The Etymologicon: A Circular Stroll Through the Hidden Connections of the English Language by Mark Forsyth

rejected Freud’s pansexualism (not a sin of cookery, but the belief that everything comes down to nooky) and ran off to become a Jungian.
    Having invented his own form of psychoanalysis, Jung now had naming rights. So it was Carl and not Sigmund who decided that a psychological problem should be called a complex . Then he thought up introverts and extroverts , and finally, realising that naming was a doddle, he invented synchronicity and ambivalent . And with that he sat down to rest on his laurels and consider his subterranean grandparents.
    But the grand panjandrum and greatest inventor of psychological terms was neither Sigmund Freud nor Carl Jung. It was a man who was just as important but is far less known today: Richard von Krafft-Ebing.
    Krafft-Ebing was born sixteen years before Dr Freud and 35 years before Jung. He was, essentially, the first doctor to start writing case histories of people whose sexual behaviour wasn’t entirely respectable.
    The book that resulted, Psychopathia Sexualis (1886), was so scandalous that large chunks of it had to be written in Latin, in order to keep it out of the hands of the prurient public. The idea was that if you were clever enough to understand Latin, you couldn’t possibly be a pervert (something that nobody mentioned to Caligula).
    Because Krafft-Ebing was a pioneer he had to invent terms left, right and centre. Humanity had a long history of condemning peccadilloes, but not of classifying them. So it was in the translation of Psychopathia Sexualis that English first got the words homosexual , heterosexual , necrophilia , frotteur , anilingus , exhibitionism , sadism and masochism .
    Sadism had in fact been around for a while in French. The French writer Donatien Alphonse François Marquis de Sade was famous for producing horrid books about people being horrid to each other in bed. Really horrid. Catchy titles like One Hundred and Twenty Days of Sodom should give you some idea, but a clearer image of the nature of Sade’s work comes from the fact that in the 1930s a historian by the name of Geoffrey Gorer, who was researching the marquis, went to the British Museum to read some of de Sade’s works that were stored there. However, he was told by the British Museum that it was a rule that people were only allowed to read de Sade’s books ‘in the presence of the Archbishop of Canterbury and two other trustees’.
    So it’s easy to see how de Sade’s notoriety meant that his favourite activity became known as sadism in French. But Richard von Krafft-Ebing also needed a name for sadism’s opposite: masochism.
    Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, who gave us the word masochism , is known to few, or less. This seems rather appropriate. While the Marquis de Sade strides around spanking Fame’s bottom with a hardbacked copy of The Hundred and Twenty Days of Sodom , little Leo is forgotten in some ratty cellar, wearing a gimp-suit and whimpering over a copy of Venus in Furs .
    Venus in Furs (1870) was Masoch’s great work. It describes a chap called Severin who signs a contract with a lady (I use the term loosely) who is thereby:
… entitled not only to punish her slave as she deems best, even for the slightest inadvertence or fault, but also is herewith given the right to torture him as the mood may seize her or merely for the sake of whiling away the time …
    As you can imagine, Venus in Furs would make a splendid book-group read, or christening present. Yet even Masoch’s masterwork is better known these days as a song by the Velvet Underground, whose lyrics have a fragile connection to the original novel, mainly in the use of the name Severin.
    Venus in Furs was rather closely based upon Leo’s own life. Masoch met a girl with the ridiculous name of Fanny Pistor. They signed just such a contract as the one above and set off to Florence together, with him pretending to be her servant. Exactly how much time Fanny Pistor whiled away and how is not recorded, and it’s probably