Word of the week: Totalizing
And a tote bag of related words worth staring at. Like, totally.
Greetings to the many new subscribers who discovered Fritinancy in the last several days thanks in large part to recommendations from
, , and , to whom I am most grateful. Be sure to subscribe to their newsletters, too, if you’re interested in words, language usage, and names. And you wouldn’t be here if you weren’t, right?For the newcomers, here’s an introduction, here’s what “Fritinancy” means, and here’s the whole newsletter archive. (My old Typepad blog, also called Fritinancy, is here.) Celebrating eight months of Substacking tomorrow, whoo-hoo! It’s all free, and likely to remain so until I change my mind and decide to monetize. I always welcome your comments, of course.
I’m in the wrong part of North America to view today’s total solar eclipse — if you experience it, leave a comment and let us know what it was like for you — so I’m making do by considering total in its many interesting forms. I’ll get to the word of the week, totalizing, in a bit, but first let’s look at the word of the day, totality. It’s meant “entirety” since the 17th century but acquired the astronomical sense of “total obscuration of the sun or moon in an eclipse; the moment of occurrence or time of duration of this” only in 1842, when it was used that way by a British astronomer, George Biddell Airy.1
Or take teetotal, “to abstain totally from intoxicating drink,” which began appearing in the 1820s and 1830s in the U.S., the U.K., and Ireland, but whose origins are disputed. (There’s no connection with tea.) Etymonline says teetotal is may have been introduced “in 1827 in a New York temperance society which recorded a T after the signature of those who had pledged total abstinence,” and then adds, disappointingly, “but contemporary evidence for this is wanting.”
Teetotal is related only faintly to teetotum, which Etymonline defines as “a small dreidel-like toy or device like a spinning top, with a letter on each of its four sides indicating the outcome for the player who spins it," Its name comes from T + Latin totum (“all, the whole”). I love that Etymonline relies on the Yiddish word dreidel to explain teetotum. Incidentally, Merriam-Webster says the first known use of dreidel in English was in 1916, which seems impossibly recent.
Then there’s totalitarian, which describes a system of government in which the individual is subservient to the state. Care to guess how and when that word first entered English? The year was 1926, and the source was a translation of an Italian book by Luigi Sturzo, a priest and politician forced into exile by the rise of Italian fascism.
I’d never heard of a totalizator, “a device for showing the number and amount of bets put on a race,” until I started researching this post, probably because gambling and horse-racing are total mysteries to me, although I do try to keep up with the jargon. Totalizator first appeared in 1879, says Merriam-Webster, which gives the machine sense of “pari-mutuel” as a synonym. It’s also known more conversationally as a “tote board.”
On to totalizing, our tantalizing total word of the week. It sparked my curiosity because I’ve been noticing it a lot lately. It turns out that it’s been on the rise only for the last 30 or so years.
The standard definition of totalize is “to add up” — just a fancier way of saying total. But when used as a modifier, totalizing can mean something a little different. The definition Google served me, from Oxford Languages, wasn’t totally helpful: “treating disparate parts as having one character, principle, or application.”
Totalizing is one of those words that Very Smart Guys — it’s almost always guys — use when making Important Statements. Here, for example, is Daniel Drezner, an international-politics professor at Tufts and author of Drezner’s World, writing in March that “the 2024 U.S. presidential election is going to be a totalizing news event,” which he doesn’t define or clarify. (Is it supposed to be obvious from the context?)
Or see
, arguing that “blue America needs to grow”: “[T]o an extent that progressive intellectuals neglect to appreciate, a totalizing anti-growth mindset has taken hold across huge swathes [sic] of the country.” , in his Bridging toward Belonging newsletter, posits that “Whiteness made claim to being the only reality, a totalizing framework for understanding life.”Or how about media theorist
, also last month, talking about “the false promise of the totalizing systems of the digital age.” Rushkoff uses “totalizing” a lot; his recent book Survival of the Richest discusses the “totalizing solutions” of the “entrepreneurial elite,” and back in 2013 he blogged about Communism, Socialism, fascism, and capitalism as “grand totalizing ideologies.”I was still a bit at sea, so I consulted ChatGPT.2 To my surprise, it came up with a pretty good response:
“Totalizing” refers to the process of encompassing or incorporating everything within a particular framework, system, or perspective. It implies a comprehensive or all-encompassing approach, where every aspect or element is considered and included. In various contexts, such as philosophy, sociology, or political theory, totalizing perspectives or ideologies seek to provide a unified explanation or understanding of reality, often by reducing diverse phenomena to a single overarching principle or framework. This term is often used critically, as it may overlook or suppress complexities, nuances, and diversity within the subject matter being analyzed.
As for a “totalizing event,” ChatGPT says it’s “one that has wide-ranging and profound effects, often permeating various aspects of society, culture, or individuals’ lives.”
When and why did the Very Smart Guys start using totalizing in the sense that ChatGPT favors? Rushkoff’s 2013 usage is the earliest I’ve found so far. But I’m guessing that shortly thereafter, the ascent of Donald J. Trump in national politics turned many people’s thoughts toward total- words (including total shit-show). In September 2018, David A. Graham, a staff writer for The Atlantic, wrote about “the totalizing logic of Trump” in which “Every story is, or eventually becomes, a story about the president himself.” And in September 2017, during Year 1 of Trump’s White House residency, Carina Chocano3 — a rare female totalizing-er — wrote for the New York Times Magazine about “important things” versus “distractions”:
Our tug of war over what is important and what is irrelevant reveals something unsettling: a bent toward totalizing ideologies and a seismic struggle over which one gets to lay claim — in our minds, at least — to the center of the universe.
Coincidentally, Chocano published that column one month after the last major North American eclipse. “In the weirdly denatured language of the news media,” she wrote, “August’s total solar eclipse was notable in large part as a potentially lethal distraction for drivers.”
Stay safe out there when the sun disappears, and don’t let any totalizing events, astronomical or otherwise, ruin your week.
“Airy” for an astronomer is a pretty good example of nominative determinism. It would have been even better if he’d become a meteorologist, or a balloonist. The Wikipedia entry for Airy includes this biographical note: “Airy gained popularity with his schoolmates through his great skill in the construction of peashooters.”
Chocano also published one of my favorite essay collections, You Play the Girl (2017).
>The definition Google served me, from Oxford Languages
Thank you for NOT saying "Google's definition is ...", an error I see all the time.
I was in the path of totality today and it was delightful. (Oh, please notice the pun!)
About teetotal, it sounds like the word you'd use if you'd been small and heard older people talk about capital T total.
"I'll only drink water!"
"Is that all?"
"Capital T total, ma'am!"
"Put away the whisky, Albert, he's a teetotaller."