Observations...

Well, I spent the better part of yesterday comparing what John Keegan wrote about Clausewitz with what Clausewitz actually wrote. The reason I did this was originally because I have to, but as I progressed I found myself actually enjoying this a lot. I also found a terrifying interview with Keegan (here: http://www.booknotes.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1198) which did pretty much nothing for my confidence in him. Plus I've never been able to understand historians that read books on history because it's their "work". I do however like what he's saying about writing "a" history rather than "the" history.

Any old how. Today's most annoying and media-abused word is "coup". Everything's a coup these days. It's getting bloody annoying. This is a good example of how a word is changing it's meaning due to the hi-jacking of the word by people who use it in a different way than say... The Oxford English dictionary. Although actually, the OED definition of a coup is a "notable or successful stroke or move", which I guess could apply to an underground movement on the internet trying to get enough people to vote for a certain BB contestant's eviction. I maintain that it's a watered-down version of a coup though. And it's been used most frequently lately to describe everything from voting on Let's dance to today's headline in the main Swedish tabloid; hockeyplayer Sundin's "coup"; which consisted of him paying for everything at the party celebrating recent Olympic gold. I guess that would qualify as a notable or successful stroke or move. Oh, and that's the definition in the Concise Oxford Dictionary, ninth edition, "the foremost authority on current English". Just saying.