Not coated, covered or dipped in but enrobed.  Synonym, neologism or archaic?

Off we go, and our first stop is MW Third Universal:

1:  to invest or adorn with or as if with a robe; broadly :  attire;

2:  to cover (confections) with a coating (as of chocolate) .

All synonyms refer to clothing or dressing, and the noun is one who dresses, an enrober.


verb (used with object), Imageen·robed, en·rob·ing.

to dress; attire: The king was enrobed in velvet.


1585–95; en-1  + robe

Also from D.com, questions related:

Enrobing Food is when you are Coating one product with another” Chocolate is a popular one when you cover a biscuit, for instance.

An enrober, according to Wikipedia: machine used in the confectionery industry to coat a food item with a coating medium, typically chocolate.

Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary:

“We do not have an entry for enrobe.”

So, what is it?  Vanity?  Pretentiousness?  The wafer cookies are produced by the Loacker family on a mountain in Sicily, and perhaps they are royalty or wish to be so enrobed in the garment sense.

But wasn’t this entry about a word?  Mostly.  Entries about words (mostly) will appear as things of many things.



Here, the pinnacle of cynical delights,
The rise of good intentions till they broke,
Getting what they asked for in a night,
Nothing left of happy helpless hope.

Can any now bereaved admit regret?
Supporters that disparaged, spreading doubt,
Rigged the game against their bets,
And whine about their losses even now.

Lesser is an evil none the less,
Resonating well in many minds.
For some a nation in distress,
For others just a stupid trick of time.

Toss all sad abstractions out the door
We know who hurts the worst—we are the poor.



How I have fun with news (and language and the election)

This post is the first of a series I’ll put together about items in the news, news issues like fake news and clickbait, and language in the news. Since Poetry, Prose and Anything goes is a poetry blog, it has to also be a language blog.

Today’s ersatz study is about a not-so-new new word, Post-Truth.

As reported by BBC news, 16 November 2016, the Oxford English Dictionary made post-truth its Word Of The Year.

“It is defined as an adjective relating to circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than emotional appeals.”


In a post to the Between The Covers LinkedIn group, Alvin Stone, impressibly titled Media and Communications at UNSW ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science (wow), writes:

“Post-truth is a catchy phrase but what it describes is neither new or unknown. It seems we have simply forgotten the failures of the information deficit model, so beloved of scientists and educators, and what really leads to change.  Emotions rule.”

Stone is referring to the Information Deficit model, that people will change their opinions if given the facts. It doesn’t work.

“Increasingly, research shows emotions and ideology have tended to lead the shaping of opinion – public and private. Even correcting misinformation doesn’t work.”

Emotions rule.

From the New York Times:

The Age of Post-Truth Politics

By William Davies

Aug. 24, 2016


“How can we still be speaking of ‘facts’ when they no longer provide us with a reality that we all agree on? The problem is that the experts and agencies involved in producing facts have multiplied, and many are now for hire. If you really want to find an expert willing to endorse a fact, and have sufficient money or political clout behind you, you probably can.”

From The Economist:

The Art of the Lie

Sept. 10th 2016


“But post-truth politics is more than just an invention of whingeing elites who have been outflanked. The term picks out the heart of what is new: that truth is not falsified, or contested, but of secondary importance. Once, the purpose of political lying was to create a false view of the world. The lies of men like Mr. Trump do not work like that. They are not intended to convince the elites, whom their target voters neither trust nor like, but to reinforce prejudices.”

So, here we are. Post-Truth fits nicely into the whole fake or misleading news industry, and I’ll produce more ersatz journalism on that for the next news post.

Comments, Please.



A nation of bigoted idiots has elected one as president.

Know I not whereof I speak?

From a December 2014 Huffington Post article:

According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can’t read. That’s 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can’t read.

Recently, from Statistic Brain, http://www.statisticbrain.com/number-of-american-adults-who-cant-read/:

U.S. Illiteracy Statistics Data
Percent of U.S. adults who can’t read (below a basic level) 14 %
Number of U.S. adults who can’t read 32,000,000
Percent of prison inmates who can’t read 70 %
Percent of high school graduates who can’t read 19 %
Reading Level of U.S. Adults Percent
Proficient 13 %
Intermediate 44 %
Basic 29 %
Below Basic 14%
Demographics of Adults Who Read Below a Basic Level Percent of Population
Hispanic 41 %
Black 24 %
White 9 %
Other 13 %

‘Nuff said?

What are we facing now?

From the Republican platform:

We endorse the First Amendment Defense Act, Republican legislation in the House and Senate that will bar government discrimination against individuals and businesses for acting on the belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.

We condemn frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers and the current Administration’s illegal harassment of firearm dealers. We oppose federal licensing or registration of law-abiding gun owners, registration of ammunition, and restoration of the ill-fated Clinton gun ban.

And so on and so on. The platform is available as a 66-page PDF and on the ‘Net at https://gop.com/platform/we-the-people/. Of course there’s more, but I’m too disgusted to keep reading right now, and I do want this post out tonight. Someone on the radio just used the phrase “unified Government” or “unified country.” Whatever else “unification” involves, the “unification” of a Republican government  will ensure an oligarchy of the rich.

I hope that those who were so critical of Hillary, I don’t trust her, she changes positions, Wall-Street ally, and so forth are happy with the result of their acrimony. The poor, working poor and a level or two above are thoroughly screwed.

Protests are already in progress here in NYC, and I remember the days when I was a crazy young radical and Nixon was the bogeyman. Build, knock down, rebuild perhaps even stronger, defines the ages-old struggle for basic human rights.

Xi Xinping

One immediate benefit is the invigoration of the left. About thirty years into the previous century, a heavily mocked candidate was elected as chancellor. The reaction sprouted even more amusement. The left was sure that the chancellor would mess things up badly enough so they would be in power in two years. Nach Hitler Uns—after Hitler, us. Let us hope that today’s left wing movement keeps this in mind and take it easy with the confidence.


In my last post on this happy subject, I listed the most commonly used words in rejections. Since sometime in 2015 and continuing now, rejection statements seem worded differently and better suited to the found poetry idea I mentioned (and haven’t yet acted on). “Not fit” and equivalent still turn up. I think this might be code for no rhyme and meter, but I also think that might be a little nuts of me to think.

Some comments take a bit of study.

This decision is based not on the quality of your work but rather on the narrow focus and objective constraints of our journal.

Our direction for the next issue of Lunch Ticket was simply different than the vision of your work. (What?)

Others, apologies and regrets

We’re sorry we can’t use it, but we appreciate having the opportunity to consider it

Though we were glad to have the opportunity to experience your writing, we are regretfully going to have to pass

I regret to inform you that your poetry has not been selected for publication on the homepage of the Society of Classical Poetry.

While we have very much enjoyed reviewing your work, we’re sorry to say we have decided not to proceed with your submission for Issue 3

And encouragement

Unfortunately, we’ve decided to pass on your submission. Poetry is subjective. Keep writing. Keep submitting.

This is from Booat, and I’ll submit again.


How should we feel about rejections? The second sentence of the last comment is the key. I think that poems are passed over mostly because they didn’t stand out sufficiently to catch an editor’s attention, and of those that stand out, only one or two would make it further. A non-subjective reason is that “doesn’t fit” means exactly that, and this is the poet’s fault for not noticing that the writing is nothing like the writing in the publication. Rhyme and meter for prose poem journals? I’ve made this mistake a number of times, so now when I check a new publication I look to see any sign of scanned verse or at least a strongly rhythmic poem with a rhythm I can hear.

And another non-subjective reason: Three to five percent of all submissions to a given issue are accepted, and I think three percent is the real number.

So, calm down. Take another look at the thing, fix something you might have missed, and fire it off again.