Thursday, 6 April 2017

There's Nowt So Queer As Folk



In northern England, the wee corner of the world I call home (actually, I often call it hyam, but that’s a whole other discussion) we have a phrase, “there’s nowt so queer as folk”, meaning that there’s nothing quite so odd, eccentric, strange, unusual, unique, funny as people are. I was yacking away a few days back with a dear friend and serial brain-lightbulb catalyst of mine and I used the word queer in this sense.   She said that young people around here (‘here’ being the eastern seaboard of the USA) don’t use the word that way any more, and that got me to thinking (always a dangerous thing to do).


The 1999 British TV series Queer As Folk did much to challenge taboos about homosexuality in the UK
The word ‘queer’, in its ‘unusual’ sense, first turns up in writing in 14th century Scots, possibly from Low German and related to the word ‘quer’, which my German-English dictionary tells me now means ‘transversely’ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transverse anyone?).


By at least the 19th century it had gained certain pejorative senses, such as ‘unwell’ or ‘in financial difficulty’. In the 1904 Sherlock Holmes story “The Adventure of the Second Stain” (Twice in one night! Good work, old boy!), Inspector LeStrade threatens an unruly police constable with dismissal by saying they would “find [themselves] in Queer Street” (using the modern sense of the term, that sounds like rather an enjoyable Friday night).

The Marquess of Queensberry - as charming as he was well-lettered.

One of the earliest references to “queer” in its meaning of same-sex attraction, was in an 1896 letter by John Sholto Douglas, the 9th Marquess of Queensberry, famous for publicly endorsing the ‘Queensbury Rules’ that form the basis of modern boxing and for bringing about the arrest of Oscar Wilde for “posing as a somdomite” (clearly spelling was not Queensberry’s strong suit) by living as a couple with Queensberry’s son Lord Alfred ”Bosie” Douglas.
 

Oscar and Bosie

The letter referred to “snob queers like Rosebery”, speaking of the splendidly monikered Archibald Primrose, 5th Earl of Rosebery, who Queensberry
suspected of being one of his son’s lovers.

Archibald Primrose
Throughout the 20th century, the term queer was used either euphemistically or abusively to refer to homosexual men. It was in the late 1980s that the process of reclaiming the word began. “We’re here, we’re queer, we will not live in fear” came to be a popular chant at gay rights rallies.




A pamphlet passed out at 1990’s NYC Gay Pride by the organization Queer Nation explained the reasons for taking up the term:

Ah, do we really have to use that word? It's trouble. Every gay person has his or her own take on it. For some it means strange and eccentric and kind of mysterious [...] And for others "queer" conjures up those awful memories of adolescent suffering [...] Well, yes, "gay" is great. It has its place. But when a lot of lesbians and gay men wake up in the morning we feel angry and disgusted, not gay. So we've chosen to call ourselves queer. Using "queer" is a way of reminding us how we are perceived by the rest of the world.”

And it is true that to be queer is to be unusual, to be abnormal. Less than 2% of the population in the UK and USA identify themselves as bi- or homosexual (although the percentage of those who’ve had some sort of same-sex dalliance, tasted the cherry chapstick if you will, is almost certainly considerably higher). It’s also true that being left handed (around 10% of the population) is queer (in its “nowt as queer as folk” sense), as is having red hair (less than 2% of the world’s population) or being black in the UK (3%) or Caucasian in China (a small enough percentage to be classed as a trace element). And all of these minorities have suffered, or still suffer, various forms of prejudice and discrimination.


But normal, like natural, is a term that is often dusted with a patina of positive connotation that it doesn’t warrant.  Strychnine and arsenic are both natural, but I wouldn’t be overly inclined to sprinkle a little on my organic, quinoa salad. In a similar way, for the vast majority of history (and most probably its illiterate older brother prehistory) slavery was normal, but that doesn’t incline me to propose it as a handy solution to the irksome problem of having to do tiresome domestic chores.


John Stuart Mill

Indeed I would contend that the increased tolerance of queerness, of not being the norm, is one of the greatest achievements of the enlightenment. The philosopher John Stuart Mill’s corrective against the danger of the tyranny of the majority inherent in the utilitarian ideal of achieving “the greatest happiness for the greatest number”, enshrining that an individual should be free to do whatsoever they choose as long as it does not harm others, is a vitally important underpinning of modern democracy.

The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right...The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns him, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign”
John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859)

At a time when acceptance of homosexuality is thankfully on the rise in many parts (though by no means all, I’m looking at you Uganda) of the world, but tolerance of other forms of diversity of action and opinion is in great danger of being clamped down on, I would make the modest proposal that embracing queerness, in all of its senses, is something we would do well to encourage.

Wednesday, 15 February 2017

On Bread

<<Todos los duelos con pan son buenos>>
"Bread alleviates all sorrows"
Miguel de Cervantes

Image may contain: one or more people

My lords and ladies, my brave companions, today we're going to let our stomachs do the talking and speak of one of the great fuels of human civilisation: of bread. Of bread and the words with bread baked in...like the words above.

Anyone who has broken bread by the roadside with weary travellers they've trudged a long march alongside will have a feeling for the roots of the word "companion". It comes originally from the Latin for "one who breaks bread with you" from com "with, together" & panis "bread" and came into English around about 1300 from Old French.

Incidentally, the "pa-" of "panis" comes ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European root meaning "to feed, tend, protect, guard", which is the same root from which we get the words "feed", "food", "fodder", "pasture", and "pastor".

Which, the lord being my shepherd (and distributor of daily bread), brings us neatly on to the words "lord" and "lady". There is a loaf of bread inside of them that speaks of the responsibility of the heads of a household to provide nourishment for their dependants.
Lord is a shortening of hlaf weard, from the Old English hlaf "bread, loaf" & weard "keeper, guardian" (think about warden). Lady is a shortening of hlaf dige; from Old English hlaf "bread, loaf" & dige "maid, kneader of bread". The "dige" part of lady comes from the same root as "dough".
And "dough", like "bread", is often used as a synonym for money. But that is a wordtale for another day.