicit in 1953, this time with uplift, supported still by the bumper but notably higher.  However, for 1953, the dagmars also returned to their military roots with the addition of small stabilizer fins so those seeking meaning in the metal should make of that what they will.  It was in 1953 the Cadillac Eldorado first appeared as a low volume convertible, production prompted after the positive response to the 1952 El Dorado “Golden Anniversary” show car.  Lavishly equipped, it featured a unique body and is notable for the first appearance on a Cadillac of the “wrap-around” windscreen which would become an industry feature for almost a decade and one historian suggested the several days of incapacity suffered by Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974) during the 1960 presidential campaign (his knee damaged by the “dog-leg” windscreen pillar in his Chevrolet) may have been a factor in him losing the contest by “an electoral eyelash”.  The 1953 Eldorado was very expensive and only 552 were built but despite that, in subsequent decades, US manufacturers often couldn't resist the lure of such unprofitable ventures, justified usually as "prestige projects".

1954 Cadillac.

Cadillac slightly enlarged the tails fins for 1954 but abandoned the little fins on the dagmars, the shape returning not merely to something approximating Ms Lewis but hinting also at the bullet bra style so associated with the era.  Why the dagmars dropped a cup size in 1954 isn't known but although it must at the time have seemed a good idea, the era's mantra of "never do in moderation what can be done in excess") soon prevailed.  It was clear there was demand for something like the Eldorado but the stratospheric price of the exclusively bodied 1953 car had meant buyers were few.  In 1954 Cadillac re-positioned the Eldorado as a blinged-up version of the regular-production line, enabling the price to be reduced by 35%; in response, sales almost quadrupled and almost immediately the thing was among the most profitable in the GM stable, something which encouraged over the years a number of “special edition” Eldorados with predictably fanciful names.

1955 Cadillac.

Peak dagmar was reached in 1955.  Although techniques in steel fabrication existed to allow them further to grow, imagining such things can conceive of them only as absurd and there's no evidence in the GM archives that anything bigger was contemplated; from now on, they would have to evolve in another way.  Such was the importance of the dagmar, to afford them additional space, the parking lamps were moved to a spot directly below the head lamps and 1955's uplift was quite explicit, the superstructure suggestive of the cantilever effect which underlay the structural engineering of the underwire bra.  Pursuing the metaphor, this was definitely up a couple of cup sizes from the year before; while it’s hard to be exact, by 1955 Cadillac was well into the alphabet.

1956 Cadillac.

Apparently now content with the shape of the protrusions, Cadillac may have realized that even by their standards the 1955 fittings may have been too big so slightly they were pruned and some attention was devoted instead to the surrounding details, the grill now with a finer texture and the parking lamps moved to lacunae cut into the bumpers.  A novelty for 1956 was the option of the grill being embellished in gold as an alternative to the standard satin finish and the fins, although higher than the originals, remained restrained.  That was not to last.

1955 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham Show car (left) and 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham (right).

Longer to lengthen the lingerie link, the uplifted dagmars now gained padding (which were technically more like pasties given they didn't increase a dagmar's size), the rubber attachments actually quite a good idea given how far their chromed metal predecessors stuck out.  Although obviously not at the time foreseen, the idea would be revived by some in the early 1970s as a quick, cheap solution to meet the new frontal-impact regulations and the rubber buffers must in 1957 have prevented some damage, both to victim and perpetrator.  Predictably, they were quickly nicknamed “pasties”, a borrowing of the term used in the female underwear business to describe a stick-on attachment designed for purposes of modesty.  The quad headlamps previewed on 1955 Eldorado Brougham Show car became lawful in many US states in 1957 (and soon all 48) and that meant the front end was becoming very busy with its array of circular shapes.

1958 Cadillac.

GM's corporate body for 1958 was released with the usually high expectations.  However, not only was the a brief, though sharp, recession which affected sales but the ranges suffered stylistically against the sleek new Chryslers which more than any embodied the "longer, lower, wider" motif which would characterize the era.  The Cadillacs were certainly longer in 1958, one aspect addressed in response to the perception the 1957 models had looked, remarkably, too short; a thing of relative proportions as well as absolute dimensions.  Still padded, the dagmars moved towards the edges and the fins grew, losing the forward slope on some models which had contributed to the sense of stubbiness.  What GM's designers looked at most longingly however were the Chrysler's sweeping tail-fins; they would respond.

1959 Cadillac.

Cadillac retired the dagmars for 1959; Darwinian natural selection again. (1) The dagmars, even if padded, did cause damage, both to themselves and whatever it was they hit (2) the adoption of the newly lawful quad headlamps in 1957-1958 created an opportunity for stylists render something new and (3) whatever may have be the linkage with women’s fashion, the old imagery of artillery shells or twin propellers was outmoded in the jet-age, the new inspiration being the twin-engined nacelle seen on the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress and the Convair B-36 Peacemaker, four of which Cadillac grafted on, two for the head lamps, two for the park lamps.  Even in Detroit in the 1950s, to add a pair of dagmars to that lot might have been thought a bit much.  As it was, probably few noticed or long lingered over their absence because it was the tail-fins and tail-lamps which drew the eye.

Translatable motifs: The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress and the 1959 Cadillac.

Built between 1952-1962, the B-52 has been in service under fourteen presidents and has seen several generations of airplanes come and go; when first it flew, Joe Biden (b 1942; US president since 2021) was nine, Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) was six and crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) was five (though even then probably already lying about her age).  No longer used for its original purpose which was to overfly Russian & Chinese targets, dropping gravity bombs, the platform has proved adaptable and has been subject to a number of upgrades and revisions, new generations of engines (quieter, more economical and less polluting) fitted and some modern materials integrated to replace the some of the period steel & aluminium.  The most obvious updating however is that the B52s still in service are hybrids in that they're a mix of analogue and digital, the flight controls, weapons systems and other avionics reflecting in some cases almost all of the technical generations of the last sixty-odd years.  It’s not impossible some may still be in service in 2052, a century after the first flight.  In most ways, the B-52’s design has proved more durable than the 1952 Cadillac.

Translatable motifs: The Convair B-36 Peacemaker and the 1959 Cadillac.

The nacelles of aircraft engines provided Cadillac with a rich source of inspiration and if they couldn't decide between propellers and jets, some aircraft offered both.  The earliest of Messerschmitt's prototype twin-jet ME-262s were equipped also with a propeller driven by a Jumo 210 engine, a necessity for the test-pilots given the unreliability of the early jets and many manufactures adopted the approach for their prototypes.  For some aspects, Cadillac settled on on one which, unusually, combined both propulsion systems in a mass-produced model, the Convair B-36 Peacemaker (1946-1954) a transitional airframe which straddled the two eras which was one of the earliest strategic bombers designed specifically as a delivery system for nuclear weapons.  With a greater payload even than the B-52, in its final configuration the B-36 was powered by a remarkable ten engines, six radial propeller units and four jets which lent the B-36 its slogan within Strategic Air Command (SAC): "six turnin' and four burnin' ".  However, the propellers were in an unusual pusher configuration, facing the opposite direction from the usual practice so it would have been a challenge to continue the tribute to Ms Lewis.  Instead, for 1959 Cadillac "mixed and matched": the B-52's twin nacelles at the front, the B-36 lending its lines to the tail lamps at the rear.

Jayne Mansfield (1933-1967) in her 1959 Cadillac Eldorado Biarrritz.

She may neither have noticed nor cared that Cadillac deleted the dagmars on the 1959 range but Jayne Mansfield anyway brought her own when she bought a 1959 Eldorado convertible.  As a marketing ploy, the two-door hardtops had for some time been called the "Eldorado Seville" while the companion convertible was the "Eldorado Biarritz".  The dagmars may have gone but it's for the "twin bullet" tail-lamp assemblies that the 1959 range is remembered; while not the tallest fins on the era (the 1961 imperials winning that dubious award by about an inch (25 mm)), they probably were the most extravagant.  Also, despite the number of pink 1959 Cadillacs now in existence, none ever left the factory painted thus, a rose-colored exterior hue offered in only 1956.  It was that Elvis Presley (1935-1977) owned a pink Cadillac and the use of the phrase in popular culture (song & film) that made the trend a thing although his car was a 1955 Fleetwood Sixty Special which was originally blue with a black roof.  The roof was later re-sprayed white but people adopting the motif usually go all-pink.

1959 Cadillac Cyclone (XP-74) concept car (left) and North American F-86-50-NA Sabre (right).

However, although Cadillac abandoned the use of dagmars in their 1959 models (a rare example of restraint that year), just to remind people what they were missing, simultaneously they toured the show circuit with the Cadillac Cyclone (XP-74) concept car, an example of how far things had come from Ford's "spinners" a decade earlier.  Although it was powered by the corporation’s standard 390 cubic inch (6.5 litre) V8, there was some adventurous engineering including a rear-mounted automatic transaxle and independent rear suspension (using swing axles, something far from ideal but not as bad as it sounds given the grip of tyres at the time) but few dwelt long on such things, their attention grabbed by features such as the bubble top canopy (silver coated for UV protection) which opened automatically in conjunction with the electrically operated sliding doors.  This time the link with military aviation was quite explicit, the black dagmars actually functional radomes like those familiar on the F-86-D Sabre, containing the radar-controlled proximity sensors used electronically to alert the driver with an audible signal and warning light should an automobile or other approaching object be detected.  The system apparently worked although it would have been too expensive to offer as an option.  In 2024, such systems are produced by the million at low-cost and are standard equipment on many vehicles.

Trends in one industry do get picked up in others and it can be difficult to work out who is being influenced by whom, cause and effect sometimes amorphous.  Like the tailfin fad, the dagmar era came and went during the first generation of the affluent society, a brief, chromed moment during which excess could be enjoyed without guilt although, even at the time, there were critics although there were probably few dissenters among those who actually bought the big Cadillacs, Lincolns and Imperials.  Whether being in the avant-garde of dagmar trends much influenced buying patterns is doubtful because the Cadillac, Lincoln & Imperial crowd tended to be a tribal lot and conquest sales happened at scale only if some thing genuinely innovative (like the 1955 & 1957 Imperials) appeared and even then, Cadillac owners were seen as a breed apart; a separate population.  Only about one thing did probably most concur: everybody likes boobs.

Not only Cadillacs

1958 Lincoln Continental Mark III Convertible (left) and 1960 Lincoln Continental Mark V Executive Limousine.

Ford's 1958 Lincoln Continental was a reasonable technical achievement, being at the time the largest vehicle of unitary construction ever built and in convertible form it remains the longest the industry made since World War II (1939-1945).  It was also a failure in the market which went close to dooming the Lincoln brand and the reasons for that included the sheer size of the things (there were many garages, even in affluent places, in which where one simply wouldn't fit) and the appearance, a mashup of lines, curves and scallops which made some speculate each part may have been designed by a different committee, all working is isolation.  Ponderously, the body survived for three seasons during which Lincoln apparently couldn't decide about dagmars; after appearing in 1959, they were deleted the next year, only to return for the range's swansong in 1960.  Clearly, Lincoln lacked Cadillac's passion. 

The size did however come in handy when building limousines.  The black car was leased by Ford to the White House for an annual US$500 and was the one presidents used for personal journeys around Washington DC.  Replaced during Lyndon Johnson's (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) administration (1963-1969) as part of the periodic updating of the White House fleet, it was sold by public tender as just another used car and there wasn't then the same sensitivity attached to objects associated with events.  The 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible in which President John Kennedy (JFK, 1917–1963; US president 1961-1963) was assassinated in 1963 was, after being repainted black (it was originally midnight blue), fitted with a permanent roof and titanium armor plating, returned to the White House car pool where it served until 1977, an unsentimental pragmatism probably unthinkable now.  Although their own extravagances were hardly subtle, the fins on Fords, Lincolns and even Edsels never reached the heights or bent to shape the contortions GM and Chrysler pumped out.  To their eternal credit, Lincoln didn't add dagmars to the memorable 1961 Lincoln; there would have been an absurd clash with the severe lines.

1963 Ford Galaxie 500XL convertible (G-Code 406 Tri-power).

Notably, GM's other divisions rarely tried to match Cadillac in the size, lift and projection of dagmars, Buick the most committed though other manufacturers, albeit spasmodically, would use the theme.  Mercury and Packard offered them on various models between 1953-1956 and Chevrolet's were modest and often rubber-padded.  That idea was picked up by Ford in the early 1960s, their final  A-cup fling on the 1963 Galaxie; perhaps as a sign of the times, uniquely, they were offered only as an optional extra.  In a distinctly un-dagmaresque way, a pair appeared also on the rear bumper and were obviously there genuinely to offer some modest protection against the damage which might be suffered in low-impact events such as those suffered in car parks.  The insurance industry had already noted the disproportionately large costs they were incurring fixing damage suffered while parking and were planning their own strategy.

Clockwise from top left: 1974 Jaguar XKE (E-Type), 1974 Triumph TR6, 1978 Triumph Spitfire and 1973 Dodge Monaco.

There was no suggestion of anything organically Darwinian about the sudden addition of ungainly blocks of rubber to certain US-market cars in the early 1970s.  They were a consequence of the lobbying efforts of the insurance industry proving more effective in having the congress pass legislation imposing "bumper standards" than were those of the car industry to delay or prevent their introduction.  Presumably also, the "campaign funds donations" of the insurance industry were both greater and better "packaged".  Some US manufacturers bolted them on as a stop-gap solution while the engineering was done to create the "railway-sleeper" bumpers to comply with the next year's tougher standards while some British sports cars would see out their final years so disfigured.  A few were built on platforms designed in the 1950s which either couldn’t be adapted or were so close to end-of-life the economics were not compelling.  The quick and dirty solution produced what proved to be distinctly non-anthropomorphic dagmars, this time made almost entirely of padding so predictably dubbed “falsies”.  Awkward looking though they were, worse was to come; some of the solutions used to meet the rules were truly ghastly, a few of which lasted well into the 1980s.

Sabrina, the English Dagmar

Television penetrated most of the Western world during the 1950s and in an era of generally (though not without the odd hiccup) rising prosperity, the sets became increasingly ubiquitous in domestic households.  The content however was much more regionally specific than would become the trend in succeeding decades.  While production centres in the UK did distribute some of their product elsewhere (and not only in the English-speaking world), by volume and cultural influence the US were by far the most successful, much of what was seen on many screens was locally produced, something easier to achieve in an era when 24 hour TV was not yet a thing and it was industry practice to repeat broadcasts with some frequency.  Additionally, there were often “local content” requirements (quotas) which were industry protection trade barriers erected obsessively to save viewers from what even then was understood as “cultural imperialism”.  Although that phrase had been used even prior to World War I (1914-1918), it wasn’t until it appeared in Mass Communications and American Empire (1969) by US sociologist Herbert Schiller (1919–2000) that it would become part of the mainstream language of critical theory.  However, not only was the particular phenomenon of American cultural influence well documented in the 1950s, it was also appreciated that television would be a force like no previous form of distribution, a concept Dr Schiller also discussed as “packaged consciousness”, an idea later refined as “encapsulated cultural hegemony”.

1962 Reliant Sabre (1961-1963): It was only the early cars which were adorned with the rather bizarre “sabrinas”.

But in the 1950s, more cultural references than now were regionally specific, although international trade (globalization had actually been well underway by before the World War I (1914-1918) and its aftermath of decades imposed an intermission) meant objects spread and in fields like architecture something like an “international style” had emerged.  So, the dagmars on the cars made it to Europe but, without Ms Lewis appearing of screens, the nickname didn’t come into use.  Except for Detroit’s cars, not many examples of the classic dagmar bumpers were seen but England did have Norma Ann Sykes (1936–2016), better known by her stage name: Sabrina.

Sabrina in some characteristic poses.

Sabrina’s early career was as a model, sometimes in various stages of undress, but it was when in 1955 she was cast as a stereotypical “dumb blonde” in a television series she achieved national fame.  On stage or screen, she remained a presence into the 1970s and although without great critical acclaim although the University of Leeds did confer an honorary D.Litt (Doctor of Letters) for services to the arts so there was that.  What was of course noticed was her "presence" and as well as the unusual fittings to the nose of the Reliant Sabre, the “sabrina” moniker was applied to parts of equipment on machinery as varied as heavy trucks and Royal Air Force (RAF) fighter jets.

Triumph sabrina engine in TRS, Le Mans, 1960.

There was also a “sabrina” engine, or more correctly its cylinder head.  For various reasons, it wasn’t easy for European manufacturers to pursue the path to power and performance by adopting the American approach of big displacement so they chose the alternative: greater specific efficiencies & higher engine speeds.  In Italy, as early as 1954 Alfa Romeo had proved the once exotic double overhead camshaft (DOHC) configuration was viable in relatively low-cost, mass-production machines and even in England, MG’s MGA Twin Cam had been released, short-lived though it was.  Triumph’s sports cars had enjoyed much success, both in the marketplace and on racetracks but their engines were based on one used in a tractor and while legendary robust, it was tuneable only up to a point and that point had been reached, limiting its potential in competition.  The solution was a DOHC head atop the old tractor mill and this the factory prepared for their racing team to run in the 1959 Le Mans 24 Hour classic, naming the car in which it was installed the TR3S, suggesting some very close relationship with the road-going TR3 although it really was a prototype and a genuine racing car.

The Le Mans campaigns with the sabrina Engine: TR3S (1959, left), TRS (1960, centre) and the TRS team crossing the finishing line (1961. right).  

Some resemblance in the mind's eye of an engineer: Sectional view of the sabrina.

Triumph used the sabrina engine for three consecutive years at Le Mans, encountering some problems but the reward was delivered in 1961 when all three cars completed the event with one finishing a creditable ninth, the trio winning that year’s team prize.  Satisfied the engine was now a reliable power-plant, the factory did flirt with the idea of offering it as an option in the TR sports cars but, because the differences between it and the standard engine were so great, it was decided the high cost of tooling up for mass production was unlikely to be justified, the projected sales volumes just not enough to amortize the investment.  Additionally, although much power was gained by adding the DOHC Hemi head, the characteristics of its delivery were really suited only to somewhere like Le Mans which is hardly typical of race circuits, let alone the conditions drivers encounter on the road.  As a footnote in Triumph’s history, it was the second occasion on which the factory had produced a DOHC engine which had failed to reach production.  In 1934 the company displayed a range-topping version of their Dolomite sports car (1934-1940), powered by a supercharged two litre (121 cubic inch), DOHC straight-8.  The specification was intoxicating and the lines rakish but, listed at more than ten times the price of a small family car, it was too ambitious for the troubled economy of the 1930s and only three were built.

Professor Regitz-Zagrosek's "bikini triangle": Lindsay Lohan illustrates.

When viewing the casing containing the gears and timing chains running from the bottom-end to the front camshaft bearings, one can see why Sabrina rapidly would have entered the mind of an engineer.  Apparently it began with a chance remark at the assembly bench but nobody could think of a more appropriate description so the official project name it became.  Anatomically, the engineers were of course about right because the front sectional view of the sabrina engine’s internals do align with what Dr Vera Regitz-Zagrosek (b 1953; Professor of Cardiology at the University of Zurich), describes as “the bikini triangle”, that area of the female human body defined by a line between the breasts and from each breast down to the reproductive organs; it’s in this space that is found all the most obvious anatomical differences between male & female although the professor does caution that differences actually exist throughout the body, down to the cellular level.