casting couches & fish skins

[George Thompson]

Having recently outed myself as one who reads histories of
pornographic photography (even if in Italian), I now confess to have
spent last week an agreeable mid-day at NYC's Museum of Sex.
(Why, you may ask, did I visit the Museum of Sex?  You do keep asking
these questions.  Decause it is there, how about that?)
One of the exhibits was of early 20th C blue movies.  Having had a
sheltered
childhood (and adulthood), I have never attended a session where such
movies were shown.  I may now say, that having a sheltered childhood
has its positive side.  Still, the earliest of the films being shown,
in addition to being the only one to offer any degree of acting skill
or competence with a movie camera, also offered material of
philological interest.

The film was called "The Casting Couch", and was dated by the museum
to 1924.
HDAS has 1931 for "casting couch" and OED has the later 1940s.
(It is a silent movie, and so the dialog to be quoted appeared on
subtitles.)
Once the ingenue has resigned herself to giving in to the base lusts
of the casting director, she says to him, "You must use a fish skin."
HDAS has 1936 for "fish skin" in the sense of "condom", and OED seems
not to have this sense of "fish skin" at all.
In the next bit of dialogue, she asks him "do you have it on?"  He
replies, vehemently, "And how!"  I thought that this vehemence
indicated an amphibology: "have it on" in the question referring to
the fish skin, and in the answer assumed to have meant something
like "are you eager to screw?" or "are you hard?"  If so, then this is
also an antedating.  (I did not take notes at the time, and am not now
sure whether she used the form "do you have" or "have you got", but I
think the latter.  I'm not likely to go back to check.  If anyone else
chooses to, the Museum's website offers a $5 discount pass.)
Finally, at an earlier moment in the movie, when she first has
extricated his prick from his trousers and is resting it on her hand,
he orders her to "blow on it".  She does.  He repeats the order, in
larger letters, and a third time.  Is this erotic practice the origin
of the term "blowjob"?

Material found through Google indicates that it is supposed by many
that the ingenue in this movie was played by Joan Crawford.  I have no
opinion on this matter.

In addition, a card at this exhibition indicated that earliest known
vice-squad raid on a dirty movie show was in January, 1912, referring
to a story in the NYTimes.  I looked the story up afterwards.  The
following is somewhat longer than called for to make the philological
point I have in mind, but still only a part of a much longer story.
It's all fairly interesting, as social history and movie history, as
these paragraphs show:
        Police to Run Down All Illegal Films.  ***  [headline]
As the result of a raid made on Monday night by detectives attached to
the staff of Inspector Dennis Sweeney of the Sixth Inspection District
a searching investigation will be instituted by the police to discover
the identity of persons engaged in the manufacture and production of
indecent motion picture films.
        This industry, which has sprung into existence within a few
months, furnishes amusement at so-called “stags” and smokers given by
private clubs or individuals to which admission is by “invitation.”
The invitation usually carries with it a “check room” coupon which
costs the holder of the ticket a dollar.
        For several months it has been known to the police that moving-
picture shows of a questionable nature were being given, `but evidence
sufficient to justify an application for a bench warrant was not
forthcoming.  Owing to the fact that the tickets, on “invitations,”
which entitled the bearer to admission to these entertainments, were
limited to a select list, the police were powerless to get the needed
evidence.
        On Monday night, however, two detectives attached to Inspector
Sweeney’s office were sauntering along West 116th Street when they
were accosted by a shabbily dressed man, who asked them if they wanted
to see “something rich.”
        “What is it?” queried one of the sleuths.
        “A ripe motion picture show – something good – hot stuff,” was
the response.
        Two Willing Sleuths.  [a sub-head]
        The detectives expressed their willingness to witness “hot
stuff” of any description, and were directed to the Lenox Casino, at
Lenox Avenue and 118th Street, a dance hall.  ***
        NY Times, January 17, 1912, p. 13, cols. ?-?? (from Proquest)
(This raid was not covered by the NY Tribune, the [NY] World, or the
[NY] Sun.)
I connect the tout's words with the following passage of a more than
half-century before:
        Don't you want Something Rich?  [the reporter, sitting in "a
prominent hotel in Broadway," sees a young man ask a middle-
aged "country-looking" man "Don't you want something rich?"; he takes
him to a corner of the room, takes from his pocket] a number of books
in pamphlet form, one of which he opened and commenced turning over
the leaves.  "Ain't that High?" he said, in a tone of admiration, as
he stopped at a flaming picture in order to let his customer get a
good look at it.  [The customer kicks and beats him indignantly.]
        Sunday Dispatch, March 9, 1856, p. 5, cols. 2-3
Was "something rich" pornographer's code?

Also: OED has 1904, then 1947 for "stag" as "ellipt. for stag-dinner, -
party, etc." (stag, noun, 7e).  See para. #2 of the Times story.

In all, a well-spent afternoon.

At the particular request of my wife, who lurks here, my next few
postings will be such as will not raise a blush of shame upon the
cheek of modesty.

GAT

George A. Thompson
Author of A Documentary History of "The African Theatre", Northwestern
Univ. Pr., 1998, but nothing much lately.

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