|
So I was sitting here realizing that far too much time has passed since I actually wrote an article, due to the fact that I've been slaving away at hammering out a schedule for homework assignments. The professors are great, (go NAU!), but the workload has taken a little to adjust to. No worries, though.
Anyhow, as I was sitting there, it occurred to me: By Jove! I have NO idea where these frickin' phrases and statements come from!!
For instance, there's one phrase I've always wondered about. It's "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth." Now, for replacement purposes, I can see where that would be sound advice. After all, you wouldn't want to try replacing a tooth with an eye, seeing a how they are rather squishy, and you certainly wouldn't want to replace an eye with a tooth!
Although, if you're willing to give your right eyetooth, I suppose that wouldn't be so bad. But why not give your left eyetooth? Isn't it just a toothy? Or is this a case of the left not knowing what the right is doing?
Now that I think about it, that's talking about hands, not teeth. Seeing as how hands are a unit of measurement for horses, and horses work like dogs, does it make people strong as an ox? Or are they stupid to have horse sense? After all, they DO see the world through blinders.
At the same time, though, I suppose it's better to see the world through blinders than to be blind and leading the blind. In fact, it seems to me that such an arrangement is a lawsuit waiting to happen. Wouldn't it be better to have the deaf leading the dumb and the blind?
That way, you see, the deaf can see the hole and stop while gesturing and making as many sounds as possible, which will cause the mute to hold up bringing the blind to a stop as well.
Hey, I'm not being insensitive here- I'm just trying to point out a way these phrase makers could save money in legal fees! I think maybe they just turned a blind eye to it. Either way, I hope they aren't deaf to my suggestions.
However it goes, at least with my way, the three disabled folks stay out of the hole while the ditch diggers fall into it themselves, and then we can have some rockers roll in for a finale. The bonus here is that no one gets the pits, but everyone gets to mosh.
I suppose, though, that the left not knowing what the right is doing could also be talking about politics. Seems to me though that that many bloodsucking insects would have the inside track on whatever is circulating through the system. It doesn't make a lick of sense.
Actually, even THAT saying doesn't hold water, because how can it be sensible to be at a salt lick? At best, people are being peeping toms, and at worst, you're wearing a bullseye on your chest.
Of course, no one has an actual bullseye on their chest, unless they're a Far Side character or have a bummer of a birthmark. If that were the case, it'd be sheer dumb luck. Most luck is, of course, pretty dumb, especially for those people with bad luck. Still, I guess they're better off than no luck at all.
The idea of this sheer dumb luck though is also something that escapes me. Most of the time, we seem to be blinded to to what's actually going on, then when something DOES happen, it's "sheer dumb luck." Answer me this- What was so transparent about it?!
Frankly, I think it's a case of mistaken identity, though why we use THAT phrase to mean anything is beyond me. It's not like anyone is ever going to dedicate time and effort into figuring out WHY people keep using these phrases.
In any case... See? There it is again! I guess it refers to the fact that no matter how you package it, people will keep opening up these cans of worms and letting the cat out of the bag, if only to pull the wool over the eyes of the sheep in the fold. If I may be frank, this will most likely continue forever and a day- And that's no bull.
|
BLOGOSPHERE 
