McGuffin and Bogey

[Victor Steinbok]

OK, so this one may not be the origin of McGuffin, but the story had a
great line and an odd line, so I thought I should mention it. On the
other hand, it may be connected to the McGuffin as well, although there
is certainly no sign of it in the story.

http://bit.ly/9trVor
Harper's New Monthly Magazine. Vol. 100 (509). p. 805++. 1900.
Tales of the Links. By John Kendrick Banks. I. The Phantom Card.

The piece in question is presented as correspondence between one
Wilkinson Peabody and Willie McGuffin, Greenskeeper at St. Willieboy.

The story circles around Mr. Peabody (no connection to Rocky and
Bullwinkle, I hope) confessing a sin in winning his first tournament at
St. Willieboy in 1894 by signing a card where he failed to include a
penalty for retrieving one of his balls from a marsh. Mr. Peabody got a
trophy--a silver-backed brush with a dragon head etching on it--the
dragon that, apparently, keeps "telling" Mr. Peabody that he's a liar.
Throughout the entire correspondence, Mr. Peabody addresses his
counterpart as simply "McGuffin".


First, the odd line:

> My opponent took my word for it, and my caddie, who was looking for
> apples, or butterflies, or whatever it is that caddies always are
> looking for while a tournament is in progress, had not observed my
> act, and what was under the rules a six hole was put down at four,
> *beating Bogey himself by a stroke*.

Who is this "Bogey" who was beaten by a stroke? Current use is, of
course, a score of one over par, but that's not how it was used in the
early 1900s. OED had bogey 1.a. (under golf) as something more closely
resembling "par" today, with samples ranging from 1892 to 1910. This
also extended to 1.b. which ranges from 1922 to 1959 (the former being a
Wodehouse quotation, of course). It is 1.c., which is labeled "US", that
gives the "one over par" definition, all post-WWII.

However, none of the examples address "Bogey himself" as either a
mythical or real person. Is it safe to assume that this was just a joke?

Aside from the fact that everyone seems to have been pounding
undesirable objects with a brassey (or brassy), there is also a postdate
appearance of "hobnailed". I would have thought a word such as this one
would not disappear so easily, seeing how it was a very functional piece
of cobblery. Yet, OED has none of the words related to "hobnail" post
the 1880s. Not a brilliant find, but suggestive nonetheless (and, I am
sure, if I looked, I would find instances going into the late 1920s, at
least).

> I took the brush, paid the expressage on it, and pounded it with my
> brassey, stamped upon it with my *hobnailed shoes*, and lofted it over
> into the river with my jigger, a shapeless mass of silver, wood, and
> bristles; and at every crack with the brassey the infernal dragon's
> head on the back blared out: "Liar! Thief! Scoundrel!"

Note that here the dragon head makes its appearance (for the second
time, actually, but let's not split hairs--or boar's bristles, as it
were). And the dragon seems to be doing a lot of talking. This brings me
to a line quoted form McGuffin's reply.

> Your dragon was a liar himself; and I never knew a dragon who wasn't.

Although this has no direct connection to the mongoose story, the moral
is essentially the same. "Never knew a dragon who wasn't" in no way
implies that there was a dragon to begin with. And, to top it off, the
dragon is not the feature of the story either, but it is directly
associated with it. I understand if you find the connection a stretch,
but give the story a quick read (it's only a couple of pages) and see if
you find any connection. Note that the author disclaims the names at the
end, so McGuffin--however irrelevant his identity is to the
punchline--is not "the real name" of the greenskeeper. (And it appears
to have been quite a popular fictional name at the turn of the century.)

     VS-)

PS: I talked to a friend who spent a large fraction of life in theater
and the response to "McGuffin" was "an object that appears quite central
to the plot but really is irrelevant". In addition, it's an object that
may either feature prominently (the briefcase in Pulp Fiction) or not
appear at all or only briefly (the Pink Panther). So it appears to have
survived Hitchcock quite well.

PPS: It has been suggested previously in one of the preceding threads
that "McGuffin" is not a common word or even a common name and stumbling
on it by accident in two unrelated verbal innovations is quite unlikely.
A quick search dispels this notion: there are a number of legal cases
that appear in GB (although some in multiple entries, but there are a
lot of different jurisdictions) that carry the name of McGuffin as
either one of the litigants or one of the actors (e.g., there are
several insurance-related cases where McGuffin was the insured, but not
a party to litigation). And, as I mentioned above, it was a name that
was used with some frequency in turn-of-the-century fiction. But there
are also quite a few random references--especially in histories of
towns, regions and states--to various McGuffins and Maguffins.

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org