The Woozle effect, also known as evidence by
citation, or a woozle, occurs when frequent citation of previous
publications that lack evidence misleads individuals, groups, and the public
into thinking or believing there is evidence, and nonfacts become urban myths and factoids. A Woozle is an imaginary character in
the A.
A. Milne book Winnie-the-Pooh, published in 1926. In chapter three, "In which Pooh and
Piglet Go Hunting and Nearly Catch a Woozle", Winnie-the-Pooh and Piglet start following tracks left in
snow believing they are the tracks of a Woozle.
The tracks keep multiplying until Christopher
Robin explains to them that they have been following their own tracks
in circles around a tree. Prior to the introduction
of the specific term "Woozle effect", the underlying research
phenomenon (and connection to the Woozle) dates back over 60 years. Bevan (1953), writing about scientific
methodology and research errors in the field of psychology, uses the term
"scientific woozle hunters". Wohlwill (1963) refers to a
"hunt for the woozle" in social science research, and Stevens
(1971) cautions readers about woozles in the study of a misquoted letter. According to Richard
J. Gelles, the term "woozle effect" was coined by Beverly
Houghton in 1979. Other researchers have
attributed the term to Gelles (1980) and Gelles and Murray
A. Straus (1988). Gelles and
Straus argue that the woozle effect describes a pattern of bias seen within
social sciences and which is identified as leading to multiple errors in
individual and public perception, academia, policy making and government. A woozle is also a claim made about research
which is not supported by original findings. The creation of woozles is
often linked to the changing of language from qualified ("it may",
"it might", "it could") to absolute form ("it
is") firming up language and introducing ideas and views not held by an
original author or supported by evidence.
The Birth of Brunch: Where Did This Meal Come From Anyway? by Jesse Rhodes As is the case with many culinary traditions,
the origins are a bit hazy. Some food
historians think that the meal has its roots in England’s hunt breakfasts—lavish
multi-course meals that featured a smorgasbord of goodies such as chicken
livers, eggs, meats, bacon, fresh fruit and sweets. Others posit that
Sunday brunch derives from the practice of Catholics fasting before mass and
then sitting down for a large midday meal.
And then there are those who look to New York’s
abundance of dining spots when it comes
to tracing the origins of classic brunch dishes from eggs Benedict to bagels
and lox. What does seem certain
is that the word “brunch”—that playful blend of “breakfast” and “lunch”—first appeared in print in an 1895 Hunter’s Weekly article. In “Brunch:
A Plea,” British author Guy Beringer suggested an alternative to the
heavy, post-church Sunday meals in favor of lighter fare served late in the
morning. ″Brunch is cheerful, sociable
and inciting,″
Beringer says. ″ It is
talk-compelling. It puts you in a good
temper, it makes you satisfied with yourself and your fellow beings, it sweeps
away the worries and cobwebs of the week.″ But wherever the initial spark of genius came from,
the tradition definitely seems to have caught on in the United States in the
1930s, supposedly because Hollywood stars making transcontinental train trips
frequently stopped off in Chicago to enjoy a late morning meal.
It was a meal championed by hotels since most restaurants were closed on
Sundays and, with church attendance flagging after World War II, people were
looking for a new social outlet that also let them sleep in a bit. Restaurants soon hopped on the bandwagon and
began offering the decadent spreads of food and signature morning cocktails,
such as Bloody Marys, Bellinis and Mimosas. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-birth-of-brunch-where-did-this-meal-come-from-anyway-164187758/ See also
https://www.vappingo.com/word-blog/86-great-examples-of-portmanteau/
A sachet is a small, usually decorative, bag
filled with aromatic ingredients. Good things to
stuff your sachet with include: Lavender
buds (dried), wood shavings (cedar is great),soap shavings (perfect for tossing
in the washing, while a lavender stuffed one is perfect for the dryer!),
potpourri, scent impregnated stuffing material (probably needs new scent after
a time), dried herbs, and spices (make sure the fabric does not allow for the
spices to leak through). A combination
of lavender and dried hops makes a good nighttime pillow to improve sleep. https://www.wikihow.com/Make-Sachets See also How To Make A Gifty Flower Sachet by Kitty and Jennifer O'Neil at http://runningwithsisters.com/how-to-make-a-scented-flower-sachet/
By George! is a mild oath or exclamation that had its beginnings in the late 1500s. The word “George” here is a
substitute for “God,” as are words like “golly,” “ginger,” “gosh,” “gum,”
and so on in other similar euphemistic oaths.
In case you’d like to read more, we’ve had several items on the blog
about such euphemisms, including a posting a few years back about “gol
dang it,” “gosh darn it,” “dag nab it,” and others. And, as we’ve written on the blog, you can add “For Pete’s sake!” to
the list.) You didn’t ask, but some
readers may wonder who the Scott is in “Great Scott!” This interjection, too, is a believed to
be euphemistic, the OED says,
a mild form of “Great God!” that originated in mid-19th-century America. But in this case, the “Scott” was probably
real. Evidence suggests, the OED says, that the name inserted
into the oath was that of a revered American general, Winfield
Scott. As Oxford explains: “Winfield Scott, Commanding General of the
United States Army (1841-61) and Whig party presidential candidate (1852), was
a popular national figure in the United States in the mid 19th cent.,
celebrated as a hero for his role in the Mexican-American War (1846-8).” The first example of “Great
Scott!” cited in the OED dates
from an American journal published in 1856. But this 1871 example, from John William de
Forest’s novel Overland,
clearly shows the connection with General Scott: “ ‘Great—Scott!’ he gasped in his
stupefaction, using the name of the then commander-in-chief for an oath, as
officers sometimes did in those days.” Patricia T. O'Conner and Stewart
Kellerman https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/01/by-george.html
Read
five-page The Lottery at http://fullreads.com/literature/the-lottery/
When Shirley Jackson’s
story “The
Lottery” was first published, in the June 26, 1948, issue of The New Yorker
magazine, many readers accepted “The Lottery” as truthful is less astonishing
than it now seems, since at the time The New
Yorker did not designate its stories as fact or fiction, and
the “casuals,” or humorous essays, were generally understood as falling
somewhere in between. In a lecture
Jackson often gave about the story’s creation and its aftermath, which was
published posthumously under the title “Biography of a Story,” she said that of
all the letters that came in that summer—they eventually numbered more than
three hundred, by her count—only thirteen were kind, “and they were mostly from
friends.” The rest, she wrote with
mordant humor, were dominated by three main themes: “bewilderment, speculation, and plain
old-fashioned abuse.” Readers wanted to
know where such lotteries were held, and whether they could go and watch; they
threatened to cancel their New Yorker subscriptions;
they declared the story a piece of trash.
If the letters “could be considered to give any accurate cross section
of the reading public … I would stop writing now,” she concluded. More than a hundred of these letters, which
she kept in a giant scrapbook, are now in her archive at the Library of
Congress. There were indeed some
cancelled subscriptions, as well as a fair share of name-calling—Jackson was
said to be “perverted” and “gratuitously disagreeable,” with “incredibly bad
taste.” But the vast majority of the
letter writers were not angry or abusive but simply confused. “The
Lottery” has been adapted for stage, television, opera, and ballet; it was even
featured in an episode of “The Simpsons.” By now it is so familiar that it is hard to
remember how shocking it originally seemed: “outrageous,” “gruesome,” or just “utterly
pointless,” in the words of some of the readers who were moved to write.
Ruth Franklin https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-lottery-letters
11 Things You Probably Didn't Know About Shirley
Jackson by Ruth Franklin Ruth Franklin's Shirley Jackson: A Rather Haunted Life is a
biography of the American author, taking readers inside the personal life of
the enigmatic Jackson. Franklin picks
some of her favorite Jackson details. If you went to high school
in the United States in the 1950s or later, you probably read Shirley Jackson’s
“The Lottery,” one of the most anthologized short stories in American
fiction. Perhaps you’ve also read her
spooky novel The Haunting of Hill House (or seen one of the
two films made of it) or the mysterious We Have Always Lived in the
Castle. Read other details at https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/tip-sheet/article/71549-11-things-you-probably-didn-t-know-about-shirley-jackson.html
http://librariansmuse.blogspot.com Issue 1874
April 13, 2018 In 1952, the West Point Military Band celebrated that
famous military academy’s Sesquicentennial by asking prominent composers to
write celebratory works to mark the occasion. Among those who responded with a new piece was
the American composer Morton Gould,
whose “West Point Symphony” received its premiere performance on today’s date
in 1952, at a gala concert featuring the West Point Academy Band conducted by
Francis E. Resta. Of all the pieces
written in honor of West Point’s Sesquicentennial in 1952, Gould’s Symphony is
probably the best-known. The score of
the West Point Symphony calls for a “marching machine,” but on a classic 1959
recording under the late Frederick Fennell, the required sound was provided by
the very real marching feet of 120 Eastman School of Music students. Composers Datebook West Point Symphony Eastman Wind Ensemble - Frederick Fennel, conductor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvYSuesYVyg 20:27
No comments:
Post a Comment