An informal discussion of a likely trajectory of the word 'guy'
Fascinating that the word "guy" gained popularity in early 19th Century America.
Apparently "guy" was a Britishism that stems from the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, in which Guy Fawkes was caught planting enough gunpowder to blow sky high the Parliament building, along with the Protestant king, queen and heir to the throne. In an annual national celebration effigies of Fawkes and the other plotters are burnt.
So an informal designation of any effigy was "guy," as in "we need another guy for the bonfire." Of course those guys were always dressed in rags. Who wants to burn good money?
Well, you never know which twist in meaning a word might take. Human language is essentially metaphorical. So it's very natural that the word guy would come to denote any badly dressed man or loutish sort.
Now we come to 19th Century America. In that era, after Jefferson defeated Adams, the newly empowered "common man" was overturning every idea and term that smacked of elitism and privilege (Hamiltonism was OUT). So at some point a group of "lower class" men began referring to each other with friendly disdain as "just another guy." After all, America gained great vigor from these poorer classes.
The phrase "just another guy" is similar to the phrase "just another bozo on the bus," which could easily be rendered in Britain as "just another bloke on the bus." Bozo the Clown was a TV entertainer of the 1950s. "Blok" is/was Dutch for "block" as in "dimwit." "Bozo," "bloke" and "guy" all derive from the idea of "here comes another dummie."
Or think of American infantrymen referring to themselves as "grunts." No grand titles needed when men really talk.
It seems highly plausible that the gallows humor of enlisted men contributed to the popularity of "guy" (War of 1812, Mexican War, Civil War), "bloke" (Crimean War, Boer War and First World War) and "bozo" (Korean War, Vietnam War).
"Bloke/blok" seems to have entered British vernacular via Australians, probably via Australian military contingents used in the wars of the 19th and early 20th Centuries. This makes sense, as Australia was then in close contact with Dutch East India colonies.
Eventually, of course, the humorous origin of the term "guy" was lost and it became an acceptable informal synonym for any grown American male. Children and animals often are tagged as "little guy." Similarly for "bloke." You never know, "bozo" might one day become a vernacular synonym for "man."
It's funny that feminists persuaded everybody that we should not use the word "man" when "man or woman" is meant. But ordinary young women quickly turned the tables, letting "hey guys" mean a mixed group or a group of girls only. Well, they are the equals of men, so I see their point. Guys quickly picked up on the usefulness of the catchall "you guys," which sounds cooler than "you all" or "hey, people" (depending on who is listening).
You know, the paradox really shows two sides of the same coin. In the first case, women want to be recognized as having the same rights and social status as men. In the second case, women are expressing that girls want to be boys or at least to be treated the same as boys -- pretty much. (Please guys, these last two paragraphs are not meant as fightin' words, but only as a feeble male attempt at humor in line with the jocose origins of the word "guy.")
Ladies, what do you say?
Fascinating that the word "guy" gained popularity in early 19th Century America.
Apparently "guy" was a Britishism that stems from the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, in which Guy Fawkes was caught planting enough gunpowder to blow sky high the Parliament building, along with the Protestant king, queen and heir to the throne. In an annual national celebration effigies of Fawkes and the other plotters are burnt.
So an informal designation of any effigy was "guy," as in "we need another guy for the bonfire." Of course those guys were always dressed in rags. Who wants to burn good money?
Well, you never know which twist in meaning a word might take. Human language is essentially metaphorical. So it's very natural that the word guy would come to denote any badly dressed man or loutish sort.
Now we come to 19th Century America. In that era, after Jefferson defeated Adams, the newly empowered "common man" was overturning every idea and term that smacked of elitism and privilege (Hamiltonism was OUT). So at some point a group of "lower class" men began referring to each other with friendly disdain as "just another guy." After all, America gained great vigor from these poorer classes.
The phrase "just another guy" is similar to the phrase "just another bozo on the bus," which could easily be rendered in Britain as "just another bloke on the bus." Bozo the Clown was a TV entertainer of the 1950s. "Blok" is/was Dutch for "block" as in "dimwit." "Bozo," "bloke" and "guy" all derive from the idea of "here comes another dummie."
Or think of American infantrymen referring to themselves as "grunts." No grand titles needed when men really talk.
It seems highly plausible that the gallows humor of enlisted men contributed to the popularity of "guy" (War of 1812, Mexican War, Civil War), "bloke" (Crimean War, Boer War and First World War) and "bozo" (Korean War, Vietnam War).
"Bloke/blok" seems to have entered British vernacular via Australians, probably via Australian military contingents used in the wars of the 19th and early 20th Centuries. This makes sense, as Australia was then in close contact with Dutch East India colonies.
Eventually, of course, the humorous origin of the term "guy" was lost and it became an acceptable informal synonym for any grown American male. Children and animals often are tagged as "little guy." Similarly for "bloke." You never know, "bozo" might one day become a vernacular synonym for "man."
It's funny that feminists persuaded everybody that we should not use the word "man" when "man or woman" is meant. But ordinary young women quickly turned the tables, letting "hey guys" mean a mixed group or a group of girls only. Well, they are the equals of men, so I see their point. Guys quickly picked up on the usefulness of the catchall "you guys," which sounds cooler than "you all" or "hey, people" (depending on who is listening).
You know, the paradox really shows two sides of the same coin. In the first case, women want to be recognized as having the same rights and social status as men. In the second case, women are expressing that girls want to be boys or at least to be treated the same as boys -- pretty much. (Please guys, these last two paragraphs are not meant as fightin' words, but only as a feeble male attempt at humor in line with the jocose origins of the word "guy.")
Ladies, what do you say?
No comments:
Post a Comment