Dwight Garner’s NY Times review (archived) of Ray Isle’s The World in a Wineglass is a master class in how to write a negative review of a book by someone you respect; here’s the nub of it:
Isle is among the best, and best-known, wine commentators in the United States. For many years, he has been the wine editor for Food & Wine magazine. He is a genial presence when he appears, glass in hand, on the “Today” show. His palate is beyond reliable. It should be insured, as Betty Grable’s legs were, by Lloyd’s of London. I would take his wine advice to the bank. What I would not do is take his new book out of the bookstore. It’s too heavy. It’s also too padded, like a student’s term paper. If it were an Easter basket, it would be 95 percent shredded green paper. You must really poke around to find the candy eggs.
But I’m bringing it here for the delightful ending:
There is a certain kind of food and wine writing that walks unwittingly into a class minefield. The liberal urban writer is dropped onto a stony goat path among artistic or successful rural people, or both: How should he describe them? What not to do is to baste them in joie de vivre. Isle consistently and patronizingly refers to people as “cheerful and twinkly” or from the “wise old elf school.” He says that they are “extraordinarily animated” or “fiercely animated” or possessed of “an infectious, impish smile” or “irrepressible.” It’s as if he is describing toddlers, or the brain addled. No one would refer to a lawyer, or an ambassador, or a scholar or indeed a wine writer in this manner.
One Slovenian winemaker says to Isle, in my favorite lines in the book: “I need critics! I don’t need this wow-brow shikimiki zak-zak!” Isle presumes the last bit means something like “useless hipster yes-men.” Shout it loud: Down with wow-brow shikimiki zak-zak! Up with Ray Isle, who has better books in him.
“wow-brow” is a great expression. It encompasses much more than high-brow pretentiousness, namely any kind of mindless enthusiasm.
Exactly!
Wow-brow is what Brezhnev have had.
Schickimicki in de.wikipedia.
Schickimicki in de.wikipedia.
Perhaps the Slovenian winemaker meant what in my English would be called foo-foo or frou-frou or la-dee-dah, i.e. pretentiously heavy with high-class signifiers.
There is of course a vogue in certain circles for making your wine stand out by giving it (at least for the export market) a hipster-ironic-or-jocular name. I predict Wow-Brow Shikimiki Zak-Zak may be appearing soon on the label of an undistinguished Australian shiraz, retail price around US$14 the bottle in the NYC market.
Or perhaps the Zak-Zak varietal from the Shikimiki vineyards of the Wow-Brow Winery.
Slovenia has already embraced the „hipster-ironic or jocular name“. Last time I was there I enjoyed a bottle of „Jebačin“ („fucker“), a very nice red from the Pasji Reb vineyard.
Craft beer names seem to have moved to the wild and absurd over about as many years as band names have, say 1980s to the 2000s (beer) vs. 1950s to the 1970s (Rock ‘n’ Roll).
Wiki
[Literaturangabe benötigt]
That wikipedia.de article is a great blast from the past for me – we lived in Munich from 2000-2005 and my boss fancied himself a sort of local playboy, so I not only heard “schickimicki” daily, but I was also constantly bombarded by references to every member of the clique of useless local celebrities the wikipedia article mentions as exemplifying the term: Rudolph Moshammer, Michael Käfer, Uschi Glas, Roberto Blanco, Julia Siegel… Boris Becker came up a lot, too, if I remember correctly.
we lived in Munich from 2000-2005 … Rudolph Moshammer … Roberto Blanco …
The good ol’ days !
Moshammer was murdered in January 2005. Blanco attended the funeral. M’s last dog Daisy (he had had four of them) died just short of two years later. I’m surprised you didn’t mention her.
I wonder if „zakzak“ comes from German as well. In Austria „Zack,zack!“ means „right away!“, „ get on this!“. Kind of thing an annoying schickimicki types might say to their underlings.
I read „wow brow“ as Isle‘s condescending transcription of a Slovene saying „low brow“ but producing a heavily velarized „l“ sound.
Why condescending ? Would Isle sin by writing what he heard ? To drag in the word “transcription” here is Bauernfängerei.
Huh – I’d always been told “schickimicki” was based on French “chic” (and mickey mouse), but wikipedia.de brought in this italian term “sciccheria”, so, curious, I looked up the etymology of “chic” and got this:
“mid 19th century: from French, probably from German Schick ‘skill’.”
So… things have gone full circle?
@AG:
The TLFi reckons they have, yes:
I don’t think Wikipedia contradicts your understanding that Schickimicki comes directly from “der Chic bzw. Schick.” On the other hand, it seems unlikely that Schickeria could be independent of Italian sciccheria, which surely has a pronunciation as close to identical as German and Italian phonologies allow.
It may also help that in Italian the adjective chic is typically used in earnest (as the TLFi seems to imply it also is in French), but as Treccani says: “L’adattamento ital. scicche e i der. sciccóso e sciccherìa sono usati sempre in tono scherz. o ironico.” I seem to understand that Schickimicki and Schickeria are likewise intended as jocular or ironic.
@Vanya, Stu Clayton:
Eye dialect would seem condescending to me too, but I dare say (despite being a non-native speaker) that wow-brow has to represent /waʊ braʊ/, while eye dialect for low brow with an exceptionally dark l would be whoa-brow instead.
eye dialect
Does Isle speak Slovenian ? If not, he will be unable to write Slovenian eye dialect. Even if he speaks Slovenian, that doesn’t ensure that his readers do, so eye dialect would be lost on them.
Find something to get upset about, even if you have to put it there yourself ! The Easter Bunny would approve.
Does Isle speak Slovenian ? If not, he will be unable to write Slovenian eye dialect.
Don’t be silly, Giacomo is talking about English eye dialect, and I agree with him: wow-brow has to represent /waʊ braʊ/.
What is eye-dialectic about “wow-brow” ? Two familiar words joined by a hyphen not intended to indicate a pronunciation other than the familiar ones. Is “high-brow” eye dialect ?
I agree with him: wow-brow has to represent /waʊ braʊ/.
Or course it does, what else ? Your point being ? Is “/waʊ braʊ/” eye dialect ?
Where does “eye dialect” come in here at all ??
Oh well, I wasn’t thinking deeply about the definition of eye dialect. As long as we agree about the pronunciation, call it what you will.
An attempt was made to brand something as condescending. A hue and cry was raised to that end, featuring “eye dialect”. But in “wow-brow” I find no trace of condescension or eye dialect.
As I indicated in the very first comment here, I think “wow-brow” is rather clever.
“Who will rid me of these turbulent nannies ?”
Empr. à l’all. Schick (déverbal de schicken [proprement « faire que quelque chose arrive »] au sens de « arranger, préparer »)
huh! i would not have expected yiddish שיקן / shikn [to send] to be cognate with “chic”*! but now that i do, the potential for puns with (unrelated) שיכּור / shiker [drunk] and שיקסע / shikse [non-jewish woman] has expanded rapidly!
.
* yiddish does have שיק / shik [elegance] – contrasting /i/ with the verb’s /ɪ/, i believe – but i’ve rarely heard it used.
@stu
A little bit of preppie (or NY sophisticate) humour goes a long way. It helps if the preppie (or NY sophisticate) is able to laugh at himself. Here is a Berlin sophisticate for comparison:
https://www.ardmediathek.de/video/verstehen-sie-spass/max-raabe-als-nerviger-kellner/das-erste/Y3JpZDovL3N3ci5kZS9hZXgvbzE5MzQ1MjI
I seem to understand that Schickimicki and Schickeria are likewise intended as jocular or ironic
The sentiment expressed by using these terms can range from wry amusement and ironic distancing to downright disdain and loathing, especially for Schickimicki.
I never heard these words used with any other attitude than “downright disdain and loathing”. Never “jocular or ironic”.
Wonderfully satirized in the classic German TV series Kir Royal.
I agree with him: wow-brow has to represent /waʊ braʊ/.
That’s how people with some linguistic training think, or non-natives accustomed to phonetic spelling, but not ordinary native speakers of English. “wow” strikes me as a completely plausible “eye dialect” transcription of “Elmer Fudd” English because the writer is trying to show the speaker was trying to say “low”, not “woah”.
There’s also the issue that Slovenian has no initial “w” sound, so English “wow” would usually come out as “ vaʊ”.
@Stu Clayton:
In my book, nothing.
I was trying to say that if Isle had heard /ɫoʊ braʊ/, understood low-brow but printed woah-brow to underline a foreigner’s non-standard pronunciation, I would consider that eye dialect and find it condescending.
I did say I don’t think wow-brow reflects either a pronunciation of /woʊ braʊ/ or an understanding of low-brow. I thought I had implied clearly enough (“but … while eye dialect … would be … instead”) that also means I don’t think wow-brow is eye-dialect and thus condescending.
Apparently I rudely overestimated the clarity of my intended implication. I have no idea if the Easter Bunny is supposed to be extra pleased with me for helping you find something to get upset about, or displeased that I made it too easy for you to put it there yourself. I guess I’ll find out at Easter!
@Vanya:
Certainly our gracious host is a person with linguistic training and I’m a non-native, but I wouldn’t say I’m accustomed to phonetic spelling.
Be that as it may, it seems unimaginable to me that wow-brow shikimiki zak-zak is anything but a series of three rhyming pairs.* In that series, the expected /waʊ braʊ/ works, as does /vaʊ braʊ/ (though I remain of the opinion eye dialect for that would be vow-brow) or for that matter /laʊ braʊ/. Conversely, /loʊ braʊ/, /ɫoʊ braʊ/ or /woʊ braʊ/ don’t.
I don’t think we can gather here a representative panel of ordinary native speakers of English, but we can get more context from the author. The first time he printed that quote, in a 2009 issue of Food and Wine (the article is currently readable in PDF here), the full paragraph was the following.
I’ll double down on my reading that this is not the prose of someone who understood low-brow but is using eye dialect. However, I’m happy to agree to disagree and move on before the Easter Bunny gets (more?) upset at me!
* Or maybe zak-zak doesn’t count as rhyming since it’s mere reduplication, but I’ll have to let others provide the more appropriate technical terminology.
I now see clearly the connections between the Easter Bunny and turbulent nannies. Of course I myself drew these connections. But I could not have done so without the dots provided by others. Thanks, guys !
@giacomo
Fair enough, the idea Kristancic was going for the rhymes seems pretty plausible. I‘m lost at „his native language was Ales“ – meaning ales as in beer I suppose. But capitalizing it is confusing. And why is a winemaker‘s drink of choice ale? Particularly in Slovenia, where I recall the beers being mediocre.
Ah, sorry for the lack of further context!
The folk hero of the article is called Ales Kristanicic. His “actual native language” is named after him. I’d have imagined that should make it “Alesian,” but Isle thought otherwise.
“wow-brow shiki-miki zak-zak” is clearly the start of the counting-out rhyme our times demand, but i’m not sure what the rest of it is.
i would propose something that scans
/ -, / – / -, / –
/ -, / – / -, / –
/ -, / – / –
/ -, / – / –
/ / /
I am belatedly realizing that this phrase somehow reminds me of the Oktoberfest-and-beyond drinking chant that goes something like (both pronunciations and transcriptions are varied …) “Zicke Zacke Zicke Zacke Hoy! Hoy! Hoy!” Although maybe Slovenian beer-as-such isn’t worthy of such praise, as Vanya suggests.
For kids:
Zicke Zacke Hühnerkacke
For fervid bunnies (»Das Video wird nun intensiv ausgewertet«):
Zicke zacke oder Nazi-Gruß
The second link is the same as the first?
I think Stu meant to post this; https://youtu.be/Zlf-Fa2o_vA?si=AgeNBOW8eGqz9LnS
Interesting example of how conditioning in your youth is hard to overcome.
Football chant, sometimes satirized-or-something as Hundehütte! Hundehütte! Wau! Wau! Wau! “doghouse, doghouse, bow-wow-wow”. Keep in mind that soccer and beer are strongly linked.
Interesting example of how conditioning in your youth is hard to overcome.
On a related note, I read that when the NPD made it into some state parliaments in the 1960s, they instructed their deputies to always vote with the left hand, to prevent cases of old comrades falling back into old habits.
I once got a little booklet from the SPD. It presented a few quotes and invited the reader to guess if they were from the NPD or the AfD*, implying this was going to be extremely difficult. It’s actually very easy: while the content is often identical, the NPD is the one that routinely puts national and sozial into the same sentence; the AfD usually pays more attention.
* the alternative to Germany
The correct link is Zicke Zacke oder Nazi-Gruß, an article in the Jüdische Allgemeine a year ago.
* the alternative to Germany
The alternative for Germany: Alternative für Deutschland.
If the AfD were to espouse the slogan “The alternative to Germany”, I suppose that would be in the context of advising furriners to go elsewhere. Which they do advise.
I’m staying put.
I read that when the NPD made it into some state parliaments in the 1960s, they instructed their deputies to always vote with the left hand, to prevent cases of old comrades falling back into old habits.
Perhaps the scriptwriters picked that up for the character of Dr. Strangelove (1964).
I heard much later from my sister that my father took my mother to see that film, and stormed out of the theater in a rage. Apparently he had expected a gung-ho, pro-American movie (“learned to love the bomb”). What a dork.
* the alternative to Germany
The alternative for Germany: Alternative für Deutschland.
I had taken the translation to be a deliberate joke by DM.
I thought DM’s joke was pretty obvious (and funny).
I assumed it was a joke. My response was one as well.
However upset some people are inclined to get about the AfD – Germany has been through worse. The AfD is not an alternative to Germany.
Even the US would survive another, worse dose of Trump for four years. That might hamper hopes of imposing itself as a “world leader”, but it will still be able to push other countries around – for a while yet. Rome was not razed in one day.
@ Vanya
“wow” strikes me as a completely plausible “eye dialect” transcription of “Elmer Fudd” English because the writer is trying to show the speaker was trying to say “low”, not “woah”.
I think the “Elmer Fudd” version would be more like “whoah-bwow”… (“Wow” gets the vowel sound for the first word wrong.)
I assumed it was a joke. My response was one as well.
It sure doesn’t read like that. It reads like a straightforward correction: “The alternative for Germany: Alternative für Deutschland.” Maybe if you explain to me the hidden hilarity I’ll be able to better calibrate your responses.
My original comment, as you say, is straightforward. No need for calibration. What ensued was a little round of more-humorous-than-thou. You’ll have to ask those who kicked that off what their motives were. I just played along.
Whether or not DM’s rendering of “AfD” was a joke or a typo, it’s misleading.
I was providing the party’s True Name. Read it in a bitter and gloomy mood, the way the word mirth sounds rather than what it means.
Define “survive”. There probably wouldn’t be a nuclear war, but other than that…?
The US is still a Federal system. Recall that Trump was fairly ineffective in his first term and is even older now. The President also has less power than commonly assumed. Republicans in Congress have managed to do far more damage to the US over the past 20 years than Presidents. Trump combined with a Republican Senate and House will be a disaster. Trump with a Democratic controlled Congress will be a loud mouthed farce. So vote local is the message.
Recall that Trump was fairly ineffective in his first term …
If that’s your take, it shows how effective he was … at distracting from those who were doing the real damage: Mnuchin, and packing the Supreme Court.
Packing the Supreme Court was all Congress. McConnell gets the credit for that not Trump. And it started when Obama got stimied in 2016.
Mnuchin was the kind of slimeball that President Cruz would also have happily appointed, so again, not Trump being particularly effective.
Trump has been most effective, and continues to be effective even now, at turning the GOP into an explicitly isolationist, pro-Russia, anti-EU party. In some ways he has been more effective at this while out of office than he was when in office. But again, this requires the support of a GOP Congress.
Not that I particularly want to get into this, but I feel obliged to point out that Trump (and his would-be handlers) have learned from their failures that it’s vital to get utter toadies into all responsible positions as soon as possible so that he won’t have to deal with those underlings whose notions of “constitutionalism” and “legality” stymied him from time to time. If he gets back in, things will be much worse.
That’s what the plan to make tens of thousands of federal employees fireable and then fire them immediately is about. The list of replacements is already pretty long. (And of course Trump hasn’t been writing it alone, but there are enough stink tanks for that.)
Even the US would survive another, worse dose of Trump for four years.
Define “survive”.
Indeed. There’s a very real danger that the USA will “survive” Trump in exactly the same way that Hungary has “survived” Orbán.
Trump (and his would-be handlers) have learned from their failures that it’s vital to get utter toadies into all responsible positions as soon as possible
And also to have prepared policies and legal briefs. The next Trump administration will be much more organized, even if he’s still the same chaotic narcissist with the tempers and the attention span of a three-year-old toddler.
“isolationist, pro-Russia”
I don’t think Iranians will call Trump isolationist. Not only Iranians. China. Whole pro-Palestinian crowd.
At the level of blah-blah-blah (for I don’t know details – but certainly hear some blah-blah-blah) Trumists and anti-Trumpists argued a lot about who is the arch enemy (Russia vs. China) but both agreed that there is an arch enemy.