"Danny D'Amico" <dan...@is.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2014.01...@is.invalid...
> "After hitting a tree and a lamp, "the vehicle was almost split in half .
> . .
> the majority of the vehicle was also charred" in the blaze that followed.
> Walker, 40, was found "charred and in a pugilistic stance."
>
http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/celebrities/20140104_Sideshow_.html
>
> Pugilistic, meant, to me, "boxing", which makes no sense.
> Googling, I find that is the only meaning!
This is an interesting experiment because Google failed to find
for this inquirer the answer he needed.
The "pugilistic stance" is a standard body position, popularized
in the 19th century (when boxing became standardized and legitimated
as a popular sport), viz. the position of self defence (one foot forward,
one fist forward) taken up by most boxers before a bout begins.
This body position was pictured innumerable times in newspapers
and magazines of the 19th century (the first time in history when
pictorial representation became cheap and available to everyone.)
Its cultural environment was that of boxing for recreation and
exercise, the "manly art of self defence," typically Victorian.
The pugilistic stance is thus a standard image. The notional power
of hypertext and Google is their promise to find pictures as
easily as they can find words. But they failed in this particular
test case. This suggests to me that despite its capacity to
retrieve pictorial images Google is in practice determined
completely by words: if pictures on the web have not been
identified with the right words by their providers, Google
cannot find them no matter how hard or fast it searches. It
thus remains a tool essentially different from the eye/brain
interface babies construct by trial and error, and which we
use continuously until death.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)