Arm And The Man

Mike Deri Smith contextualizes the new film 127 Hours:

These kinds of accidents are usually due to human error rather than lightning-strike bad luck. Despite many years of climbing experience, Ralston made the near-fatal error of failing to tell anyone where he was going. Had he told someone his plans, he may not have lost his hand and would have had a better chance of being rescued. Ralston’s idiocy should be condemned in equal measure to the extent that his heroics are applauded. After all, the heroics were in response to a self-inflicted predicament.

What’s In A Shirt, Ctd

Detachable_Collars

Last weekend we posted a quote by Paula Marantz Cohen on the meaning of the shirt collar. Dozens of readers pounced on the post, criticizing Cohen for her apparent failure to recognize the practical reasons for detachable collars. Jesse Kornbluth made related criticisms a few weeks back. The article appears to have been updated. It now reads (the bolded part is new):

As originally designed, the collar was detachable, like the tie. One could speculate on why this was and why it changed. Ostensibly, the detachable collar (and cuffs) facilitated more targeted starching and cleaning. Given the abundance of Industrial Era dirt and grime, "ring around the collar" (what later detergent advertisers made the bane of serious housewives) could be efficiently mitigated. But more theoretical explanations are also possible. Perhaps the 19th-century man only needed to give emphasis to his head in public settings; at home, he could disregard this part of his anatomy, either because he deferred to his wife’s judgment or, contrarily, because brute force could serve him in lieu of brain power. Whatever the reason, in the 20th century, the collar ceased to be detachable. Public and private became less differentiated.

Dish readers had some great things to add on the subject of shirt collars. One writes:

Once mechanical washers became common, it was just as easy to wash the entire shirt.  And by then, our advertising industry insisted that you had to wash the shirt after just one wearing, since that's how they got you to buy ever more soap.

Another:

By the 20th century, mass production of clothing became more common and it became acceptable for men and women to buy premade clothing rather than having it tailor made, and so it became less expensive to replace shirts and dresses when the collar got too dirty or wore out.

Another:

Having grown up as the grandson of a NY clothing manufacturer, I believe the main reason for detachable collars was far more mundane than one might think. That reason was sweat. Before the advent of automatic washing machines and air conditioning, one could get an extra days use from a well-starched dress shirt by changing the collar.  In the current HBO series Boardwalk Empire, there is a scene where Arnold Rothstein, wanting to look fresh for dinner, changes his collar (but not his shirt) after a long, and presumable sweaty, game of poker.  Air conditioning was an invention which dramatically altered everyday life in America, from population patterns to contemporary fashion.

Another:

The detachable collar and cuffs became fashion in a time, around the 1850s, when most did not have a clean shirt daily. If a man had more than two shirts, he was doing well. If he had more than two suits and an extra pair of pants, he was wealthy.

Nearer the 20th century, the "white collar" office clerk would have paper or celluloid detachable collar and cuffs. A "blue collar" working man or farmer might only have one shirt to go to church on Sunday and was probably his wedding day shirt. The rich may have same fabric detachables. The first washing machines the rich had beat the hell out of clothes, and the poorer or more old fashioned used washboards. All classes replaced just the collars and cuffs in a time where clothes were a larger percentage of incomes, they are the part of a shirt that wears out first and becomes un-cleanable first.

Another:

The fuel of the Industrial Revolution was coal – soft coal, to be specific, which burned dirty.  That coal stove in the corner of the office? Multiply it by ten thousand, and you get this 1902 report from a London a fog monitor:  "White and damp in the early morning, it became smoky later, the particles coated with soot being dry and pungent to inhale. There was a complete block of street traffic at some crossings. Omnibuses were abandoned, and several goods trains were taken off."

Why did men change their collars – and cuffs – several times a day in London? Because white turned black in a matter of hours.

Another:

Or perhaps becuase 19th century collars, starched to iron stiffness, were basically choking hazards that a reasonable man would only wear as long as necessary.

Another points to the article, "A General History Of Detachable Collars On Custom Made Business And Formal Shirts." Another recommends Kathleen Brown's Foul Bodies: Cleanliness in Early America to "anyone interested in the history of laundry." One last reader:

Paula Marantz Cohen's mention of detachable collars brought back a great memory concerning my dad.  I grew up in England during the post-war period and my dad worked at a Harley Street opticians as one of the first contact lens practitioners in the country.  For those who are unfamiliar with Harley Street in London, it remains the location where many of the British upper class go to receive medical care from well-known, socially acceptable and expensive medical specialists.  As a result, my dad had to dress up to fit the part.  That included shirts with detachable and highly starched collars.  The collars were attached to the shirt with studs.  My mom would wash the shirts by hand (very few homes in England had washing machines in those days) but the collars were sent out to be washed and starched.  I believe my dad changed his collar every day but not his shirt.  In England, standards of hygiene were not up to North American standards in those days.

As a young boy, I fondly remember my dad walking around our house in Twickenham with his collar partially detached asking my mom if she had any clean collars. Thanks for the memory.

(Photo via Wikipedia)

The Original 99¢ Song

David Ensminger salutes the music bins of dollar stores:

Flimsy toilet scrub. Check. Day old bread. Check. Offbrand toothpaste. Check. Sonny Sharrock CD. Wait. What?  In the relentless glare of the 99 Cent Only Store, which makes any face look blanched with a hangover, I grip this little gem by the uber jazz-noise guitarist buried in a heap of discount CDs tilting precariously forward on an overstocked shelf next to videotapes. Yes, those relics of the age of plastic, when John Hughes’ teenage angst movies filled living rooms.

This is beyond weird. Sharrock has played with everyone from Miles Davis and flautist Herbie Mann to hip producer Bill Laswell. He was obscure and legendary, not some used-up, no-name, cookie cutter musician. This CD represents agile, disruptive art in the aisle of discount city.

More Than A Poker Face

Jay Caspian Kang reveals the real trick of the game – an incredible pain tolerance:

Pain in poker comes in many forms. There is the loss you feel about living off of the dregs of a societal illness. There is the gambler’s moment of clarity when you realize you have become just like the old, sad men that you ridiculed in your younger, luckier days. There is the tedium of sitting at a filthy felt table for hours, sometimes days, feigning a studied intensity. There is the anxiety over explaining to a loved one exactly how you lost $30,000 in the course of a weekend. There is searing unease that comes from watching that same loved one twist uncomfortably whenever you give them a gift bought with the spoils of gambling.

But none of poker’s daily pains are deadly or instructive, really. What’s more, all of guilt’s iterations can be cleansed by one monster score.

The Science Of Guessing

Jonah Lehrer reports on a new study that appears to prove "psi" – instances of telepathy, clairvoyance or psychokinesis. But Lehrer reminds us it's been done before:

Consider the story of Adam Linzmayer. In the spring of 1931, Linzmayer, an undergraduate at Duke University, began participating in an experimental test of extra-sensory perception, or ESP. The study was led by the psychologist Joseph Banks Rhine and revolved around the Zener deck, a special set of cards featuring five different symbols. The test itself is straightforward: A card is drawn from the deck and the subject is asked to guess the symbol. While most of Rhine’s subjects performed in the neighborhood of random chance – they guessed about 20 percent of the cards correctly – Linzmayer averaged nearly fifty percent during his initial sessions. Furthermore, these “guesses” led to several uncanny streaks, such as when he correctly guessed nine cards in a row. The odds of this happening by chance are about one in two million. Linzmayer did it three times.

In a short time, Linzmayer lost his abilities, and performed only slightly higher than average. What makes the new study by Daryl Bem so important is "Bem’s attempt to create rigorous, well-controlled tests of psi that can be replicated by independent investigators."

“Like going to Las Vegas and throwing down a million dollars to win a nickel.”

"I don't think torture belongs in the American arsenal. I think torture is illegal, is immoral, but I would go further and argue that it doesn't work. These silly scenarios [in which] the terrorist knows where the bomb is that's about to go off in 30 minutes — that's not reality. Further, you have to judge what you get in information versus the strategic loss that you take when it is revealed, as it will be inevitably, that a country is employing torture.

In Madrid, [I chaired] a working group on intelligence at the time of the revelations of the abuses in Iraq. I was being pummeled by men who are not squeamish, not hand-wringing compassionate folks, [who said] it was worse than immoral — it was stupid. The information really had very little value, and yet the loss that we took strategically to our reputation is tremendous. This is like going to Las Vegas and throwing down a million dollars to win a nickel.

Finally, you take into account that [using torture] changes the nature of our own society, and that is a tremendous cost. [As for legal justifications], I would find a legal brief more compelling if I knew the lawyer had witnessed an actual waterboarding — more so, had the author been waterboarded. Let's waterboard a panel of lawyers and see where they come out," – Brian Jenkins, Senior Advisor to the President of the RAND Corporation.

One point stands out to me in this:

"[Using torture] changes the nature of our own society."

I wonder whether people have fully absorbed this fact.