Punkins and Prohibition

The two topics I wanted to blog about aren't related except that they've come into my consciousness the past 24 hours. They interest me, but I know that what I find fascinating would bore others to tears - I hope that this is short and humorous enough to entertain instead.

First, punkins:

I was just wondering about the differences in pronunciation of the word "pumpkin." My grandpa always pronounces it as "punkin." When I tried to search for what might be the reason for the wildly different ways of saying it, I was only able to find a dictionary entry stating that the pronunciation was: 

[puhmp-kin or, commonly, puhng-kin]

Then I found a hubpage made about pumpkins. No mention of how to pronounce it, but the article is educational. My favorite part was the history of how the pumpkin pie came about:

 instead of cutting them into strips and baking them, the colonists cut off the top, scooped out the seeds, and then filled the hollow pumpkin with milk, honey and spices. Once filled, they replaced the top and baked the pumpkin in the hot coals of a fire thereby inventing pumpkin pie

I still am not quite sure what regional differences, etc. there are - I'm open to ideas.

Prohibition:

One of the stranger aspects of volunteering at a church library that has been out of commission for years is finding, for lack of a better word, archaic texts. "Bombs of Infinite Power" which has been "stockpiled" by Allen R. Blegen is merely a long list of short and popular Bible passages. While this can be explained by the publication date, which is 1964, there is no reason to have it in any current library, only in archives. 

Another old pamphlet-sized monograph is titled "To Drink or Not to Drink? A Vital, Personal Problem Facing America To-Day" by James W. Johnson. There is no publication date listed, but it's clear it was after the Great War (World War I) and before World War II, during the Prohibition Era (1920-33). I had expected to see a religious argument but there was very little Biblical reference.

Instead, it started out with a numerated list of reasons drinking should be legal. Not too bad, I give the writer points for attempting to give voice to both sides. However, there are the four pages of both introduction and anti-Prohibition arguments contrasting the 16 pages of why Prohibition is necessary.

The four main points:

1. Liberty
1. PRO Obviously, thinking men and women should be able to have the choice and if they're not thinking, they're only hurting themselves, not others.
2. CON But they're not hurting just themselves; we have a duty to be our brother's keeper. The Law should uphold the moral law. States have to give up some of their liberty to become part of the United States. "The appeal for personal liberty is powerful. The appeal for brotherhood is overwhelming."
2. Old Customs
1. PRO We have indulged in alcoholic beverages for ages. "The abuse of wine was always condemned, not wine used in moderation."
2. CON Just because we've always done it doesn't mean we should continue to do it. Think about polygamy ("Even when practiced under the camouflage of religion the Mormons ...") and slavery.
3. Physical Needs
1. PRO Alcohol can be stimulating and cheering when used in moderation. It is even recommended by doctors in certain cases of physical illness.
2. CON Even for the cases which alcohol can help, there are alternatives which work just as well, if not better. There are far too many negative outcomes ("The alcoholic ward, the crime committed in drunken frenzy, the suicidal act ...") to deny that it is usually tragic for the many.
4. The Social Instinct
1. PRO "In all social gatherings from time immemorial, at feasts, banquets and celebrations, the use of wine has been the custom." And being good social animals is important.
2. CON The saloon is the poor man's club, but "it must be admitted that poverty is increased by drinking." Along with the patriotic duty that calls for every man to be his fittest.

And it goes on to describe other pro-Prohibitionist points, most of which are no big surprise, including the argument that man must be protected from his temptations but that the expressed desire of the majority for the Prohibition will win out in the end. "There may be a return to (previous) conditions ... but such a setback will only be temporary. Because, as Lincoln so tersely said, 'You can't fool all the people all the time.'"

The passage I find most amusing is the one about the "very real difference between the temperament of Americans and the temperament of foreigners." How Americans are intense, high-strung, and keen, which is responsible for excess in many ways. "We cannot even enter into our sports without often suffering more from exhaustion and overplay than we benefit from the relaxation and the exercise. This is especially true of our young men and women. It is not equally true of most foreigners."

Can't you just hear the grumpy old man's voice in your head from 80 to 90 years ago?