The Sixth Conversation Thread

What can I say? It doesn't fit above, put it here. Also the location of board rules/info.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2702
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by sangi39 »

Salmoneus wrote: 20 Aug 2020 18:19 I have a question, people! About bathing!

So, by a roundabout way, I came across a brief article about the history of bathrooms - how the modern bathroom was invented as part of a craze for 'sanitary' arrangements in the early 20th century, echoing some concerns we face now. Yada yada.

But what perplexes me is the illustrations. Look at this late-19th-century bathroom. Obviously, the most striking thing is that everything is a monumental wooden block. But beyond that, what ARE those things? Well, going clockwise from the bottom left... that immense plinth must be the toilet (see cistern above), and then the bath, and then... huh? A sink? A chest of drawers - but with something on top? And then on the right there's another one - that's definitely a chest of drawers, with maybe a container for cosmetics and the like on top? Then the real sink, and then... what is that narrow thing, a sort of lidded bidet?

But then finally, there's the real mystery: what is that thing at the bottom right?

And then again, at the end of the century, we have a bathroom like this one. The style is rather ornate, but more recognisable. And it contains the four essential items: the bath, the sink, the toilet, and, on the left, the.... what!?

The item on the left of the later picture and that on the far right in the earlier picture appear to be the same thing. Both are lower than the corresponding bath - the front is in each case lower than the seat of the toilet. Both are quite wide/long, but not as long as the full bath. Both appear to have taps nearby. And both have a very distinctive ogival 'shoulder'. And given that it's still there as one of only four items in the simplified ~1900 bathroom, they're clearly important.

BUT WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY!?

So, I've thought of four options, but none of them seem convincing to me:

a) a bidet. You could sit/crouch in it. However, having to sit in the water doesn't seem to match the sanitary purpose of the bidet. It's much larger than it would need to be, too. And the older, wooden bathroom has that otherwise unidentifed 'narrow plinth' item that could well be a bidet itself.

b) a urinal. It's a little bit like a trough urinal, to use while standing. But if you're going to have a private urinal, why would it need to be so wide? And the front of the wooden one seems rather high for that purpose. And you've had thought the makers of the wooden bathroom would have discretely hidden the porcelain if it was used for urination. And it's not just high-backed, it's specifically got those 'shoulders' - how would they help a urinal? And finally, both devices seem to have no cistern-powered flush, but instead THREE taps. Presumably, given that everything else has three taps, that's hot and cold mixers and a volume control. A bit elaborate for a urinal!

c) a sit-in bath. Those shoulders look useful for helping you stand up out of the bath, don't they? The width is wide enough for you to sit while still have room on either side for, say, dipping a pitcher or the like. And yet... it's really low! Why would a sit-in bath be lower than either the bath or the toilet? In fact on the newer one, given that no seat is visible, you'd almost be down on the floor! Given the depth of the baths, why not just fill the bath partway, if you just wanted to sit in some water? Unlike the baths, both devices have no visible water taps down INTO the device, presumably meaning that the water comes in from the side or from below (supporting the bidet theory, I guess). And since the newer bathroom has both a bath AND a shower - and it wasn' felt necessary to make the shower separate from the bath - would it really be worth a third showering device, separate from the others? And are those shoulders really ideal for pushing yourself upright - aren't they too far back, and too curved?

d) a foot bath. For washing your feet. That would explain why it's low. And maybe why the water comes in from the side - you'd only need a little water in the bottom, and you could even have a sort of 'running stream' effect that might be nice. But... wow, that's a big bit of expensive furniture just for washing your feet! And the wooden one has quite a high front to step into. And... what, you're meant to just stand there, with no (visible) seat? And despite the huge design changes in these few decades, the 'shoulder' shape is retained, so surely is important somehow? I guess you could lean on them while bending over to wash your feet... but that hardly seems ideal! The shoulders are very low, lower than the sides of the bath, lower than the sink. If you were designing something for foot-washing, wouldn't you make it a seat with a small basin in front, not a big semi-bath you have to stand in, then bend over to wash your feet one-handed while precariously holding on to a curved, slippery enable side?

On balance, I'm guessing d) is the answer, but it still seems like a really bad answer. Does anyone have a better one?


------

While we're at it, look at this. What's that on the back left? A low trough, but seemingly with some sort of dome lid? I'd put it down to a weird picture, but then look at the picture on the right here. It looks like the same 'domed' item in the right corner. What are these? Footbaths? Why the dome? And then in that picture, look, right front, there's ANOTHER low trough by the door! Nobody can need two different foot-bathing items of furniture in one bathroom, surely!? [And neither is likely to be a bidet - not only are they the wrong shape, but look, in the second picture there, the 'sanitary ideal', the toilet is discretely in its own demichamber - presumably the bidet would be, too?



-----

I know these questions aren't exactly vital, but it's just really curious!
The original source (J.L. Mott Iron Works, 1888) says the following:

"This very complete Bath Room is designed to show how the various Fixtures illustrated in the following pages, may be fitted up. The Fixtures shown are our "Imperial" Porcelain Bath and Seat Bath, both with Supply Fittings and "Unique" Waste, our "Hygeia" or "Inodoro" Cistern Water Closet, Bidet, and Wash Stand fitted with Oval Wash Stand fitted with Oval Wash Basin and "Unique" Waste. The Wood Work is Mahogany, the design Elizabethan. The size of the room represented is about 13 fett x 10½ feet; of course the size can be modified should any of the fixtures be dispensed with."

The thing at the front right seems to be the seat bath going by the rest of the catalogue, and just back from that is the bidet.

The seat bath seems to be somewhat similar to what's called a "hip bath" in some online stores, where the person bathing would literally just sit in the bath with the water up to their hips, as opposed to lying down as in a standard bath. Other, smaller variants in the catalogue look to be aimed at a place to bathe small children.

EDIT: Oh yeah, source: https://library.si.edu/digital-library/ ... gueg00jlmo
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3933
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Creyeditor »

Maybe it is a bath tub you can bathe your child in? It's lower on the sides and the front so that you can hold your (standing or sitting) child while crouching or kneeling yourself. It's higher on the back so that you don't spill to much water (maybe). Why is it not higher up, so that you could do the whole thing standing up? Maybe there was some technical problem with having large amounts of water in an elevated container?

Just a random guess.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

Here's a good all around view of the sitz bath. Quite unlike a modern sitz bath, you actually sit inside the bath. It's not as unsanitary as it might seem. As you can see, the water inlet is pretty low and you'd only have a few inches of water in the tub. Must have been absolute gyp to get in and out of if you're at all arthritic or rheumatic!

The foot bath would have been easier to deal with, as you just pull up a chair to soak your feet & lower legs. Especially handy, when considering that this was the age before insulin and antibiotics. Cleanliness might be next to godliness, but a dirty and infected diabetic foot wound will send you straight to him!

The underlying plumbing itself is just as interesting as the fancy baroquery of the woodwork. Here is an interesting comparison of modern and antique plumbing. Find out why plumbers are all about the lead! And find out why Cluedo / Clue has a lead pipe token as a murder weapon.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

Rinat Ibagrimov, formerly of the London Symphony Orchestra, and quite possibly one of the awesomest bassists ever, died today.

Hear the music of the profound deeps!

And another.
User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 514
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien »

elemtilas wrote: 02 Sep 2020 23:05 Rinat Ibagrimov, formerly of the London Symphony Orchestra, and quite possibly one of the awesomest bassists ever, died today.

Hear the music of the profound deeps!

And another.
Thanks for posting that. The double bass is underrated and I so seldom hear it as a solo instrument.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote: 03 Sep 2020 02:22 The double bass is underrated and I so seldom hear it as a solo instrument.
Tis the king of string!
Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2397
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Khemehekis »

A few days ago, Masako posted an animated GIF of a guy blowing a kiss.

Then he changed his signature to read "gone".

I also noticed he edited his Frathwiki page to remove the link to the CBB.

Masako's left us? What brought this about?
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2680
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Dormouse559 »

Khemehekis wrote: 06 Sep 2020 04:53 A few days ago, Masako posted an animated GIF of a guy blowing a kiss.
I couldn't say where masako is, but the gif is of a chef's kiss, the stereotypical way for Italian chefs to remark on something's high quality.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

Dormouse559 wrote: 06 Sep 2020 05:02 The gif is of a chef's kiss, the stereotypical way for Italian chefs to remark on something's high quality.
Given that this is Rowan Atkison (perhaps Mr Bean or some iteration of Blackadder), who knows whát it might truly signify!
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2022
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

sangi39 wrote: 20 Aug 2020 18:59
Salmoneus wrote: 20 Aug 2020 18:19 I have a question, people! About bathing!

So, by a roundabout way, I came across a brief article about the history of bathrooms - how the modern bathroom was invented as part of a craze for 'sanitary' arrangements in the early 20th century, echoing some concerns we face now. Yada yada.

But what perplexes me is the illustrations. Look at this late-19th-century bathroom. Obviously, the most striking thing is that everything is a monumental wooden block. But beyond that, what ARE those things? Well, going clockwise from the bottom left... that immense plinth must be the toilet (see cistern above), and then the bath, and then... huh? A sink? A chest of drawers - but with something on top? And then on the right there's another one - that's definitely a chest of drawers, with maybe a container for cosmetics and the like on top? Then the real sink, and then... what is that narrow thing, a sort of lidded bidet?

But then finally, there's the real mystery: what is that thing at the bottom right?

And then again, at the end of the century, we have a bathroom like this one. The style is rather ornate, but more recognisable. And it contains the four essential items: the bath, the sink, the toilet, and, on the left, the.... what!?

The item on the left of the later picture and that on the far right in the earlier picture appear to be the same thing. Both are lower than the corresponding bath - the front is in each case lower than the seat of the toilet. Both are quite wide/long, but not as long as the full bath. Both appear to have taps nearby. And both have a very distinctive ogival 'shoulder'. And given that it's still there as one of only four items in the simplified ~1900 bathroom, they're clearly important.

BUT WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY!?

So, I've thought of four options, but none of them seem convincing to me:

a) a bidet. You could sit/crouch in it. However, having to sit in the water doesn't seem to match the sanitary purpose of the bidet. It's much larger than it would need to be, too. And the older, wooden bathroom has that otherwise unidentifed 'narrow plinth' item that could well be a bidet itself.

b) a urinal. It's a little bit like a trough urinal, to use while standing. But if you're going to have a private urinal, why would it need to be so wide? And the front of the wooden one seems rather high for that purpose. And you've had thought the makers of the wooden bathroom would have discretely hidden the porcelain if it was used for urination. And it's not just high-backed, it's specifically got those 'shoulders' - how would they help a urinal? And finally, both devices seem to have no cistern-powered flush, but instead THREE taps. Presumably, given that everything else has three taps, that's hot and cold mixers and a volume control. A bit elaborate for a urinal!

c) a sit-in bath. Those shoulders look useful for helping you stand up out of the bath, don't they? The width is wide enough for you to sit while still have room on either side for, say, dipping a pitcher or the like. And yet... it's really low! Why would a sit-in bath be lower than either the bath or the toilet? In fact on the newer one, given that no seat is visible, you'd almost be down on the floor! Given the depth of the baths, why not just fill the bath partway, if you just wanted to sit in some water? Unlike the baths, both devices have no visible water taps down INTO the device, presumably meaning that the water comes in from the side or from below (supporting the bidet theory, I guess). And since the newer bathroom has both a bath AND a shower - and it wasn' felt necessary to make the shower separate from the bath - would it really be worth a third showering device, separate from the others? And are those shoulders really ideal for pushing yourself upright - aren't they too far back, and too curved?

d) a foot bath. For washing your feet. That would explain why it's low. And maybe why the water comes in from the side - you'd only need a little water in the bottom, and you could even have a sort of 'running stream' effect that might be nice. But... wow, that's a big bit of expensive furniture just for washing your feet! And the wooden one has quite a high front to step into. And... what, you're meant to just stand there, with no (visible) seat? And despite the huge design changes in these few decades, the 'shoulder' shape is retained, so surely is important somehow? I guess you could lean on them while bending over to wash your feet... but that hardly seems ideal! The shoulders are very low, lower than the sides of the bath, lower than the sink. If you were designing something for foot-washing, wouldn't you make it a seat with a small basin in front, not a big semi-bath you have to stand in, then bend over to wash your feet one-handed while precariously holding on to a curved, slippery enable side?

On balance, I'm guessing d) is the answer, but it still seems like a really bad answer. Does anyone have a better one?


------

While we're at it, look at this. What's that on the back left? A low trough, but seemingly with some sort of dome lid? I'd put it down to a weird picture, but then look at the picture on the right here. It looks like the same 'domed' item in the right corner. What are these? Footbaths? Why the dome? And then in that picture, look, right front, there's ANOTHER low trough by the door! Nobody can need two different foot-bathing items of furniture in one bathroom, surely!? [And neither is likely to be a bidet - not only are they the wrong shape, but look, in the second picture there, the 'sanitary ideal', the toilet is discretely in its own demichamber - presumably the bidet would be, too?



-----

I know these questions aren't exactly vital, but it's just really curious!
The original source (J.L. Mott Iron Works, 1888) says the following:

"This very complete Bath Room is designed to show how the various Fixtures illustrated in the following pages, may be fitted up. The Fixtures shown are our "Imperial" Porcelain Bath and Seat Bath, both with Supply Fittings and "Unique" Waste, our "Hygeia" or "Inodoro" Cistern Water Closet, Bidet, and Wash Stand fitted with Oval Wash Stand fitted with Oval Wash Basin and "Unique" Waste. The Wood Work is Mahogany, the design Elizabethan. The size of the room represented is about 13 fett x 10½ feet; of course the size can be modified should any of the fixtures be dispensed with."

The thing at the front right seems to be the seat bath going by the rest of the catalogue, and just back from that is the bidet.

The seat bath seems to be somewhat similar to what's called a "hip bath" in some online stores, where the person bathing would literally just sit in the bath with the water up to their hips, as opposed to lying down as in a standard bath. Other, smaller variants in the catalogue look to be aimed at a place to bathe small children.

EDIT: Oh yeah, source: https://library.si.edu/digital-library/ ... gueg00jlmo

Thanks, both of you. And sorry for the late reply.

I wonder if the two devices are actually different, then. The newer one certainly seems like one of elemtilas' bidet devices, while the older one, which seems deeper and has a much higher front, may be a sitting bath?

The 'sitz' bidet idea, despite apparently being true, still seems mad to me. Then again, maybe that's why they stopped existing.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2022
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

elemtilas wrote: 02 Sep 2020 23:05 Rinat Ibagrimov, formerly of the London Symphony Orchestra, and quite possibly one of the awesomest bassists ever, died today.

Hear the music of the profound deeps!

And another.
If you're into the double bass, you might want to keep an earout for a guy called Toby Hughes. I've seen him live a couple of times over the last few years, and he seems to be breaking through into wider recognition now. He's a young double bass soloist, and he plays with great virtuosity (as much as you can do on the double bass...). Seems to be crusading for his instrument (I'm sure he could have settled down with an orchestra by now, rather than getting by on solo and chamber concerts, but wants to show people what the instrument can do).


Here's him taking on the Glière tarentella - don't just listen to the virtuosic flight-of-the-bumblebee-esque (flight of the murder hornet?) main tune, but listen to that cantabile tune a minute in - as sweet as a cello. It's pretty impressive live!

And if you think that's stepping too much on the cello's toes, here's a more meditative piece that really exploits the whole range of the instrument, that you could never play on a cello.
Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2397
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Khemehekis »

Dormouse559 wrote: 06 Sep 2020 05:02 I couldn't say where masako is, but the gif is of a chef's kiss, the stereotypical way for Italian chefs to remark on something's high quality.
Oh, OK, I didn't know that! I thought he was kissing us good-bye.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

Salmoneus wrote: 06 Sep 2020 17:56
elemtilas wrote: 02 Sep 2020 23:05 Rinat Ibagrimov, formerly of the London Symphony Orchestra, and quite possibly one of the awesomest bassists ever, died today.

Hear the music of the profound deeps!

And another.
If you're into the double bass, you might want to keep an earout for a guy called Toby Hughes. I've seen him live a couple of times over the last few years, and he seems to be breaking through into wider recognition now. He's a young double bass soloist, and he plays with great virtuosity (as much as you can do on the double bass...). Seems to be crusading for his instrument (I'm sure he could have settled down with an orchestra by now, rather than getting by on solo and chamber concerts, but wants to show people what the instrument can do).
Speaking of young artists crusading for the instrument, though not dbass, I've been following Patrick Wibart's career for some years now. A young fellow who's taken up the ophicleide and also serpent and I think has done a fantastic job advocating for the virtuosity of both instruments. I used to play the ophicleide at local Christmas concerts (nowhere close to virtuoso level I might add); it's a wickedly fun instrument to play.

And if you think that's stepping too much on the cello's toes, here's a more meditative piece that really exploits the whole range of the instrument, that you could never play on a cello.
Mm. Molasses cooky sweet! Deep and complex. I've added this performer to my favourites, thank you!

I do like dbass, actually. I've only ever played (bass) winds and keyboards, so strings are a bit undiscovered, there-be-dragonsy country for me. Cello is okay, but it's really all about the bass! ;)
User avatar
eldin raigmore
korean
korean
Posts: 5567
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 19:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Unexciting inexperienced notions simmer ...

Post by eldin raigmore »

Unexciting inexperienced notions simmer heatedly.
Khemehekis
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2397
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: Unexciting inexperienced notions simmer ...

Post by Khemehekis »

eldin raigmore wrote: 11 Sep 2020 16:40 Unexcxting inexperienced notions simmer heatedly.
I see what you did there.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

Time Sensitive PSA!
Jan Havliš from LCS wrote:
Date: út 15. 9. 2020 v 10:03
Subject: linguopoetic data collection - a kind request


dear linguopoetic colleagues and friends,

i am collecting data for my thesis and that for i prepared a set of three questionnaires, which i would like you to fill in. pls, approach them honestly, do not try to go through them at once and if you decide to help me, do it in the next 14 days. ps. although it is google forms, i collect no email addresses, which may bias my study, but i put my trust in you :)

it is also my very first try with google forms, so be patient, pls.

if you have any questions or comments, please let me know, i hope to have listening ear and answers too :)

and pls, if you teach, pass these questionnaires to your students :)

https://forms.gle/mzFNDKskhPZRVoLT9

https://forms.gle/wNj71q8Hgs9S1t8n8

https://forms.gle/ViNodTtwm9FgKwW66

best,
jan h.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1586
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by All4Ɇn »

Realizing there's something a bit sad about seeing words from Polish, Hungarian, etc. like Łódź or Szőcs and not looking at them with the same awe and confusion at their pronunciation and spelling like most other non-speakers seem to do.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2642
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by elemtilas »

All4Ɇn wrote: 21 Sep 2020 17:28 Realizing there's something a bit sad about seeing words from Polish, Hungarian, etc. like Łódź or Szőcs and not looking at them with the same awe and confusion at their pronunciation and spelling like most other non-speakers seem to do.
Wodge & Sodge?

They're Foreign, bound to sound different. One thing I didn't know: I already knew that barred L was "dark L" (which exists in some English dialects), but I didn't know it has since evolved into straight up W in Polish.

So basically, they spell vee "W" and doubleyou "L".
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2702
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by sangi39 »

All4Ɇn wrote: 21 Sep 2020 17:28 Realizing there's something a bit sad about seeing words from Polish, Hungarian, etc. like Łódź or Szőcs and not looking at them with the same awe and confusion at their pronunciation and spelling like most other non-speakers seem to do.
Next step: not recognising a word as belong to your native language, and reading it as if it were a word in a language whose orthography you've now basically internalised. "Coleslaw"? Clearly /tsɔˈlɛslaf/ [:P]
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2022
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: The Sixth Conversation Thread

Post by Salmoneus »

Is it just me for whom the board's spacing is now broken?
Post Reply