The Future of Politics & Advertisements

Little annoys me more than the poor decision-making skills of authors when it comes to branding the future.  The names and ethnicities of politicians strive to shock but elicit nothing but groans. 

There will never be a President Osama bin Reebok, III.  Nor will "Hail to the Chief" ever accompany Madame President Wendy Shorty-Muhammad into the corridors of power.  I understand why science fiction writers want their future to reflect the marginal values of the present, but there will never be a President who sells half his name to a shoe company or spent her formative years in porn. (There might be a Muslim President one day, but years of poorly thought out speculative fiction make the name difficult to consider soberly.)

Similarly, pharmacies of the future will not stock medication with names like "Happitol" or "Blissbutrin."  People will not ask their pharmacist whether "Breathix" is right for them, or what the recommended dosage of "Muscledrine" is.  Medications will not be "cleverly" christened.  Actual people don't need the Head-On Apply-Directly-to-the-Forehead approach to naming medications.  Except apparently they do.

Seems I'm wrong about the future.  The present too, for that matter:

On page 40 of the latest issue of Rolling Stone appears a phrase straight out of bad science fiction: "President Barack Hussein Obama."  A year ago that phrase would've clunked like so much speculative overkill.  ("A President whose name almost rhymes with 'Osama'?  Not likely.  We'll see Little Oral Annie in the Rose Garden first.")

Page 41 of the latest issue of Rolling Stone consists entirely of an ad for Abilify, the latest and most ghastly named entrant into the already crowded field of antidepressants.  (Possible side effects include "an inner sense of restlessness or need to move," but be careful, because Abilify "can affect your judgment and motor skills," so if you need to move avoid cars and heavy machinery.  Don't ask anyone for a ride either, because Abilify may cause permanent abnormal and incontrollable facial movements that send people the wrong signal.)

All of which is only to say that while the future may be now, it lacks imagination.  It could've been so much better, if only we'd applied some Thought-On Directly Where It Reels ... 

Comments

[Ahistoricality]

We are living in the future
I'll tell you how I know
I read it in the paper
Fifteen years ago
We're all driving rocket ships
And talking with our minds
And wearing turquoise jewelry
And standing in soup lines
We are standing in soup lines -- John Prine, "Living in the Future"

Introducing the song on his live album he says that it was supposed to be about the future, but it took him seven years to write, so at best it's about the present. Jeanne Dixon has days like that.

Twenty years ago I would have scoffed at the idea of presidential dynasties, the US becoming a colonial power, or me being an historian. Stuff happens.

[The Necromancer]

You suddenly make me think of When Gravity Fails.

[Sisyphus]

Or The Year of Glad.

[Patterico]

Irrelevant picky usage question:

Who here agrees with placing "an" in front of "history" or "historian"?

I don't, myself. My argument is: we're not Brits. Since we pronounce the "h," we should say "a history" or "a historian."

Am I wrong here?

[SEK]

I'll address the easiest issue first:

Who here agrees with placing "an" in front of "history" or "historian"?

It's not that we're British, it's the first syllable of "historian" is unstressed, whereas the first syllable of "history" is. Because the unstressed "h" is inaudible, it falls under the rule we use for "an." So, technically: "An historian writes a history." The flip side of this is when "u" functions as a consonant sound, as in "uniform." No one ever says "an uniform" or "an universe." Same rule. It's only rendered a little awkward in the case of "historian" because some dialects aspirate the "h."

(Such are the things you learn while doing eight years of speech therapy.)

Now for the more complicated stuff.

[SEK]

(In the other thread, that is.)

[Patterico]

SEK:

Do you say "an uniformity"??

If that's really the rule, it *shouldn't* be.

[Ahistoricality]

Thanks, Scott: that's the best explanation I've ever seen of the a/an usage issue.

Patterico: your trollish nature is showing, both in the nitpick itself and in your inexplicable inability to understand the simple explanation. An unbiased observer would simply note that there's no relevant pronunciation difference between "uniform" and "uniformity" which makes your query a universal bore.

[Patterico]

Didn't mean it as an attack, which seems to be how to took it. I always wondered about it, and thought this would be a fun place to raise it, because of the English expertise of our host.

It's not that we're British, it's the first syllable of "historian" is unstressed, whereas the first syllable of "history" is. Because the unstressed "h" is inaudible, it falls under the rule we use for "an."

See, to me, it's audible. I can see how the lack of a stress could arguably make it slightly less audible, but I think the same would go for "uniform" and "uniformity."

[Patterico]

Maybe, as Scott says, it's my "dialect." I grew up in Fort Worth, Texas.

[Patterico]

Btw, instead of this:

Patterico: your trollish nature is showing, both in the nitpick itself and in your inexplicable inability to understand the simple explanation. An unbiased observer would simply note that there's no relevant pronunciation difference between "uniform" and "uniformity" which makes your query a universal bore.

Would it have been so hard to say this?

Patterico: the answer to your question is that there's no relevant pronunciation difference between "uniform" and "uniformity."

Just askin'.

[Ahistoricality]

No, wouldn't have been hard at all. But it also wouldn't have expressed my point, which was that the question and followup were -- unintentionally or not -- decidedly trollish in tone and effect.

Nor would it have allowed me to demonstrate the proper use of a/an with u-initial words in "An unbiased" and "a universal."

I'm staying out of the other discussion entirely, because that would be feeding the troll.

[Patterico]

Yum!

[Jon H]

"Similarly, pharmacies of the future will not stock medication with names like "Happitol" or "Blissbutrin." "

Actually, I have wondered about the origin of "tadalafil", which has the brand name Cialis - the erection pill.

I suspect when they were coming up with the name, they pronounced it as "Ta-Da!-lafil".

[PSlaven]

Scooter,

Is it possible that the author is merely using such names as a shorthand for the intended effects of this medication, such as Forgettol in Lethem's "Gun, with Occasional Music"?

Ignoring the collective thwack of so many foreheads slapped in unison after that question, the reader may not have yet gleaned the medicinal uses of said substance. So rather than follow the introduction of Avunculatrix with a list of intended uses, and possible side effects, I won't fault the author for making the choice to explain the product via its name by calling it Harddon.

-Patrick

[SEK]

Patrick,

"Scooter"? Who is this "Scooter" person of whom you speak? I've never been heard of him.

But yes, I know it's more often short-cut than social statement -- as opposed to Wallace's "Year of the Glad," mentioned above -- but it still irks me when pharmaceutical companies and science fiction authors try to walk the fine line between transparency and scientific sounding.

Jon,

I initially read that as "tralalafil," which sounds like treatment for a sore Diane Keaton.

Patterico,

See, to me, it's audible. I can see how the lack of a stress could arguably make it slightly less audible, but I think the same would go for "uniform" and "uniformity."

The stress pattern's aren't the same though: the first syllables of "uniform" and "uniformity" are both stressed, and the "u" functions as "y" ini both instances, so it's not quite the same as history/historian.

[JPool]

I somehow can't call to mind these American-English speakers who don't aspirate the H. Can you suggest a dialect,maybe? As long as it's aspirated, I can't really see the circumstances where a spoken "an historian" would sound right.

Boy it's a small internet. I don't think I've "seen" Patrick since we ran into each in downtown Decatur.

[PSlaven]

@JPool: When in doubt, I like to attribute American English idiosyncrasies to people living on the Outer banks of NC, or folks from rural Maine. I do this because a) it's a good rule of thumb to adopt - both people talk funny to a nearly absurd degree, and b) I lie pathologically.

And BTW (apologies for derailing a thread), if you ever saw me in Decatur - EVER - just forget those moments. Nothing good happens in Downtown Decatur, if you've been there you know this. And who are you anyway?

[SEK]

Christ, it really is a small internet, isn't it? Pat and JPool, you share an alma mater.

[JPool]

Yup. This is Jeremy from Emory. Patrick I and shared a number of beers and sympathy during a rather tumultuous time in his life.
I'm sure Patrick would have put it together eventually. I figured out the likely LSU connection between you two fairly quickly, because there have to a limited number of Patrick Slavens in the world; there just have to.