Friday, November 26, 2010

The word of the day is panjandrum:

[Apparently <PAN- comb. form + an arbitrary second element. (Any deliberate echo of PANGERAN n. seems unlikely.)
  The word is supposed to have been coined in 1754 or 1755 as part of a farrago of nonsense composed by Samuel Foote (1720-77), actor and dramatist, to test the memory of his fellow actor Charles Macklin, who had asserted that he could repeat anything after hearing it once. In the first published version the relevant passage (attributed to Foote) reads as follows:
  1825 M. EDGEWORTH Harry & Lucy Concl. II. 153 And there were present the Picninnies, and the Joblillies, and the Garyulies, and the Grand Panjandrum himself, with the little round button at top.
  The composition of the passage has also been attributed to the actor James Quin (1693-1766): see N. & Q. (1850) 16 Nov. 405.

    1. (A mock title for) a mysterious (freq. imaginary) personage of great power or authority; a pompous or pretentious official; a self-important person in authority. Also Grand Panjandrum, Great Panjandrum.
  In quot. 1825 in extended use, of a particularly showy flower.
  Quot. 18252 follows shortly after the passage quoted in the etymological note above, of which some quotations are extended echoes.

    2. Ceremonial fuss or formality; rigmarole. Now rare.  (OED)

"Swiftness is part of his triumph and of his character’s blinkered, annihilating aggression. As Elomire, on the other hand, Hyde Pierce is a master of the slow burn, a sort of panjandrum of pique. His suffering is terrific to watch; it lends oxygen to Rylance’s astonishing linguistic pinwheeling. Dazed by Valere’s marathon of conceit—it runs to about four hundred and fifty lines—Elomire sinks beyond boredom, into a deep and infuriating loneliness. He twists his handkerchief into knots, slugs wine from a decanter, and briefly leaves the stage to bang his head against the wall, in the sure knowledge that Valere won’t notice."

 - John Lahr, "Screaming Me-Mes: David Hirson and David Mamet on life in the theatre", 25 October 2010 The New Yorker

No comments: