Timekeepers. Simon Garfield
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Timekeepers - Simon Garfield страница 6

Название: Timekeepers

Автор: Simon Garfield

Издательство: Ingram

Жанр: Историческая литература

Серия:

isbn: 9781782113201

isbn:

СКАЧАТЬ adds about 2,500 new and revised words and phrases to the online version of its third edition (in print, the second edition runs to 20 volumes, containing 615,000 entries). Many of the new words are slang, and many of the others derive from popular culture or digital tech. In contrast to the new words, the OED also maintains a list of the old words we use most often, and they are words we might expect: the, be, to, of and, of course, and. But what are the most commonly used nouns? Month is at number 40. Life is number 9. Day is 5, and Year is 3. Person is at number 2, while the most commonly used noun in the English language is time.2

      The OED observes that our lexicon relies on time not merely as a single word, but as a philosophy: more actions and phrases depend on time than any other. On time, last time, fine time, fast time, recovery time, reading time, all-time. The list goes on for ages. It leaves us in no doubt of time’s unassailable presence in our lives. And reading just the beginning of that list might lead one to imagine we have come too far, and are travelling too fast, to reinvent time or stop it altogether. But as we shall see in the next chapter, we once had a notion that such things were both possible and desirable.

      _______________

       1 Which reminded me of that joke where Big Ben talks to the Leaning Tower of Pisa and says, ‘I’ve got the time if you’ve got the inclination.’

       2 Oxford University Press conducted its research online, consulting books, newspapers, magazines, blogs and Hansard.

Image

      Counter-revolutionary: the 10-hour clock finds a new admirer.

       Chapter Two

Image

      How the French Messed Up the Calendar

      Puffball, walnut, trout, crayfish, safflower, otter, basket of gold, truffle, sugar maple, wine press, plough, orange, teasel, cornflower, tench. At the end of January 2015, Ruth Ewan positioned the last of her 360 objects in a large bright room overlooking London’s Finchley Road and tried to turn back time. Ewan, who was born in Aberdeen in 1980, was an artist much interested in time and its radical ambitions, and this new project, entitled Back to the Fields, represented an act of historical reversal so audacious and unsettling that a casual visitor might have suspected both sorcery and lunacy.

      It does look like witchcraft. The objects, placed primarily on the parquet floor, also included winter squash, skirret, marshmallow, black salsify, a bread basket and a watering can. Some of the fresh produce ruined easily in the indoor conditions, and so there were occasional gaps in the display. Grapes, for instance, rotted fast, and it was up to the artist, or one of the assistants at Camden Arts Centre, to visit a nearby supermarket to replace them. The objects resembled a giant church harvest festival, but had a distinctly non-religious intent. And they were not chosen or arranged at random. The winter barley, for example, was deliberately separated from the six-row barley by salmon and tuberose, and the button mushroom was 60 items away from the shallot.

      The items were divided up into groups of 30, representing the days of the month. Each month was divided into 3 weeks of 10 days, while the number of days in a year remained the familiar 365 or 366. The 5- or 6-day shortfall in the new calculation was made up by festival days: Virtue, Talent, Labour, Conviction, Humour and, on leap years, Revolution. But the whole concept was a revolution, and certainly more than just elaborate and provocative art: it was a vivid representation of the idea that time could begin anew, modernity running wild in the fields of nature.

      Ruth Ewan was recreating the French Republican calendar. This was both a political and academic rejection of the ancien régime, and the practical conclusion to the logical theory that the traditional Christian Gregorian calendar should be stormed alongside the Bastille and the Tuileries.

      Astonishingly, this new calendar caught on for a while (or perhaps not so astonishingly: the guillotine still glistened in the autumn sun). It came into being officially on 24 October (Poire of Brumaire) 1793, although it was backdated to 22 September (Raisin of Vendémiaire) 1792, which became the start of the Republic Year 1. This radical notion lasted more than 12 years until 1 January 1806, when Napoleon Bonaparte presumably reasoned ça suffit.

Image

      Outside this agricultural and seasonal room in north-west London was a second Ruth Ewan re-creation, hung high on the wall: a clock with only 10 hours. This was based on another Revolutionary and doomed French experiment in the reformatting of time – the decimalisation of the dial, a complete refiguring of the day.

      Four years earlier, Ewan had tried to confound a whole town with her wrong clocks. The Folkestone Triennial of 2011, a show utterly reliant on time passing regularly and predictably, featured 10 of her 10-hour clocks positioned strategically throughout the town, including one above Debenhams, one above the town hall, one in an antiquarian bookshop and one in a local taxi.

      For a few minutes, the 10-hour clock seemed to make sense, or at least as much sense as the 12-hour one. The day was reduced to 10 hours, while each hour was divided into 100 minutes, and each minute split into 100 seconds. (One revolutionary hour was thus 2 regular hours and 24 standard minutes, while 1 revolutionary minute was 1 standard minute and 26.4 standard seconds.) The midnight hour 10 was at the top, the noon hour 5 at the bottom, and, if you were used to the regular 12-hour face, 8 minutes to 4 on the Revolutionary one was in fact anyone’s guess. The French – or at least those French citizens to whom precise time was important in the 1790s and could afford a new timepiece – struggled to come to terms with the new state-imposed clock for 17 months and then shook it off like a bad dream. It remains an anachronism of history, although one to which obsessives will occasionally return, like those who want to put Australia at the top of the globe.1

      Ewan told me that she wanted to make the clocks because she wanted to see how they would look; she knew of only one working example in a museum in Switzerland and a handful in France. But when she approached clockmakers with her idea ‘I just got laughed at’. After phoning round six or seven clockmakers she found a keen firm called the Cumbria Clock Company (its website announced a specialism in ‘turret clock horology’, and claimed the staff were as happy oiling cogs in the smallest church as they were fixing bigger problems, which recently included work at Salisbury Cathedral and Big Ben). The company also offered services such as ‘night silencing’. The company had never made a 10-hour clock mechanism before, let alone 10 of them.

      Ewan’s disruptive show at Folkestone had a brilliant name: We Could Have Been Anything That We Wanted To Be. The title came from a song in the film Bugsy Malone, and Ewan particularly liked the second line: ‘And it’s not too late to change.’ The clocks were ‘an old item, but they also seemed to talk of a possible future,’ Ewan says, putting her finger on the nature of time itself. ‘I wanted to allude to the fact that we had rejected this clock once, but it may come up again.’

      Once the clocks are mounted in a public space, they are ridiculously hard to read. ‘A lot of people look at it and go, “all right, I get it”, but they realize they haven’t fully understood it: they read it as being a 20-hour clock and not a true 10-hour clock. In the course of a day, the hour hand rotates only once, not twice.’

      When we spoke, Ruth Ewan’s energetic obsession with time showed no sign of slacking. She had just started her stint as an artist in residence at Cambridge, where, alongside plant scientists, she was analysing Carl Linnaeus’s great flower clock of 1751. Linnaeus, a Swedish botanist, had proposed an intricately arranged СКАЧАТЬ