There are two phrases I’ve often heard people complain about, and I’ve never quite gotten what the problem is.
The first one, seen most recently in this thread, is “comparing apples and oranges”, and the second is “have your cake and eat it too”.
I understand what the arguments are against both phrases, but obviously they don’t actually address what the statements actually mean, and I’m genuinely unsure of whether people really feel these phrases don’t make sense, or if they’re just being cheeky?
I mean yes, obviously there are many similarities between apples and oranges that can be compared, but if I go to the store to buy apples, and am comparing the apples in the bin to each other to select the best ones, it just isn’t gonna be helpful if the clerk points out a flawless orange and says, “what about this one?”
And the cake, I’ve heard so many people ask how one can eat cake one doesn’t have, and I again honestly don’t know if they’re joking or not?
So, am I just being whooshed by like, half the people I’ve ever met? Or do people truly see these phrases differently than I do?
The problem is not from the saying per se, even though it is, IMHO, stupid; the problem is that it’s misused and wielded as a thought blocker rather than a means to reaching truth. Virtually every time I hear it used, it is used to assert that clearly comparable things are not so, and the mere statement of apples & oranges is proof enough to back it. The irony, then, is that the things in question can be compared, just like apples and oranges can be compared—even though they’re ostensibly different. Also, the self-defeating nature of the metaphor—comparing a comparison to comparing apples & oranges is, in and of itself, comparing apples and oranges—means that the claim that a comparison is invalid is itself invalid.
What really motivated my question, though, is a brilliant article in the Annals of Improbable Research, in which the author compared the spectragraphs (IIRC) of apples and oranges and found them to be very similar. His closing statement is that he’ll carry a copy of the graph in his pocket, so that whenever someone says that he is comparing apples to oranges, he can pull out the graph and shout, “No, this is comparing apples to oranges!”
I suspect people just don’t get that one. Eating one’s cake and still having it is impossible, the saying is properly invoked when one is trying to achieve two mutually exclusive goals, right? This saying doesn’t bother me. It did when I was a kid, because it didn’t make sense at the time.
No probs for me. The two phrases are pretty clear to me. I do use the “apples and oranges” phrase now and then to mean “two things should not be compared”, and not “two things cannot be compared”.
Neither bother me. The problem is something I’ve railed against time and time again on this board: people are overliteral and have no imagination. Any metaphor is immediately deconstructed for a literal meaning that’s completely irrelevant to the point being made.
Comparing apples and oranges is a colorful way of saying “comparing two dissimilar things.” Some people tend to think that it makes more sense to be literal and dull than colorful and interesting.
“Have your cake and eat it, too” is nitpicked by the overliteral because they can’t conceive the events might be meant to be simultaneous. In addition, the fact that it could be read as a reversal of events makes it more memorable.
But again, people prefer “accurate,” no matter how dull it is.