Should we talk about not catching “flak” when wearing your flak jacket? Is “flack” spelled similar to “quack”? Or else “flac” like “Big Mac”? “Flaque” like “plaque”?
First things first, let’s narrow it down to just “flak” or “flack” for this conversation.
- Catching flak/flack
- Getting flak/flack
- Taking flak/flack
As always, there’s a right answer, but there’s also a larger discussion. And this time, the conversation involves artillery, publicists, and the author Tom Wolfe. Sure, this sounds like the setup of a bad joke that I’ll catch flak/flack for, but stay with me.
Here’s what you need to know:
“Flak” and “flack” are both words.
Historically:
“Flak” derives from the German word fliegerabwehrkanonen, a combination of “flier” “defense” and cannons.” In World War II, the fliegerabwehrkanonen, which were pretty much anti-aircraft guns, were often abbreviated as “flak.” Thus, to be “catching flak” was a literal reference to catching gunfire. You can see where the “FL,” “A,” and “K” come from in this German word, but remember that there is no “C.” The word “flak” might look awkward to English speakers, but this is the original correct word. (If you’re now thinking about other war-based expressions, like “how do you like them apples?,” your head’s in the right place.)
“To catch flak” in a figurative sense, as in to take harsh criticism (as opposed to gunfire), began to appear in the 1960s, and it’s been a common expression ever since. However, this isn’t the end of the story.
Catching, taking, getting, or receiving “flack” started to appear in the late 1900s. Where did this come from? Well, it may be a typo that gained popularity, but there’s also another word to bring into this discussion.
“Flack” has been synonymous with “publicist” since the 1930s, interestingly enough (annoyingly enough?) the same decade that “flak” entered the English language. The origin of “flack” has a few theories, but it’s most commonly tied to a well-known Hollywood press agent of the time, Gene Flack. Was the man so good at his job that his name became synonymous with the type of work he did? Possibly. Kudos.
So, knowing this, here’s a true statement: a flack (publicist) might catch flak (criticism) for how they portray a book about fliegerabwehrkanonen (flak).
End of story? Almost.
The English language, as we know, can sometimes be fluid, and this is the continuing story of “flak” or “flack.”
As I noted, “flack” started being used for both definitions in the late 1900s, and these days, many consider “flack” to be an acceptable alternate spelling of “flak.” Why? We don’t know. The English language keeps us on our toes, and sometimes social acceptance leads to language transformation. (I’m looking at you, single-word-form of “nevermind.”)
But where does Tom Wolfe come into this story?
Well, in his 1970 book, The Bonfire of the Vanities, he wrote about “flak-catchers.” And who were these “flak-catchers”? They were workers whose jobs were to respond to criticism. These were not technically “publicists” in his novel; however, the connection between “flak-catchers” and those known as “flacks” seemed to stick in the public mind.
So, there you have it: guns, publicists, and Tom Wolfe.
These days, you might be able to get away with spelling this word “flak” or “flack”; however, the historical record argues for “flak” if we’re talking about criticism. And in the end, I will too.
Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more articles like this.