See page 18
Sir: I came on the following three excerpts on consecutive pages of a recent Spectator and a fourth in the London Review of Books:'. . . the dullest Anglican ear cannot fail to catch a note of triumphalism . . . . without arousing resentment or tri- omphalism . . . `. . furious allegations of Catholic triumphalism . . . ' and '. . . how- ever one disliked Thatcher's triumphalism
• • . ' — in the space of half an hour. This letter has nothing to do with religion or politics; it is prompted by dismay at the soft Spot these excellent writers obviously share for a horrible word. (After this, every pub- lished page seemed to be blistered with the word, in two cases expanded to 'triumphal- %tic' [uglier and weaker still], so `tri- umphalisticalism' may be round the corner. Artificial, ill-formed, gaseous and impre- cise, the word has probably never been uttered by human lips.) Of course, a vague meaning is within reach; but, wondering what a triumphalist could be, and how long the word had been in existence, I searched two respectable dic- tionaries from the late Seventies and found It in neither. What emergency in the Eight- ies can have called it into being? There are plenty of alternatives; 'gloating' (1574), for example ('gazing exultingly, especially with a wicked or malicious joy'), would have fit- ted the four quoted passages and the writ- ers' intentions far more tellingly than 'tri- umphalism'. Shakespeare's clash of empires and Milton's Satanic legions could do with- out it, and so can we. It suggests a proces- sional elephant astray from some seedy durbar, limping and trumpeting through column after column, and it ought to be led away, dismantled, hosed down and set to browse in the theme park it should never have left.
Patrick Leigh Ferrnor
240 22 Kardamyli, Messenia, Greece
Previous page
