Short take: penguin, information

[Victor Steinbok]

A friend posted the link to a story of David Mamet's memo to the writers
of The Unit (TV show that was canceled shortly after the note was
sent--not implying any connection between the two--just establishing the
timeline). Aside from general interest (useful notes on script/play
writing, TV series sausage-making, etc.), there is this line (all-caps
in original; emphasis in original):

http://bit.ly/cSUiMs
> OUR FRIENDS. THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO
> COMMUNICATE *INFORMATION* --- AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.

There are two things of interest here--penguins and information. Both
are elaborated on in the body of the memo, so I will take it as read.
The usage is somewhat different here than in other contexts.

First, the penguin.

OED:
> *1.d.* /humorous/ or /derogatory/. A man wearing black-and-white
> evening dress, esp. one having a stiff or pompous demeanour. Cf.
> /penguin suit/ n. (a) at Compounds 2.

There is at least one additional meaning missing here and that's of a
"nun" or nun's habit. If you want specific references for that, the most
obvious one would be early scenes in Blues Brothers. Of course, it is
far more widespread than that. So it should either be included under
1.d. or have a separate sub-entry. I've heard "penguin" refer to any
Catholic clergy garb (as long as it's black with some white), but I have
not seen it in print. Nuns are easy, making it broader is not.

However, Mamet clearly is not using this in either the "nun" sense or in
"man wearing black-and-white evening dress" sense. What's left is a man
with "a stiff or pompous demeanour". In a recent USA network TV series
White Collar one of the characters succinctly refers to the main FBI
agent character as "the suit" (in fact, the writers made it even more
interesting by referring to his wife as "Mrs. suit"). It seems, Mamet's
usage of "penguin" here is nearly the same. This is quite explicit.

> AND I RESPOND "*FIGURE IT OUT*" ANY DICKHEAD WITH A BLUESUIT CAN BE
> (AND IS) TAUGHT TO SAY "MAKE IT CLEARER", AND "I WANT TO KNOW MORE
> *ABOUT* HIM".
> WHEN YOU'VE MADE IT SO CLEAR THAT EVEN THIS BLUESUITED PENGUIN IS
> HAPPY, BOTH YOU AND HE OR SHE *WILL* BE OUT OF A JOB.

Clearly, a "bluesuited penguin" is not a "blacksuited penguin". So, to
Mamet, the color of the suit does not matter. In fact, I don't believe
the suit itself matters. It's the particular form of behaviour and the
hierarchical relationship between the writers and the "penguins" that is
important--the penguins are the stiff, ignorant people in charge. This
penguinisity is closely related to "information".

> EVERYONE IN CREATION IS SCREAMING AT US TO MAKE THE SHOW CLEAR. WE ARE
> TASKED WITH, IT SEEMS, CRAMMING A SHITLOAD OF *INFORMATION* INTO A
> LITTLE BIT OF TIME.
> OUR FRIENDS. THE PENGUINS, THINK THAT WE, THEREFORE, ARE EMPLOYED TO
> COMMUNICATE *INFORMATION* --- AND, SO, AT TIMES, IT SEEMS TO US.

This also hints at what Mamet means by "information".
  Back to OED:

> *II.* The imparting of knowledge in general.
> *5. a.* Knowledge communicated concerning some particular fact,
> subject, or event; that of which one is apprised or told;
> intelligence, news.
> *1726* SWIFT /Gulliver/ II. III. ii. 18 It was necessary to give the
> Reader this Information.

I only included the Swift citation because it seems to be /exactly/ the
meaning Mamet is trying to communicate to his writers. I believe this
meaning is substantially different from that in other citations under
the same subhead:

> *1956* A. WILSON /Anglo-Saxon Attitudes/ (1958) I. i. 14, I should be
> glad of any personal information you may care to provide me with upon
> this neglected and important young poet.
> *2003* N. RUSH /Mortals/ xxxv. 658 Ray's old self would have been
> elated to get any shreds and pieces of information that linked
> Ichokela with SWAPO in Namibia.

Information as news, communication or details is not the same as
information as clarification, which is how both Mamet and Swift use it.
They are not talking about "clarifying information" (viz. "details"),
but actually use "information" alone in that sense. I actually don't
like the OED practice of cutting off sentences--I know these are
illustrative examples of usage, not meant to contextualize the terms,
but how can one gather the meaning from a mere sentence fragment?

> It was necessary to give the Reader this Information, without which he
> would be at the same Loss with me to understand the Proceedings of
> these People, as they conducted me up the Stairs, to the Top of the
> Island, and from thence to the Royal Palace.

The only difference is that Swift talks about "information" that is
necessary and Mamet treats it as unnecessary. Either way, I would be
interested in knowing if anyone else thinks that the difference is
significant enough to warrant a separate sub-entry. Same for "penguin",
although the need there is less for a separate entry as much as for
expansion to include /any/ suit and nuns.

     VS-)

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