Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2015 January 15

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 15

Who was the "Prince of Braganza" involved in 1938 Brazil coup?

According to a somewhat removed source, someone styled as "Prince of Braganza" was involved in a failed coup d'état against Getúlio Vargas. The timeline doesn't seem to match up with any of the generally accepted Brazilian pretenders so just wondering who he was. On a less serious note, I'm somewhat disappointed Hollywood hasn't got to making a movie with a president personally fighting off rebels with a machine gun. Hack (talk) 02:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The Pentagon has a finger in American war movies. The President has a finger in the Pentagon. The President has better things to do than justify to the public why he's not out fighting bad guys, like the cool President does. Seriously though, I've never heard of this guy, either, and it's bugging me. We'll get to the bottom of this. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:30, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

There's this Princess Braganza. You might want to Google Translate that. She seems to have annoyed a lot of slaveowners. An older relative, perhaps. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:38, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Lot of (probably better) clues at House of Braganza, if you haven't been there yet. And I just noticed the aforementioned Elizabeth is also an Isabel. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:40, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Just as an aside, the source for the Vargas machine gun story is an anecdote in The Accidental President of Brazil. Hack (talk) 02:41, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

This Prince João Maria of Orléans-Braganza seems a bit shrouded in mystery. Could be him. Seems like the sort of thing that would have been remembered better. If it happened at all. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

An even more removed source suggests that the "prince" was killed in the incident, identifying him as "Prince Don Pedro Braganza". Hack (talk) 03:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

There are a lot of Pedros, but that narrows it down. Maybe Pedro de Alcântara, Prince of Grão-Pará? He died in January 1940, apparently of nothing at all. Might fit. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Probably not him. This says the mystery prince was the "second son of the Pretender to the throne". That narrows it down a bit more. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:41, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Something doesn't add up. A prince being killed in a fascist plot should have attracted more attention than a regional US paper and a couple of wire reports in an Australian newspaper. Hack (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Maybe we should be looking into this "Frank M. Garcia" from the New York Times. If I was a reporter before people could Google, I could see how lying might be tempting. Many still do it, habitually. All I can tell is he died at 71 on June 21, 1958. The rest is paywalled. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

FWIW, the Portuguese WP article on the incident and those of the protagonists don't mention anything about a prince. Hack (talk) 04:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

A (historically) great man once said "For all I know, our navy was shooting at whales out there." What purpose would be served by including a pretend pretender? Maybe just spice. I don't know this general stage of history well. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Reading the NYT report in full, a Prince John of Orleans and Braganza was supposedly leading the charge. Hack (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

An obituary of Prince João Maria of Orléans-Braganza places him in Brazil at the time. According to pt:João Maria de Orléans e Bragança, he was the guy, though the entire article is unsourced. Hack (talk) 06:27, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Dom João's life in the family of the exiled Imperial family of Brazil and as a pilot is well-known. It is the stuff of swashbuckling romance even without the "royal revolutionary" angle, although that legacy was in his blood as a descendant of the regicide, Philippe Égalité. He was a great-great-grandson in the male line of the Citizen King, Louis Philippe d'Orléans, who was banished from the throne of France in 1848. João's grandfather, Gaston d'Orleans, Comte d'Eu, was sent in 1864 to Brazil to marry the younger daughter of Emperor Pedro II but, having caught the fancy of the elder daughter and heiress, Isabel of Braganza, the Princess Imperial swapped her own intended for her sister's and both couples lived happily ever after. Almost. Pedro II was a model monarch, but while traveling abroad left Isabel as regent who, in a spasm of religious remorse, couldn't resist the opportunity to free Brazil's slaves -- alienating both the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie of the empire. Thus there was nobody to defend the dynasty when the monarchy was overthrown in 1889, so the Orléans-Braganzas took up exile in the French Republic. Isabel and Gaston's eldest son was Pedro de Alcântara, Prince of Grão-Pará, who renounced his claim to Brazil's defunct throne in favor of a younger brother to marry a Bohemian countess in 1908. Their elder son, Pedro Gastão (1913-2007), would move to Rio and offer himself as a candidate for the throne until Brazil belatedly voted in 1993 not to restore the monarchy. Meanwhile Pedro's younger brother, Prince João (1916-2005), in 1949 married Fatima Chirine (1923-1990), an Arab aristocrat who was the widow of Prince Hassan Toussoun of Egypt and the mother of an adulterine daughter by King Farouk of Egypt, from whom she had fled into her Brazilian prince's arms. So Dom João's primary claim to fame is his creation of a royal trifecta of continents: Brazilian prince of French dynasty weds Egyptian sharifa. His handsome son and namesake became popularly known in Rio as João the Surfer, and was widely regarded as the odds-on favorite Braganza to become emperor had the 1993 referendum gone the other way. Compounding the senior João's Muslim/Catholic dynastic merger were the marriages of his sisters Isabel (1911-2003) and Francisca (1914-1968), to the respective pretenders to the thrones of France and Portugal. FactStraight (talk) 14:05, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Excellent. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

@FactStraight:, thanks for the summation. Could you point me in the direction of a reliable source that deals with the older João in detail? Hack (talk) 15:05, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Nope, I know of none. Just as I did not know of his participation in the attempted coup d'état against Vargas until I read this thread, his life is known piecemeal through occasional articles and various dynastic biographies. The fact that his first wife was the mother of King Farouk's illegitimate child has only recently been acknowledged in print. Although a lot was written of his brother and son during Brazil's 1993 referendum on restoration of the monarchy (about which English Wikipedia is virtually silent), he was not actively involved. His brother's and sisters' lives have been well-documented by Brazilian, French and Portuguese monarchists, so a little about him can be gleaned from their written and online works. Like all his siblings and his son, he was distinguished, learned and handsome. As noted above, Dom João (Don Juan, in Spanish) is the tale of a bona fide modern Prince Charming waiting to be filmed. FactStraight (talk) 03:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

singing totally different roles

I was wondering if we had an article on large transpositions between vocal performances by different performers. (e.g. soprano-type women singing elvis, etc). why is it not very common? In instrumentals it seems more common, but I could be wrong. 212.96.61.236 (talk) 02:46, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Sourcing could be a problem. Certainly all of us could come with anecdotal examples (such as Robert Merrill singing "Yankee Doodle Dandy"), but a list is liable to be inherently incomplete, and even an article on the general subject could suffer from an insufficiently precise definition. Specifically, it's possible we might already have an article, but what would its title be? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, yes, I was thinking along the same lines. So we don't really have such an article? I can think of a lot of specific examples as well, such as, for example Fitzgerald singing the same song Armstrong does! But is this more common to certain styles? (like jazz)? I looked for male versions of Rolling in the Deep, but the ones I found were high - it was transposed, but not down to a lower (baritone) role - why not? It would be perfect, it's very jazzy and deep for a woman, and would work well for a man the same way. I put in 'rolling in the deep cover male' and saw a cover by John Legend. What about others? Likewise, why are transpositions between tenor and baritone pieces not that common? Are people just very used to the way they were written?

Where did you find the Merrill "Yankee Doodle Dandy" thing? That is an interesting reference. I couldn't find a version on youtube though... 212.96.61.236 (talk) 03:20, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I have it on a CD. Here it is on youtube.[1] Did I mention he sings it with the Mormon Tabernacle Choir? (And I didn't have the title quite right - sorry.) Although as you discuss Ella vs. Louis, I'm not sure this is exactly what you had in mind. I was thinking more of singers performing stuff that's outside of their normal genre. Like if Black Sabbath were to sing some old standards in the style of Bing Crosby. (Or like something I actually saw on TV once - Ethel Merman singing "Gentle on My Mind".) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

One example that occurs to me is Tom Jones' cover of Prince's "Kiss". Prince sings it in falsetto, Tom sings it an octave down in his baritone range. --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:32, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

There's a bit of a problem for those staging 17th and 18th century opera such as Gluck's Orfeo ed Euridice, since the leading male role was often written for a castrato. There are a few countertenors that can do the job, but the choice is usually between having a woman dress up as a man and sing the part as written, or transpose it for a modern tenor. If you go for the former, you end up with a woman singing "What shall I do without Euridice? Whither shall I go without my beloved?" Alansplodge (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I have a recording of Dame Clara Butt singing that lovely aria. I rate it just as highly as my other recording, by Tito Schipa, and that is very high praise indeed. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I suppose that what I was getting at (in an attempt to address "why is it not very common?") was that many songs have lyrics that suggest that a man is singing to a woman or vice versa, and so having a member of the opposite sex sing the same lyrics requires either a change in the text or a willing suspension of disbelief, unless a same-sex relationship is implied, something that has only been acceptable in the mainstream in the last couple of decades. Simply a hypothesis; I can't find a reference to support it. Alansplodge (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

There's an old Scottish tune called "The Gallant Forty-Twa", whose lyrics suggest it's being sung by a woman, but all-male groups such as the Clancys[2] and the Irish Rovers had no hesitation in singing it.[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:42, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

In the early years of phonograph records, songs were often written to make the verse imply that it's a woman's words, and then the man goes ahead and sings those words. It seems funny today, but was not unusual then. The public was not really "gay-aware" as they are now. A couple of examples are "You'd Be Surprised"[4] and the similarly-themed "Charley, My Boy" (which musically refers back to the first one, though different composes),[5] both sung by here Billy Murray ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:50, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

And Eubie Blake's composition, "I'm Just Wild About Harry", which he himself would sing while playing the piano. (As did the presumably male character Daffy Duck in one cartoon.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Has any male person, other than a drag queen, ever sung "I Enjoy Being a Girl"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Who knows ([6])? Thanks many Baseball Bugs for the youtube link to the Victor record of Bill Murray, which is revealing the true existence of something like a genre of, it seems, a musical caricature. Nothing probable under the rule of Hi-fi electronics --Askedonty (talk) 08:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

A number of songs by Steeleye Span and the like switch roles. A more modern example is Steve Goodman's "Ballad of Penny Evans". —Tamfang (talk) 08:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

insane multiphonics (whistle-hum)

I was looking at this video -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoWN-_Ue4wk

I don't understand this technique. The result is incredibly impressive for an obvious amateur. In this csae though, why isn't this something that others can do? (For example he's a very poor singer.) Is this specific performer extremely unique? Why can't I find people doing this who are more honed? (Just as you can find performance whistlers.) 212.96.61.236 (talk) 04:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

There's not a lot to it. He's creating sounds from two sources simultaneously -- his whistle and his larynx. Ian Anderson of Jethro Tull does a similar trick with flute, singing while playing. I've done the same thing on trumpet, emulating the great Bubber Miley. It's called growling when done on an instrument. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:42, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

If there's not a lot to it, it's all the more surprising that I can't see more videos on youtube of even the amateur quality he shows. I mean that for an amateur, parts of the clip are really good, it's a lovely effect. He doesn't sing well, though, so if it's simple, why don't we have more clips like this from slightly more accomplished singers? It seems kind of like an incredibly obscure thing (this specific combination of whistling and humming.) Is it incredibly difficult mentally - similar to juggling 7 balls or something? That would explain the number of clips of even this quality, which is low. 91.120.14.30 (talk) 12:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I can do it, but I don't have very good control over the laryngeal hum - I have trouble keeping it in key, and certainly couldn't hum a baseline. I honestly don't know if, with practice, I'd be able to better control the hum - I imagine so, to some extent. But doing this for more than a couple of minutes starts to hurt, as one is blowing harder (to facilitate the whistle) than one would otherwise. And it never sounds good, so it doesn't seem like a skill that's terribly worth practicing. 146.200.0.182 (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at Mongolian throat singingTuvan throat singing. It's what they do over there. Also Overtone singing. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:11, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

We have an article: Overtone singing. Also David Hykes is famous for founding the Harmonic Choir, which sing this way en masse. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Does Eagleton ever refer to Spinoza?

Does Terry Eagleton ever refer to Baruch de Spinoza? --193.196.166.161 (talk) 10:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

yes. Paul B (talk) 11:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Are Scottish Sheriffs (Judges) overpaid?

Sheriffs in Scotland are on the same salary as English Circuit Judges. But whereas an English Circuit Judge (sometimes called a recorder) sits in judgement on Murder, Manslaughter (culpable homicide in Scotland), Rape, and Serious Fraud cases, with the same sentencing powers as an English High Court Judge, who tends only to be appointed to those types of case when there is a complexity or public interest element that warrants a trial by a more senior judge (High Court Judge) than a Circuit Judge (Crown Court), his/her Shrieval (Scottish Sheriff) counterpart is not allowed to sit in judgement on those more serious cases, which are exclusively reserved for the Scottish Criminal High Court with Scottish High Court Lords of Justiciary presiding. And furthermore, a Scottish Sheriff's sentencing powers are limited to 5 years imprisonment, with the option to refer higher sentencing recommendations to the High Court. I know the judicial systems of both countries differ quite dramatically and have done for centuries, but I can't help wondering why the lower courts of Scotland are salaried at the same pay level of Crown Court Judges in England who exercise much more authority in much more serious criminal trials. 77.97.208.118 (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

What governing body decides their pay scale? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

It seems to me a rather odd way of setting pay scales you have in mind, based on the length of sentences they can hand down. I'd look at their work load and required education and experience, instead. (You might assume they have a lower workload, since they pass on more serious cases, but there might be fewer of them, so they could have an even heavier work load.) StuRat (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The IP may be assuming that everyone works 40 hours per week as per their contract / the laws of employment in Britain, but some have more responsibility. --Lgriot (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

To answer Bugs's question, it is the Senior Salaries Review Body. [7] As far as I can see, they set (or at least, advise the government on) the salaries for senior officials in the whole United Kingdom, so there must be some common scale between the separate Scottish and English/Welsh systems. According to the page that I have linked; "Research carried out in 2008 by Professor Hazel Genn showed that many highly qualified lawyers were put off applying to join the High Court because they could earn up to three times more in their current post than they could as a judge!" Make of that what you will. Alansplodge (talk) 21:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

How did tofu become associated with vegetarianism and veganism in the western countries?

Did knowledge about tofu after the mid-20th century coincide with the spread of Buddhism, and for that reason, tofu, in western eyes, would appear like a vegetarian alternative to meat-based dishes, even though tofu has never been considered vegetarian or vegan in China and the China-influenced countries? How did strict vegetarian Westerners receive their protein before that time? From milk and milk products? Did veganism exist prior to the mid-20th century? 140.254.136.154 (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I can't comment on the cultural perspective, but surely Chinese people knew that tofu was not a meat product and that it had relatively high protein, right? As for the rest, we have a good article on Vegetarianism, and also on History of vegetarianism. Veganism#History puts the coinage of that term and concept in 1944. Here's a nice article on the history or Tofu in the USA [8], mentioning that at least some people had access to it in the 19th century. Some other info at Tofu#History. SemanticMantis (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

But vegetarianism is the abstention of eating meat and meat products, which may or may not include eggs and milk. It is a lifestyle. Many Asians do eat tofu, but it's not like they avoid meat. They may eat it with meat. 140.254.136.154 (talk) 20:44, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

That's hardly unique to tofu. Other sources of vegetarian protein are also commonly eaten with meat, like beans (pork and beans) or nuts (cashew chicken). StuRat (talk) 07:58, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I gather what the OP is trying to say is that tofu may be commonly seen mostly as a meat substitute in Western countries (although I think this is getting less common). This is not the case in East and South East Asian countries. There it may be known and recognised and used as a meat substitute for those who are vegetarian like some Buddhists and perhaps the general population will recognise it as a possible meat substitute. But it's also resonably common part of the diet of many (at least those rich enough), used in desserts, meat dishes and general dishes (which may be eaten with meat dishes) among the general population who aren't vegetarian and who aren't eating or thinking of it as a meat substitute (or even if they are, probably for cost reasons). Nil Einne (talk) 12:12, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The answer, I'd venture, is Seventh Day Adventists. To be a vegetarian and travel in the US before the '80s meant seeking out Seventh Day Adventist restaurants in smaller towns, or be stuck with little other than grilled cheese sandwiches. Adventists started using tofu in the US long before other non-Asians caught on to the stuff. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 20:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

How did Seventh Day Adventists find out about tofu? Did they have Asian-American friends or something? 140.254.136.154 (talk) 20:41, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

One could glean a lot of useful information from [http://www.soyinfocenter.com/pdf/172/Adve.pdf History of Seventh-day Adventist Work with Soyfoods, Vegetarianism, Meat Alternatives, Wheat Gluten, Dietary Fiber and Peanut Butter (1863-2013): Extensively Annotated Bibliography and Sourcebook. John Harvey Kellogg is a big part of the story. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:13, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

History of Soy, Soyinfo Center, has ~ 2,500 pages of projected 4-volume set posted online, by authoritative authors of 1975 publication, Book of Tofu. More by searching for William Shurtleff & Akiko Aoyagi - Paulscrawl (talk) 21:41, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

See, esp., Chronology of Tofu Worldwide: 965 A.D. to 1929, Soyinfo Center -- Paulscrawl (talk) 21:44, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Chronology notes non-Asian (Caucasian) tofu manufacturing pioneers in America were all 7th Day Adventists. But mainstream association with vegetarianism begins later. From the preface of the 1975 Book of Tofu (linked above, readable via Google Books) we learn co-author William Shurtleff was cook at highly influential Tassajara Zen Mountain Center - most likely nexus for vegetarian association, as Tassajara was (and remains) a very influential cultural center, with many guests and a notable vegetarian restaurant that has spawned many books. Tofu Book itself sold over half a million copies. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Disbarred for failure to pay some clients

Zodiac Killer says that one Robert Tarbox was disbarred by the California Supreme Court for failure to pay some clients, with a source that says he was disbarred "because he had failed to pay clients about $4,900 won in a lawsuit". Conversely, the state bar website says that he was disbarred because he didn't pay his bar association fees.

In what context would a lawyer pay a client? It seems to be in reverse of normal. Is the first source simply in error (i.e. we should just ignore it and rely on the state bar website?), or am I missing something? Nyttend backup (talk) 23:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

It seems clear to me that it's just sloppy journalism. "Pay" could be more aptly phrased "pay out". He didn't owe the clients any money; he just failed to hand over funds he had won for them and that they were entitled to.

Also, there's no contradiction between the two sources. The bar association site says he was "suspended", not disbarred, for failure to pay the "Bar member fees" in 1974. He was disbarred in 1975. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:09, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

• Solicitors often have trust accounts for holding money for clients (from conveyancing settlements to awards from litigation). Not paying clients or misusing trust monies (which is a specific offence in some jurisdictions) can result in disbarment. St★lwart¹¹¹ 00:07, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

• So at least in California, if you sue someone and are awarded a judgement, the monies are all in the hands of your lawyer at first? I assumed that you and the defendant would agree (or lacking that, the judge would issue an order) on how the money would go from their bank account to yours. Nyttend (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not sure about California (I'm Australian) but here we have a strict solicitor's trust system which is governed by law and the Law Society. I remember reading something not so long ago that suggested that misuse of trusts was a leading cause of disbarment here. I suppose it also depends on whether we're talking about a small claims-type court or a higher court and more substantive civil proceedings. I imagine there would be a few problems with a system that required defendant and plaintiff to contact each other post-case to resolve payment per orders. Even for small claims, doesn't the money go from one party, to the sheriff, to the second party? St★lwart¹¹¹ 01:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

• Well, that's why I say "or lacking [the agreement], the judge would issue an order"; I suppose that some defendants, sick of the case and ready to have it done, would be willing to acquiesce to simple suggestions, especially in small claims (e.g. "give me a certified check for the amount"), and any such agreement would save the court some time. Nyttend (talk) 01:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

• Absolutely, yeah, you'd have to have something like that in place. I was able to find this (after some digging) which answers some of our queries. St★lwart¹¹¹ 06:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)