Posh

Posh (pronounced posch)

(1) Sumptuously furnished or appointed; luxurious.

(2) Elegant or fashionable; exclusive.

(3) A more expensive version of something mass-produced.

(4) Non-U term for the upper-class or genteel.

(5) Non-U term for speaking English with received pronunciation.

1890s: The source is obscure but it’s thought probably derived from the Gypsy (Romani; Roma) posh & pash (“half”), from the Old Armenian փոշի (pʿoši), the preferred theories accounting for it being associated with wealth and its implications being either because (1) a posh-kooroona (half a crown), once a fair sum, was used metaphorically for anything pricey or (2) because posh-houri (a half-penny) became a general term for money.  A period dictionary of slang defined "posh" as a term for “money” used by the criminal class and notes this was used sometimes specifically to refer to a halfpenny or other small coin and the connection seems soon to have been extended to wealth in general: a slang use documented from the early 1890s meant "dandy" (someone well dressed and apt to "splash cash").  There was also the early-twentieth-century Cambridge University slang poosh (stylish) which may have been a (deliberate) mispronunciation of polish but it’s thought un-related.  A popular folk etymology, dating from 1915, holds it’s an acronym for "port (left) out, starboard (right) home", describing the cooler, north-facing cabins taken by rich passengers travelling from Britain to India under the Raj and back.  However, despite much repetition of the story, there’s no direct evidence for this claim.

Posh and Smart: U and Non-U

A selection of U & non-U words by Professor Alan Ross.

A fun linguistic irony is that posh folk aren’t supposed to use the word, their preference supposedly being “smart”.  In 1954, Alan Ross (1907-1980), Professor of Linguistics at the University of Birmingham, coined "U" (upper-class) and "non-U" (non-Upper-Class) to describe the differences social class makes in their use of English.  While his article included differences in pronunciation and writing styles, it was his list of variations in vocabulary which attracted most interest.  Professor Ross published his illustrative glossary of "U" and "non-U", differentiating the speech patterns in English social classes in a Finnish academic journal and used extracts from Nancy Mitford’s (1904–1973 and the oldest of the Mitford sisters) novel The Pursuit of Love (1945) to provide examples of the patterns of speech of the upper class.  Greatly this pleased Nancy Mitford who interpolated the professor’s work into an article about the English gentry she was writing for Stephen Spender's (1909-1995) literary magazine Encounter (1953-1990).  Although not best-pleased her discussion of the Ross thesis was the only part of her piece to attract attention, more amusing was the subsequent re-publication in her slim volume Noblesse Oblige: an Enquiry into the Identifiable Characteristics of the English Aristocracy (1956) which, augmented with contributions from John Betjeman (1906–1984) and Evelyn Waugh (1903–1966), meant that for decades she was the acknowledged authority on upper-class speech, manners and ways.  Her class-conscious readers had taken it all more seriously than she had intended.

As a footnote, it was only after details were published of Professor Ross's role in Britain's World War II (1939-1945) code-breaking project which produced the "Ultra" transcripts from the messages sent through the German Enigma machine that details of his unusual child-care practices were revealed.  It transpired his way of ensuring he had a quiet, interruption-free train journey in which to read his book was to tranquilize his young son Padmint with a dose of laudanum, placing him on the luggage rack for the duration of the trip.  Laudanum was the opioid said to be responsible for the 300-odd lines of verse which came in a dream to Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834) but he’d written down only the first 50 when interrupted by “a person on business” from the nearby village of Porlock.  Once the person had departed, memories of the rest vanished, never to return.  Given the poet’s history in using the excuse for what has been judged “writer’s block”, critics have long doubted the tale but Kubla Khan (composed in 1797 but not published until 1816) remains one of the most beloved fragments of English verse.

In some circles, interest in "U" & "non-'U" has never gone away and, as differences in the English speaking world gradually diminish from country-to-country, works on the theme often appear in popular journalism.  Helpfully for the status-obsessed English middle-class, magazines like Country Life now and then print guides to help those concerned with such things and, sometimes controversially, there’s the occasional attempt to update the canon.  Right-wing English weekly The Spectator some years ago suggested the (non-U) "toilet" was now entirely classless and could be used, as it was by the rich Americans, instead of the (U) "loo" or (U) "lavatory".  Country Life ignored them and later retaliated by claiming the aristocracy's preferred term for their most frequent brush with the plumbing was "lavatory" and that "loo" was "now lower-middle class", apparently a slight worse than "peasant".

Posh vs smart: 2021 Lexus LS 500h (left) vs 1975 Bristol 411 Series V (right).  The essence of posh is a conjunction of shiny stuff, now expressed as "bling", "bling-bing" or "pricetaggery", the latter a word coined apparently by the writers of The Simpsons cartoon though it was used by Mr Burns (evil nuclear power-plant owner) in a different sense.  Something smart tends to express things like the price tag by being generally understated yet with one or two characteristics effortlessly recognized by smart folk while remaining invisible to most.

Poshmark is an example of the social marketplace, a site which exists to bring together buyer and seller, its revenue generated by "clipping the ticket" on each transaction.  It's thus structurally the same as a general trading site like eBay in that it facilitates B2C (business-to-consumer) and C2C (consumer-to-consumer) sales but as a niche player with a certain speciality, remains viable on less than 1% the turnover of the bigger aggregators because of the internet's global scale.

Acronym

Acronym (pronounced ak-ruh-nim)

In linguistics, a word formed from the initial letters or groups of letters of words in a set phrase or series of words and pronounced as a separate word (and thus distinguished from an initialism in which the letters are pronounced separately; there are hybrids which combine both methods).

1943: The construct was acr- + -onym.  It was borrowed from the German Akronym, constructed from the Ancient Greek ἄκρον (ákron) (end, peak) + ὄνυμα (ónuma) (name), deconstructed as acr(o)- (high; beginning) +‎ -onym (name) and on the model of the German nouns Homonym & Synonym, first attested in German in the early 1900s and in English in 1940 (although the linguistic practice predated this by at least several decades).  The nouns acronymophilia (an abnormal liking or tendency for the use of acronyms), acronymania (the enthusiastic creation and use of acronyms) and acronymophobia (morbid fear or dread of acronyms) are deployed (usually) in humor.  Those exhibiting symptoms of acronymophilia or acronymania (beyond being a mere acronymist) are likely suffering from acronymitis.  Acronym is a noun & verb, acronymed is a verb, acronymic & acronymous are adjectives and acronymically is an adverb; the noun plural is acronyms.

The acronym is a one of a number of subsets in what are known as “curtailed words”.  Quite when the first acronym was used isn’t known but the habits of people do suggest it’s likely something ancient and there are folk etymologies which offer acronymic expansions for common words including “fuck” “posh” & “shit” but they’re all undocumented and the earliest known use in English was a form of the Arabic أبجد (ʔabjad), the term for the traditional ordering of the Arabic script (from the first four letters: أ (ʔ), ب (b), ج (j), د (d)).  It was the twentieth century in which the acronym multiplied, earlier antipodean contributions including ANZAC (Australian and New Zealand Army Corps) and QANTAS (Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Services) which soon became the word Qantas, an unusual example in English of a “q” not being followed by a “u”.  Such words do appear in English language texts but they tend to be foreign borrowings including (1) qat (or khat) (a plant native to East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, often chewed for its stimulant effects, (2) qi (a term from Chinese philosophy referring to life force or energy), qibla (the direction Muslims face when praying, towards the Kaaba in Mecca and (4) qiviut (the soft under-wool of the musk-ox, valued when making warm clothing).

Other acronyms followed ANZAC but it was the upsurge in military activity during World War II (1939-1945) which saw the creation of literally thousands, some to endure, some to be rendered obsolete by circumstances or changes in technology and some genuine one-offs such as PLUTO (Pipeline under the ocean and originally P.L.U.T.O.).  PLUTO really should have been PLUTC because the many lines ran on the floor of the English Channel between England & France as a way of pumping fuel to the beachhead established by the D-Day landings (6 Jun 1944) but PLUTC obviously had little appeal so PLUTO it was.  While a clever idea, problems with the couplings meant the volumes achieved never came close to reaching what was theoretically possible.  In English, whether a string of letters is an acronym, abbreviation, initialism or word is determined both by form and organic process and the strings can emerge in more than one category.  The terms acronym, abbreviation and initialism are often used interchangeably, but they have distinct meanings:

Acronym: (a general term for a shortened form of a word or phrase): An acronym is a type of abbreviation where the initial letters of a phrase are taken to form a new word (or one which duplicates an existing word and, not uncommonly, an earlier acronym) which is pronounced as one would a single word (although in commercial use, the pronunciation can be non-standard).  Examples of well known acronyms include “NASA” (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), “Laser” (Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation) and “UNESCO” (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization”.

Abbreviation (a general term for a shortened form of a word or phrase): An abbreviation is a shortened form of a word or phrase used to represent the full version.  Abbreviations can include acronyms and initialisms, but they can also be simple clippings, truncations or contractions and common examples include “Dr” (Doctor), “Prof” (Professor) and “Thu” (Thursday).

Initialism (An abbreviation where each letter is pronounced separately): An initialism is specific type of abbreviation formed from the first letters of a phrase, but unlike acronyms, each letter is pronounced separately.  Well-known initialisms include “CIA” (Central Intelligence Agency), “UAE” (United Arab Emirates) and “WHO” (World Health Organization).

Leslie Nielsen (1926-2010) in one of his muddles as President Harris (there is still yet to be a "President Harris"), addressing the General Assembly (GA) of the United Nations (UN), treating an initialism as an acronym, Scary Movie 4 (2006).

The WHO is an example of the way in which the oral use of acronyms, abbreviations & initialisms evolves by way of practice and habit rather than defined rules or convention.  Obviously, in speech, once could speak of “the who” but it’s never done, the name always expressed in full which is most among the notoriously lazy speakers of the English language who tend usually to prefer the shortest form.  Perhaps it’s felt there could be some ambiguity using the word “who” for such a purpose although that seems a thin argument and it may be there was a sense “the who” might be thought flippant although initialisms are common replacements for formal terms; HMG (his (or her) Majesty’s government) is a standard in Whitehall and Westminster while JPII & JP2 routinely appeared in Vatican documents to refer to John Paul II (1920–2005; pope 1978-2005).  Sometimes, the reason dictating the choice between spelling out the letters or forming a word is obvious:  The Bougainville Revolutionary Army was an armed secessionist movement formed in 1988 by some inhabitants of Bougainville Island who sought independence from Papua New Guinea (commonly referred to as PNG) and the group was always spoken of as the initialism the “bee-ah-eh” rather than the “Bra”, the latter definitely inappropriate.  By contrast, the armed Basque separatist organization Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (“Basque Homeland and Liberty” or “Basque Country and Freedom”; active 1959-2018) was always used as the acronym ETA (pronounced et-ah rather than e-t-a).

Depiction of MAVIS with two human figures for scale.

Acronyms need not be built only from whole words, the elements sometimes abbreviations or acronyms: Consider MAVIS.  MAVIS is the acronym of Multi conjugate adaptive optics Assisted Visible Imager and Spectrograph and the “M” component references MCAO (multi-conjugate adaptive optics).  MAVIS is being built for installation on ESO’s (European Southern Observatory) VLT (Very Large Telescope) at the Paranal Observatory in Chile.  Those who complain about scientific instruments being given names which give non-experts little hit about function will not be best pleased by MAVIS but will commend the coining of VLT.  Other MAVIS acronyms identified by Acronym Finder include (1) Mobility Advice and Vehicle Information Service (UK), (2) Mathieu and V Incision Sutured (a surgical technique), Mathematics Accessible to Visually Impaired Students (New Mexico State University, US), Medicines Act Veterinary Information Service (UK) and Massachusetts Alliance of Visually Impaired Students (US).

The BRA and the bra, not to be confused.

Francis Ona (b circa 1953–2005; Bougainville secessionist leader) with fighters from the BRA (Bougainville Revolutionary Army) (left) and Lindsay Lohan in demi-cup bra, Terry Richardson (b 1965) photo-shoot for Love Magazine, 2012.  Of the military formation, BRA is an acronym while as a abbreviation, under ISO 3166-1, it's the alpha-3 country code for Brazil.  Bra is also an abbreviation which has become an English noun; it was a clipping of brassiere, from the French brassière (in the sense it was used of a camisole-like garment).  The French brassière was a singular form which is why in English one buys "a bra" rather than the "pair of bras" one reasonably might expect given the garment's construction and models like "pair of glasses".  Pliers, pants and spectacles (bought a "a pair of" yet supplied as a single item) have a different origin, all originally singular products which, when combined as one, retained the "pair of" use, unlike a "pair of gloves", there always being two of those.  

Ford 427 SOHC: The "Cammer" or "sock", the 650 HP (horsepower) acronym.

Sometimes though there is inventiveness.  In 1964 FoMoCo (Ford Motor Company) released a version of their 427 cubic inch (7.0 litre) FE (Ford-Edsel) V8 which featured a then (for Detroit) rare pair of single overhead camshafts.  In industry parlance such a configuration was a “SOHC” but there was no accepted way to pronounce that as a stand-alone word so the slang adopted was “cammer” but others saw the possibility in the otherwise awkward sohc and decided it was the “sock” so it was both an initialism and an acronym.  Acronyms can also be confused with something else.  In July 1968, John Gorton (1911-2002; Australian prime-minister 1968-1971), conducting a press conference in Djakarta (now Jakarta), was asked a question about “…general SEATO attitudes…” (SEATO was the South East Asian Treaty Organisation, a regional security arrangement (which included the UK & USA); it was created in 1954 but had become moribund years before its dissolution in 1977) to which he replied “Who’s this General Seato?”  The tale is not believed apocryphal.

There is no universal convention (an certainly no “rule”) about whether acronyms are written in upper case (NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization)), lower case (scuba (self-contained underwater breathing apparatus)) or camel case (a combination of both) (CHiPs (California Highway Patrol)) and the best advice is probably to follow to practice of the manufacturer, institution etc or follow one’s preferred style guide.  Quite how these practices evolve varies with the acronym, the most significant influence apparently the subjective sense of how anacronymic they’re perceived to have become and there’s also some evidence of regionalism; historically the US style guides tended to recommend all upper case for pronounced acronyms of four or fewer letters (NATO) while in the UK there was a preference to use the conventions of standard English (Nato) but the such is the US influence on the language that the upper case form is becoming more dominant.  Acronyms formed from beginning syllables are sometimes written in camel case (EpiPen) which appals some but in many cases they’re registered trademarks and that dictates what is correct; in the IT industry the mix of upper & lower case in all sorts of words has for decades been prevalent and such is the apparent randomness that the mix can’t be predicted.  Often “minor” words (“of”; “the”; “and” etc) are represented in lower case but this is not universal so “Out of Order” might appear either as “OOO” of “OoO”.  One thing which does seem to thankfully (mostly) to have vanished is the full stop (period) between letters; U.S.A. demanding a pointless additional three keystrokes.

Fabulous

Fabulous (pronounced fab-yuh-luhs)

(1) Exceptionally good or unusual, wonderful or superb; fashionable, glamorous (which pedants insist is informal but it’s long been the standard meaning).

(2) Almost impossible to believe; incredible.

(3) In slang or as a euphemism, gay or pertaining to gay people; camp, effeminate ("a fabulousity" suggested as a collective noun for gay men but it never caught on) .

(4) In slang, fashionable, glamorous.

(5) Of or about fables; stories wholly or substantially of the imaginary and known of through myth or legend; something in the record known to be unhistorical.

Circa 1550: From the Late Middle English fabulous & fabulose, from the Latin fābulōsus (celebrated in fable; rich in myth), the construct being fābul(a) (a story, a tale) + -ōsus (the adjectival suffix).  The –ōsus suffix (familiar in English as –ous) was from Classical Latin from -ōnt-to-s from -o-wont-to -s, the latter form a combination of two primitive Indo-European suffixes: -went & -wont.  Related to these were –entus and the Ancient Greek -εις (-eis) and all were used to form adjectives from nouns.  In Latin, -ōsus was added to a noun to form an adjective indicating an abundance of that noun.  As a literary genre (and some fables came from oral traditions) fables were stories told usually to make some moral point or illustrate the consequences of one’s actions and while they could sometimes involve fantastical creatures like winged stallions or unicorns, sometimes they involved fictional characters who were mere flesh & blood and even a multi-volume, epic-length novel like Don Quixote (1605-1615) by Miguel de Cervantes circa 1547–1616) can be thought a fable.  Fabulous is an adjective, fabulousness & fabulosity are nouns and fabulously is an adverb; the use is the plural is rare but both fabulousnesses & fabulosities exist.  There is some evidence of use in the gay community of fabulous as a (non-standard) noun, sometime in the form “uber-fabulous” although that construction is also used generally as an adjective of especial emphasis.

Looking fabulous: Lindsay Lohan Fabulous magazine, August 2010.

The original sense was “of or pertaining to fable” and dates from the 1550s.  The now familiar meaning shift began as early as the turn of the seventeenth centuries when the word was recorded to convey the sense of “incredible” which soon extended to “enormous, immense; amazing” and by the mid-twentieth century it was used almost exclusively to mean “marvelous; wonderful, superb”.  The clipping to create the slang “fab” was in used by at least 1957 and use spiked after 1963 when the alliterative “fab four” was used to describe the pop group, The Beatles.  When in 1965 revising Henry Fowler’s (1858–1933), A Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926), Sir Ernest Gowers (1880–1966) maintained his predecessor’s disapproval of much that was a bit too modern, noting that correctly fabulous meant “…mythical, legendary, but was long ago extended to do duty as an adjective for something that is real but so astonishing that you might not think it was legendary if you did not know better.”, adding that it had “…become fabulously popular as a term of eulogy or allure.”  He seemed though to suspect it might be a “fad word”, noting it and its contracted forms “fab” & “fabs”, like “fantastic”, were perhaps the latest “…in that long list of words which boys and girls use for a time to express high commendation and then get tired of, such as, to go no farther back than the present century, topping, spiffing, ripping, wizard, super, posh, smashing.”  Decades on however, fabulous seems to have endured in its contemporary uses and even the portmanteau adjective fantabulous (the construct being fanta(stic) + (fa)bulous) has survived in its niche.  Fabulous probably gained a new lease of life when it was in the late 1960s picked up by the gay community which has used it even as a noun and it remains an essential element in the camp vocabulary.  Unless it’s between scholars, those wishing to convey the original meaning should probably use terms such as “fabled” or “mythological” rather than fabulous and even “legendary” can be ambiguous because it’s now often used to mean something like “famous” or “very well-known”.

Lindsay Lohan in an unusual cage cutout top, the lines assuming or relaxing from the orthogonal as the body moves (maybe an instance of "a shifting semiorthogonal"), The World's First Fabulous Fund Fair in aid of the Naked Heart Foundation, The Roundhouse, London, February 2015.  An opportunity was missed by not adding a sympathetic clutch purse.

George W Bush, Condoleezza Rice & Colin Powell.

The phrase “the fabulous invalid” refers to live theater & stage productions generally, the use derived from a 1938 stage play of that name by George S Kaufman (1889-1961) and Moss Hart (1904-1961) which traced the that follows the seesawing fortunes of a fictitious Broadway theater between 1900-1930.  In a touching irony, while the play was barely a modest success and not highly regarded by its authors, the title has endured as a synonym for the theatre.  George W Bush (George XLIII, b 1946; US president 2001-2009) who (admittedly unwittingly) contributed more than most to coining new words & novel grammatical structures, probably wasn’t deliberately alluding the original meaning of fabulous when he used it to describe the performance of his first foreign minister, Colin Powell (1937–2021; US secretary of state 2001-2005) but if considered thus it certainly reflected his view that the general’s favorable public image reflected more myth than reality and he’d prefer a secretary of state who both ticked a few boxes and was more attuned to his brutish world-view.  In Dr Condoleezza Rice (b 1954; US secretary of state 2005-2009) he certainly got that but in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, whatever might have been his better judgment, the general did his job because, as Field Marshall Wilhelm Keitel (1882–1946; head of Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW), the Nazi armed forces high command) put it at the Nuremberg Trial (1645-1946): “For a soldier, orders are orders.”  His flirtation with politics is a fable and story of Condoleezza Rice’s career in government even more so: a cautionary tale of what can happen when a nice young lady from a good family gets mixed up with an unsavory crowd (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al).

White House transcript of press conference assembled when the president met with Colin Powell and Richard Armitage (b 1945; US deputy secretary of state 2001-2005) at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, Wednesday, 6 August 2003:

THE PRESIDENT: First, it's been my real privilege and honor to welcome the Secretary of State back to Crawford. He and Dick Armitage came, and we spent yesterday evening and this morning talking about our country's desire to promote peace and freedom, our obligations as a prosperous and strong nation to help the less fortunate. And we had a good strategy session, and now we're about to go out and brand some cows -- well, not exactly. (Laughter)

QUESTION: Sir, you've seen the report that Secretary Powell and Secretary Armitage are going to leave at the end of this administration. Do you expect them to stay on if there is a second Bush administration? Would you like them to?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first things first, we hope there is a second Bush administration. And I will work hard to convince the American people that their confidence in me is justified. And we'll deal with it at the right time.  Listen, this guy has done a fabulous job. Washington, particularly in August, is a dangerous period -- a dangerous time, because there's a lot of speculation. And all I can tell you is, the man flies to Crawford and we spend a good 24 hours talking about how we're going to work together to make the world a better place.

QUESTION: But, Mr. President, you said, we'll deal with it…

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Elizabeth.

QUESTION: We'll deal with it at the right time. That isn't "yes".

THE PRESIDENT: Deal with what at the right time?

QUESTION: With whether Secretary Powell will serve in a second term. Is that, "yes" or "no"? I mean, are you going to offer him a spot in the second term?

SECRETARY POWELL: I don't have a term. I serve the President. (Laughter)

QUESTION: No, but the President…

THE PRESIDENT: Elizabeth, look, first things first, and that is, we've got a year-and-a-while during my first term to make the world a more peaceful place and we'll deal with it. Washington loves speculation. Clearly, you love speculation. You love it. You love to speculate about…

QUESTION: It wasn't my story. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: Let me finish, please; let me finish. You love to speculate about whether so-and-so is going to be a part of the administration or not. And I understand the game. But I have got to do my job, and I'm going to do it. And I'm going to do it with the Secretary of State. And the fact that he is here in Crawford, Texas, talking about issues of importance, should say loud and clear to the American people that he's completely engaged in doing what he needs to do, and that is, serve as a great Secretary of State.

QUESTION: Do you want to serve more than four years, Mr. Secretary?

SECRETARY POWELL: I serve at the pleasure of the President, and this is all August speculation with no basis in fact. There was no basis for this story to begin with, and we're doing our jobs together.

THE PRESIDENT: All right. We're going to get a burger. Thank you.

Chic

Chic (pronounced sheek)

(1) Attractive and fashionable; style and elegance, especially in dress (particularly when applied to women).

(2) Modishness, a casual and understated style, as in dress or décor, that expresses a specified trendy lifestyle or activity.

(3) As a noun, when used with an attributive noun or adjectival modifier, a descriptor for just about any defined style (shabby chic, boho chic etc).

1856: Adopted in English with the general sense of “style in fine art, artistic skill, faculty of producing excellence rapidly and easily”, from the French chic (stylishness; elegant (the original sixteenth century meaning was "subtlety")), of unknown origin but probably from the German Schick (elegant appearance; tasteful presentation) & Geschick (tact, skill, aptness), from Middle Low German schikken (arrange appropriately), from the Middle High German schicken (to outfit oneself, fit in, arrange appropriately), causative of the Middle High German geschehen & geschēn (to happen, rush), from the Old High German giskehan (to happen), from the Proto-West Germanic skehan, from the Proto-Germanic skehaną (to run, move quickly), from the primitive Indo-European skek- (to run, jump, spring).  The Germanic forms were akin to the Dutch schielijk (hasty) & schikken (to arrange) and the Old English scēon (to happen).  The alternative etymology is a link to the French chicane, from chicanerie (trickery) which in the 1610s English picked up as chicanery (legal quibbling, sophistry, mean or petty tricks).

The meaning "Parisian elegance and stylishness combined with originality" emerged in English by 1882, used to convey the sense of a style which was tied specifically to the most identifiably elegant street wear of the ladies of Paris, the influencers of the day noting chic was "an untranslatable word, denoting an indispensable quality"; something of the je ne sais quoi then.  The use as an adjective to describe the appearance of individuals dates from 1879 in English but interestingly, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) pointed out the use of chic was nowhere near as frequent among French speakers in France although Gustave Flaubert (1821-1880) in Madame Bovary (1857) used chicard (one who is chic), the then current Parisian slang for "classy" before waspishly adding that it was “bourgeoisie”, one indication of why it's as rewarding (and less time-consuming) to read Flaubert as it is Proust (Marcel Proust (1871–1922; author of the multi-volume À la recherche du temps perdu (In Search of Lost Time (1913-1927))).

Felicia Montealegre Bernstein (1922-1978, left), her husband the composer & conductor Leonard Bernstein (1918-1990, seated) and Black Panther Field Marshal DC (Donald Lee Cox, 1936–2011) in Bernstein’s apartment, Park Avenue, New York, January 1970.  This photograph appeared in the New York magazine article in which Tom Wolfe (1930-2018) introduced the term “radical chic”.

The phrase “radical chic” was coined in 1970 by Tom Wolfe, a writer associated with the so-called “New Journalism” (a movement that incorporated techniques and devices from various strains of literature; it was (and remains) influential but has always attracted criticism).  Wolfe’s inspiration was a benefit event given by Leonard Bernstein for the Black Panther Party (1966-1982 and the best-known of the “black power” organizations which emerged during the civil rights era; it was interesting in that as well as being concerned with the civil rights of African-Americans, it was very much in the Marxist–Leninist tradition of the US far-left but also contained a distinctive feminist element).  The term caught on and was used to describe what would later come to be called “virtue-signalling”: the rich adopting the symbols of radical political causes while maintaining a distance from the people and the conditions they purported to support.  Examples live on in upper middle-class suburbs in which BLM (black lives matter) signs might be displayed although no black families live anywhere close.  Wolfe likened radical chic to a trendy romanticizing of “primitive souls” (such as Native Americans (then called American Indians) or Chicano grapeworkers) and compared it to the nineteenth century French phenomenon denoted by the phrase nostalgie de la boue, (literally hankering after mud), coined in 1855 by the dramatist Émile Augier (1820-1899).  What Augier described was prosperous people who were somehow unhappy and, feeling “alienated” from a “natural existence”, sought to “rediscover their essence” although this was usually “temporarily experiential”, few apparently inclined to exchange financial stability for the struggles of the working class.  Wolfe’s experience at Bernstein’s Park Avenue party in 1970 was a case study Augier would have understood: “It was at this party that a Black Panther field marshal rose up beside the north piano—there was also a south piano—in Leonard Bernstein’s living room and outlined the Panthers’ ten-point program to a roomful of socialites and celebrities, who, giddy with nostalgie de la boue, entertained a vision of the future in which, after the revolution, there would no longer be any such thing as a two-story, thirteen-room apartment on Park Avenue, with twin grand pianos in the living room, for one family.”

One adjectival variation was chi-chi (extremely chic, sophisticated) which by 1908 was recorded also as a noun meaning “pretentious fussiness", from the French chichi (airs, fuss).  Etymologists think this, like frou-frou (showy or frilly ornamentation but in its original sense "the rustling of a woman's skirt as it swishes around the legs"), likely imitative.  Chic is either used invariably, in which case the spelling of the plural is chic, or has the plural chics for both the masculine and the feminine forms.  While the spelling chic is correct for the uninflected adjective, all inflected forms are nonstandard (to be correct, inflected forms must be derived from the preferred spelling schick).  The accepted homophones are sheik & sheikh, the pronunciation “chik” is non-standard except when used facetiously.

Lindsay Lohan in zettai ryouiki mode, Jingle Ball, New York City, 2013.

Chic fills a most narrowly specific niche and is thus without no exact synonym.  Words like exclusive, mod, modern, current, sharp, smart, dap, dapper, dashing, faddish, modish, natty, with it, elegant, stylish, dapper, fashionable, natty, trendy, voguish, fancy, posh or swank tend in the direction and in many cases run at least in parallel but none quite capture the sense of chic.  Nor are the likely antonyms (inelegant, unfashionable or unstylish helpful; there is unchic but is so rare as to be probably obscure and it’s unnecessary: someone or something is either chic or not.  Chic is a verb & noun, chicly an adverb, chicness a noun and chicer & chicest are adjectives.  The noun chic is very often used with an attributive noun or adjective modifier, indicating the kind of style, such as boho-chic, heroin-chic, shabby-chic, eco-chic, geek-chic, radical-chic, porno-chic, communist-chic, terrorist-chic, Ayatollah-chic, scruffy-chic, super-chic, uber-chic, goth-chic, ultra-chic, industrial-chic etc.  There were also forms designed deliberately to insult such as chav-chic (also in the form council house-chic), gypsy-chic & hillbilly-chic.  Chiconomics was a clever coining which deconstructed the ways of looking chic on a budget and très chic (very stylish) was a way to emphasize the French connection.

Heroin chic

Anjelica Huston (b 1951) photographed by Bob Richardson (1928-2005), 1971.

Heroin chic, an aesthetic characterized by a painfully thin (preferably tall) build, pale skin, dark circles under the eyes, disheveled hair and a vacuous, haunted expression, was first noted in the late 1980s before the following decade becoming prominent in the modeling industry, an allusion not only to (a not actually typical) the look of an addict but also the alleged popularity of the drug in the business.  The motif however wasn’t new, examples existing from the early twentieth century and Bob Richardson photographed Anjelica Huston very much in the mode as early as 1971.  For those who wish to perfect the look, on the internet there are tutorials detailing how to apply makeup in the appropriate way although, to avoid the thought police, the word "heroin" tends not to appear in the tags or titles; it's just not TikToker-friendly. 

When first coined, heroin chic was intended as a criticism but, in the democratic way English works, it was quickly embraced by popular culture and soon, even in the early days of the internet and long before even embryonic social media platforms, guides were soon circulating, detailing how to achieve the look which, proved so popular they were reprinted in mainstream magazines.  Had it been just a fashionable look it might not have attracted the disapprobation but, for all sorts of reasons (in part related to the symbiotic economics of drug production, distribution and enforcement regimes), the look happened at a time when heroin use in the West spiked, along with a sudden increase in overdoses and drug-related deaths.

Echoes of an earlier chic:  Models at the BCBGMAXAZIRA show, New York Fashion Week, 2012.  BCBGMAXAZIRA (bon chic, bon genre max azira) was created as a Max Azira sub-brand.  Bon chic, bon genre (literally "good style, good attitude") in this context translates as something like the philosophical statement  “dress stylishly and you'll feel self-assured and project confidence".  This slender pair may be happier than they appear.

Itself a reaction to the more voluptuous models in the 1980s, heroin chic departed the catwalks rather abruptly, 1997 noted as the end-point, induced by what was a classic moral panic, ostensibly in reaction to a general concern about heroin use and overdoses but really triggered by the drug-related deaths of a number of white pop-culture celebrities.  Although seemingly oblivious to the the death-rate among ethnic minorities and the poor, the toll of the high-profile caught the attention of the White House staff and in May 1997, Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) became involved, his speech on the subject a carefully choreographed interruption to a prayer breakfast (readers should pause to imagine what goes through Bill Clinton's mind when he's at prayer) in which he condemned heroin chic, saying “You do not need to glamorize addiction to sell clothes, the glorification of heroin is not creative, it’s destructive. It’s not beautiful; it’s ugly. And this is not about art; it’s about life and death. And glorifying death is not good for any society.”

The allure: controversial but undeniable.

Still, the thought police can only suppress but not kill an idea.  Given the political pressure, the industry remains too timid to reprise the look on covers or cat-walks but there remains a counter-culture which finds irresistibly alluring the sight of a slender models walking as if in a drug-induced stupor and although it never entirely went away, impressionistically, it does appear heroin-chic is enjoying, on-line and on the street, a post-pandemic renaissance.  The pro-ana community, always supportive of forks of fashion which build on their framework, will sometimes include style-guides but does caution it’s an aesthetic which works only on the thin (you need not be statuesque; any height can work but not any weight).  So, the first goal is to be thin and pro-ana is there to help with any number of guides available and all work but only if rigidly they’re followed.  Techniques can vary but an indicative approach to the mechanics of the heroin-chic look is:

(1) Get thin.  This is the essential pre-condition.

(2) Begin the process formerly when able successfully to shop in the (US) size zero to one section.  Clothes need to be loose and baggy (if they’re not, return to step (1)).

(3) Never buy anything clingy or with a bare back.  Structurally, the core elements you’re trying to achieve are emaciation and androgyny.

(4) Never buy anything with giant polka dots or made with fabrics of bright colors.  It sounds an unimportant point but is essential; heroin-chic simply doesn’t work with vibrant colors or certain designs.  The preferred colors are black, white, grey, the darker purples and navy blue.

(5) Buy layered items or those made with fluffy fabrics.

(6) Avoid vertical lines unless the stripes are really wide and the color contrasts distinct.

(7) Wear boots wherever possible.

(8) Prime the eyelids, then use a medium to dark brown eye shadow, packing it on to the eyelids.  Unlike the conventional approach to eye-styling, using the fingers is best because it creates an inherently messy finish and the result will inevitably be asymmetric which is good.  When content, add some eye shadow under the eyes and again, strive to achieve coverage but not neatness.

(9) Wait a few minutes (which isn’t a necessity with all eye shadows but there are variations even within the ranges of the one manufacturer.  When ready, run jet-black eye shadow along the top and bottom lash-lines.  This is best done with a small eye shadow brush and, once applied, smudge as desired using the fingers.  Experienced users claim Nyx Cosmetics eyebrow cake is the best product available and for touch-ups or quick corrections, recommend Urban Decay’s 24/7 pencils.

(10) The look is convincing only with clumpy eyelashes.  Take a mascara and use the tip to stick the lashes together, forming something which looks vaguely what you imagine spider legs so treated might resemble.  What you’re after is a variation of what eyelash stylists call “the spiky” except instead of being neatly separated, the lashes are in irregular clumps.

(11) The rest of the make-up should tend to the neutral.  The aim remember is pale skin (avoid exposure to sunlight) so use just a BB cream rather than foundation, accentuated only with just a bronzer to emphasize the shape of the cheekbones.  Illamasqua’s cream pigment is highly regarded.

(12) Perhaps counter-intuitively, the hair needs to be washed and conditioned according to the normal routine (heroin-chic is a curated look, not a consequence of neglect).  The idea is to achieve a stringy, un-kept look but, again counter-intuitively, that can really be constructed only if the hair is clean and well kept and with most hair-types, it’s not difficult using nothing more exotic than inexpensive product such as spray, wax or fudge.  In most cases the styling technique is a variation of what hair-dressers call the JBF but because hair types vary, you may need to experiment.  However it’s done, heroin-chic works best with straight hair so, if you’re after the optimal look, straighten first.

(13) There’s no consensus about which color should be used on the lips or even if it should be glossy or matt.  However, unlike the eyes, lipstick should be applied with precision; it’s just a convention of use.

(14) Juxtaposition.  As a look, heroin-chic works only if, at a second glance, it's apparent everything is expensive (think of it as a sub-set of shabby chic); it's not something done with cheap clothing and needs a pair of diamond studs and a good watch to complete the effect but jewelry should be chosen with some restraint, too much and it detracts from what is a very specific construction and silver will always work better than gold.

Gown

Gown (pronounced goun) 

(1) A type of woman's dress or robe, especially one full-length and worn on formal occasions and often styled as “evening gown” or “ball gown”.

(2) As nightgown, a loose fitting garment worn by sleeping (historically by both men & women but now most associated with the latter); the shortened for is “nightie”.

(3) As surgical gown, a light, protective garment worn in hospitals by medical staff, a specialized form of which is the isolation gown.

(4) As dressing gown (also call bathrobe), a garment in the form of an open robe secured by a tie and often worn over pajamas, after a bath and prior to dressing or on other occasions where there’s no immediate need to dress.

(5) A loose, flowing outer garment in various forms, worn to denote an office held, profession practiced or as an indication of rank or status, most associated with formal academic dress (sometimes in the phrase “cap & gown”).

(6) Those who work or study at a university as opposed to the other residents of the university town, expressed in the phrase “town & gown”.

(7) Historically, the dress of civil, as opposed to military officers.

(8) To supply with or dress in a gown.

1300-1350: From Middle English goune & gowne, from Anglo-Norman gune & goune (fur-trimmed coat, pelisse), from the Old French goune (robe, coat; nun's habit), from the Late Latin gunna (a garment of fur or leather), from the Ancient Greek γούνα (goúna) (coarse garment), of unknown origin but may be from a Balkan or Apennine language where it seems to have been used as early as the eighth century to describe a fur (or fur-lined), cloak-like garment worn by old or infirm monks; More speculatively, some scholars suggest a Celtic source.  The alternative explanation suggests a Scythian origin, from the Proto-Iranian gawnám (fur), the possibility of this link supported by the Younger Avestan gaona (body hair) and the Ossetian гъун (ǧun).  The alternative spelling gowne is obsolete and descendants in other languages include the Bengali গাউন (gaun), the Japanese ガウン, the Korean  가운 (gaun), the Malay gaun, the Punjabi ਗਾਊਨ (gāūna) and the Welsh gown.  Gown is a noun and verb and gowned is an adjective; the noun plural is gowns.

Surgeon in blood-splattered surgical gown (also called hospital or medical gowns), mid-procedure.

As late as the eighteenth century, gown was the common word for what is now usually described as dress and gown in this sense persisted in the US longer than in the UK and there was on both sides of the Atlantic something of a twentieth century revival and the applied uses (bridal gown, nightgown etc) became more or less universal.  The meaning “a loose, flowing outer garment in various forms, worn to denote an office held, profession practiced or as an indication of rank” emerged in the late fourteenth century and the collective singular for “residents of a university” dates from the 1650s, still heard in the rhyming phrase “town & gown”.  The night-gown (worn once by both men & women but now associated almost exclusively with the latter) became a thing in the fourteenth century.

Lindsay Lohan in white & black color-blocked bandage dress.  With a flawless figure, Ms Lohan doesn't need the "corrective" effects the bandage construction provides and this one may really be a bodycon dress with the visual effect of "bandage layers" created by stitched folds. 

Dress dates from circa 1300 and was from the Middle English dressen & dresse (to arrange, put in order), from the Anglo-Norman & Old French dresser, drecier (which persists in as dresser), from the unattested Vulgar Latin dīrēctiāre, from the Classical Latin dīrēctus, the perfect passive participle of dīrigō (to arrange in lines, direct, steer), the construct being dis- (the prefix in this context meaning “apart; asunder; in two’) + regō (to govern, manage), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European h₃reǵ- (straight, right).  The noun dress was derived from the verb and emerged in the sense of “attire” in the early 1600s.  Originally, a dress was always something which covered both the upper and lower parts of the female body but not of necessity in once piece.  The dressing gown seems first to have been described as such in 1854 although in French both robe de chambre (dressing gown) & robe de nuit (nightgown) had been in use for centuries.

Lindsay Lohan in dressing gowns; in the US such things would usually be called bathrobes.

Robe dates from the mid-thirteenth century Middle English robe & robbe and was from the Old French robe, robbe & reube (booty, spoils of war, robe, garment), from the Frankish rouba & rauba (booty, spoils, stolen clothes (literally “things taken”)), from the Old High German roub, from the Proto-Germanic raubō, raubaz & raubą (booty, that which is stripped or carried away), from the primitive Indo-European Hrewp- (to tear away, peel off).  The noun use of robe to refer to garments had entered general use by the late thirteenth century, an adoption of a meaning from the Old French, presumably because fine clothing looted from defeated enemies were among the most prized of the spoils of war.  The Old French robe (and the alternative spellings) had as concurrent meanings both “clothing” & “plunder: as did the Germanic forms including the Old English reaf (plunder, booty, spoil; garment, armor, vestment).  By the late thirteenth century, robe had assumed the meaning “a long, loose outer garment reaching almost to the floor, worn by men or women over other dress”, those closest European equivalents being the twelfth century Old French robe (long, loose outer garment) and the Old High German rouba (vestments).  In royal, academic and ecclesiastical circles, the particular style of robes became regulated to denote rank, function or or membership of a religious order and royal courts would include offices like “page of the robes”, “mistress of the robes”, master of the robes etc” although those titles are (to modern eyes) misleading because their responsibilities extended to garments generally and not just robes as they’re now understood.  The metonymic sense of “the robe” for "the legal profession" dates from the 1640s, a reference to the dark robes worn by advocates when appearing in court.  Robe went on productively to be adopted for other purposes including (1) in the US “the skin of a bison (later applied to other slaughtered beasts) used as a cloak or wrap, (2) a short form of wardrobe (especially when built into a wall rather than being stand-alone) and (3) the largest and strongest leaves on a tobacco plant.

Singer Dr Taylor Swift in academic gown after being conferred an honorary doctorate in fine arts from New York University, May 2022.

In formal and vocational use, gown and robe and well understood and there tends not to be overlap except among those unacquainted with such things.  That’s understandable because to the casual observer the things can look much the same and the differences in nomenclature are more to do with tradition than style or cut.  Judges for example ware judicial robes and in the US these are usually black whereas elsewhere in the English-speaking world they can be of quite vivid hues, red and scarlet the most admired.  The US influence however seem pervasive and the trend is now almost universally black, certainly among newly established courts; in the same courts, barristers robes look much the same the term “judicial robe” is exclusive to the bench, the advocates garments variously called “barristers’ robes” “legal robes” or lawyers’ robes”.  Academics however wear gowns and again, the Americans tend to favor black while in the English tradition, all the colors of the rainbow have been seen.  These differ from surgical (also known as hospital or medical gowns) which, compared with just about every other gown, really aren’t gowns at all.  Surgical gowns are made usually in a blue, beige or green pastel color (better to show the blood) and are a kind of inverted dress which is fastened at the back (by an assistant so the wearer’s fingers don’t pick up germs).  In the UK parliament, there were many robes for offices of state and the one worn by the speaker made its way to colonial and dominion parliaments.  They're now rarely worn except on ceremonial occasions and the best known is probably that of the UK’s chancellors of the exchequer although the last one, dating from the late nineteenth century, is said to have “gone missing” while Gordon Brown (b 1951; UK prime-minister 2007-2010) was chancellor.

The Welsh Wizard robed: Lloyd George as Chancellor of the Exchequer (1911) (David Lloyd George, 1863–1945; UK prime-minister 1916-1922, severed as chancellor between 1908-1915), oil on canvas by Christopher Williams (1873–1934), National Library of Wales collection.

Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) was in 1924 both surprised and delighted when Stanley Baldwin (1867–1947; UK prime-minister 1923-1924, 1924-1929 & 1935-1937) offered him the Treasury; he’d heard rumors of appointed “chancellor” as assumed the best he could hope for was the chancellorship of the Duchy of Lancaster which, although an ancient office dating from the fourteenth century, he knew to be little more than a sinecure of slight influence, having in 1915 been for a few months relegated there after leaving the Admiralty in the wake of the failure of the Dardanelles campaign.  To atone, he went to the trenches of the Western Front and for some six month commanded a regiment of the Royal Scots Fusiliers.  Though never forgotten, much was by 1924 forgiven and Churchill was pleased to tell the prime minister he’d be glad to take the exchequer, one slight benefit to the public purse being “I still have the robes my father (Lord Randolph Churchill (1849–1895; Chancellor of the Exchequer August-December 1886)) wore as chancellor”.  In retrospect, that sartorial convenience might have been an inadequate background for handling the nation’s finances and Churchill often is listed high up the list of the UK’s “worst chancellors”, the main charge being returning sterling to the gold standard and maintaining an over-valued currency but just about all the great institutions of state (the Treasury, the Cabinet, the Bank of England etc) and most economists (a notable dissenter being John Maynard Keynes (later Lord Keynes) 1883-1946) who predicted depression as a consequence) recommended the move.  Still, it was Churchill was who signed the documents and the consensus among historians of such things is that had he known anything of economics, he’d likely have signed with even greater alacrity.

NSW (New South Wales (Australia)) Supreme Court and Court of Appeal judges in judicial robes and wigs for a ceremonial event during the COVID-19 pandemic.

It’s in women’s fashion where the distinction between a gown and a dress can become muddied and probably most illustrative is the matter of the “wedding dress” and the “wedding gown”.  Even among couturiers, there’s actually no agreed definition of where one ends and the other begins; it’s very much in the eye of the beholder although the eye of the retailer is doubtless quite an influence, the theory being the grander the design and the greater the volume of fabric, the more plausible is the label “wedding gown” and the higher the price-tag.  These informal (but serviceable) rules of thumb work also for dresses & gowns in general, the distinction more one of semantics and personal preference although, in saying that, it’s only at the margins where there can be confusion; a minimalist LBD (little black dress) would never be confused with a gown and the grandest creations recalling those worn at the famous balls held in conjunction with the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815) would never be called dresses.

Watercolor by unknown artist of one of the many balls held during the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815).  Being ankle-length, gowns were not the ideal garment for ladies dancing and it's likely some made temporary modifications, "hitching them up" a bit.

Despite that, in the narrow technical sense, to a seamstress, all gowns are dresses, but not all dresses are gowns and as late as the early eighteenth century the word "dress" was still not the exclusive province of women’s clothing ensembles.  In recent centuries, the dress has been defined by its modifiers (sun-dress, summer-dress, evening-dress, travelling dress, tent dress, riding-dress etc) and the modern convention seems to be that if an invitation specifies "semi-formal" then an evening dress is expected and that might be something thought a gown but not necessarily.  However, when an invitation states that the occasion is "formal", women are expected to wear an evening gown.  Classically, that’s understood to be something at once precise yet frivolous, with a tight fitting bodice and a skirt at least brushing the floor and this was once the accepted standard for any red-carpet event of note but the recent trend towards displays of flesh has in the entertainment industry subverted the tradition although the audience is expected still to adhere.

Illustrating the modern gown: Actor Lindsay Lohan (b 1986) in a gown with an upper-level silk tulle (a netting-like weave) by Zac Posen (b 1980), Met Gala, New York, 2007 (left) and model Kate Upton (b 1992) in a gown by Victoria Beckham (b 1974, the one-time “Posh Spice”, now Lady Beckham), Vanity Fair Oscars after-party, Los Angeles, 2016.

Fashion has since the Congress of Vienna become simplified and rather than voluminous layers of fabric, a gown’s effects are now generated by cut & color.  For his diaphanous piece, Zac Posen included a quadrilateral (a four-sided polygon) cleavage split, designed cleverly to emulate a tie (in Euclidean geometry defined as a “kite” (two pairs of adjacent, equal-length sides with the two shorter sides meeting at the bottom vertex, the longer pair intersecting at the top so a line described from top to bottom produces an axis of reflection symmetry, as does the fall of a tie)).  What Lady Beckham included would probably now be called a “uvage” although physiology can affect outcome; on a different model (with less pronounced “forward projection”) the fabric would likely fall to create a “veagage”.  While there can be overlaps in cut, construction and cues, there are points at which a LBD becomes re-defined as a “dress” (possibly with a modifier or two) or a “gown”.  Although motifs can matter (what sometimes appears on a gown often not suitable for a LBD that depends on simplicity for effect) the prime determinate really is length, the classic LBD’s hemline stopping somewhere on the thighs while a gown properly should be ankle-length although calf-left implementations have become not uncommon.  The “rule” is however selectively applied and depends also on style and intended purpose; an ankle-length “maxi-dress” will typically not be a “gown”.  Again, physiology can also influence things, someone especially statuesque could appear in a LBD while the same garment on someone shorter might be classed a “black cocktail dress”, simply because the hemline reaches below the knee.  So usually it’s not difficult to tell what is a gown but, at the margins, the distinctions can become blurred and it’s really “eye of the beholder” stuff, a subjective exercise expressed best (in another context) by Potter Stewart (1915–1985; associate justice of the SCOTUS (US Supreme Court) 1958-1981) in his famous concurring judgement in Jacobellis v Ohio (378 U.S. 184 (1964)): “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within [the term], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so.  But I know it when I see it…”