Maybe I'll pile on this thread later, with the rest. For starters, I think we can agree Biden don't jive. The word is 'jibe'. But it's one of those words people get wrong. 1/
So I got curious. Whence 'jibe'? The odd thing is that this usage is opposite to other senses, seemingly. 'To jibe' is to sneer; or steer a boat in a way I wouldn't describe as 'harmonizing' with the wind. 2/ google.com/search?client=…
The OED says it's a mystery but the first instance, from 1813 - "it curricle-izes or gibes in but too well with the passing anecdotes of the day" - seems to suggest a clear solution and it isn't the phonetic connection to 'chime'. 3/
'Curricle' is a two-wheeled carriage but also a 'short course'. It would make total sense of the author of the "Sporting Mag" piece to be newly stretching 'jibe' in the sailing sense, while neologistically verbing 'curricleize', to say 'briefly come in line with'. 4/
'Jibing', socially, is brief harmony - a short course of travel together in line (for at least two - two horses?) And that's how 'jibing' in sailing works, kinda. You are passingly, not steadily, 'with the wind'. 5/
Now one must check to be sure that there is no 'jive'/'jibe' link. The former isn't just the latter originally. No, 'jive' first means misleading or empty talk. Then it means 'jazz', by some 'bad=good!' (playing 'out' is in) route. 6/
The first occurrence of 'jive' in a jazz context is, says OED, "State Street Jive" by the excellently named Cow Cow Davenport. You can listen to it here. A lot of hiss, but it's talking, not singing (by Ivy Smith). 7/
I'm having trouble making out the lyrics but she is complaining about her man, so I wonder whether this sense is 'jive talk'. That is, the 'jive' in the title doesn't (yet?) denote the boogie-woogie? 8/
More googling and basic Wikipedia checking. The term was spread, partly, by Cab Calloway's popular "Hepster's Dictionary", which defines 'jive as ' '(n.): Harlemese speech.' 9/ flashbak.com/cab-calloways-…
The dictionary also carries the subtitle 'language of Jive'. So there you have it. It looks impossible to say exactly when 'jive' came to refer to a style of music, as opposed to speech. 10/
But once it does you get the possibility of mistaking 'jive' - getting into the musical swing - for 'jibe' - get into the harmonious course or line. end/
[I will be refuted if the ghost of Cornpop pops up and testifies young Biden learned to jive back in Wilmington, back in the day. Biden impresses us surprisingly.]
[Last time I consulted OED a pedant popped up, alleging I couldn't read a dictionary, e.g. I shouldn't assume Cow Cow Davenport is first. That's fair. But a quick check doesn't find any earlier. Can you? Here's an article. Textual record thin before 30's. muse-jhu-edu.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/article/24793]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
New OBZ! Some delicate color here - lest one think Nietzche feels only contempt for these derpy denizens of the town. Do not these spots of color indicate an earnest wish on Z's, hence N's, part that the organ grinder not merely have his organs ground? 1/ onbeyondzarathustra.com/copy-of-gdfd-p…
Speaking of which! There is no 'team' in 'intestinal', but there is an 'I' and a 'test'. We are really getting to "Ye have made your way from worm to man, and much within you is still worm ..." 2/
Look at the little guy's face? Is he not - we? As Alexander Pope writes:
"So morning insects that in muck begun,
Shine, buzz, and fly-blow in the setting sun."
If this doesn't get 'likes' I'm complaining to the manager.
Incredible. Still only a few likes for a meme that has something for everyone: Neoliberals with a sense of detachment; anti-neoliberals; people who aren’t sure what ‘neoliberalism’ means.
Kerr BOTH thinks we should be talking about it as a thing that could be good AND that we are only permitted to use a word for it that implies it couldn't be good, 'court-packing'? C'mon, pick a lane. 1/
The D's need a philosophy of the judicial branch to counter 'originalist' argle-bargle from the right. 'Originalism' is a rhetoric not a philosophy (well, it's a bad philosophy, but so are most rhetorics.) But it's been hugely successful. 2/
D's need to counter that, undesirable as this is, the SC is now thoroughly politicized. Maybe it's all the fault of that darned Earl Warren, but, whatever, in recent decades the right has seen to it that its 6 R-appointed Justices are expected to be reliable partisans. 3/
Anti-court-packing rhetoric ratchets up a notch NR. Some of this is guilty projection. NR has to get behind R's; R's are increasingly behind the Jan 6 insurrection, so, in all decency, you gotta try to peel some 'thuggish treason' off your team, stick it to the other team. 1/
Even so this is a bit much. I think D's need to push back. R's have, for decades, evolved this extreme rhetoric in which whatever D judges do is 'activism', whatever R judges do is not. (At NR, Whelan has a column that makes liberal = activism an alleged analytic legal truth.) 2/
R's are always saying that D's are undermining the courts. But the opposite is true. R's have adopted a steady rhetoric that D judges, since they disagree with R's, who are doing the just plain right 'orginalist' thing, are illegitimate. 3/
Hoo boy, kicker here is he doesn't say he checks resumes for evidence the student is a legacy admit at whatever top school, and downgrades accordingly. Even though he complains about legacy admissions as hypocrisy in the letter. 1/
The takeaway is: look, legacies are a thing. It's hypocrisy to get all worked up about race and NOT about legacy admits. (True!) Therefore, the status quo must be ... preserved? That's crazy. It isn't even two wrongs make a right. It's one wrong makes a right. 2/
The larger takeaway is that the enthusiastically favorable response to this letter, by Weiss and co., is proof Weiss and co. are empirically and morally delusional on the subject, like the letter writer himself. Severely so. 3/
The books do contain negative stereotypes. It qualifies as a genuine minor dilemma. It is a fascinating, ethically fiddly topic to argue! At the same time, one of the two major parties in the US has, as its sole policy goal at present, vote suppression. 2/ apnews.com/article/dr-seu…
This generates a minor meta-dilemma. I don't want to forbid people debating the minor dilemma (just how harmful is it to small children that Seuss contains negative ethnic stereotypes?) just because voter suppression is more clear and consequential. Which it for sure is. 3/