So, it seems nobody is ever 'in danger" anymore, just “in harm’s way”.
Am I missing something in translation?
Is “in harm’s way” somehow more politically correct than “in danger” or is there really a difference?
I use “in danger” in my techincal reports. “Downstream businesses along Highway 90 are in danger of inundation in the case of a breach of Lovely Lake”.
I haven’t noticed “in harm’s way” being used more, but it does sound more poetic.
Well, “in harm’s way” may connote a more conscious decision to take risks, as opposed to just blundering into them. At least that was implicit in John Paul Jones’ famous quote in the American Revolution,
“I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm’s way.”
I don’t know if he was the first to say it but no doubt he influenced people’s memories.
I’m just speculating but “in danger” may imply that death or serious injury is certain to occur if the current situation isn’t changed and “in harm’s way” may imply that death or serious injury is just probable.
For example, if you’re in a burning building, you’re going to die if you don’t leave - you’re in danger. But if you’re playing Russian Roulette, you certainly have a reasonable chance of being killed - you’re in harm’s way - but you might be lucky and remain unharmed.
I wonder if ‘in harm’s way’ became more common after Sept. 11, when the Megacult of Police and Firefighter Worship gained about a billion followers.
I also see it has varying levels of urgency. Like a toddler is crawling on a street. There is no traffic at the moment, so right now he’s okay, but he’s in harm’s way because it’s only a matter of time before a car comes along.
When a car does come along, if the kid is still on the street, he’s in danger.
“In harm’s way” to me implies that the event is avoidable or foreseeable, or that a choice was made to place oneself in the way of harm. Whereas danger is unforeseeable, created by forces outside of one’s control.
An old woman who wakes up in a flaming house is in danger. The fireman who goes into the building to save her is putting himself in harm’s way.
I think “in harm’s way” is just another cliché that journalists like to use every opportunity they get, like “four-legged friends” or “the rain didn’t dampen the spirits of the festivalgoers.” No need for any actual thought when you can get this kind of crap past your editor.
To me, placing yourself “in harm’s way” differs from being “in danger” in that it implies that your intent is to protect someone from harm.
If my girlfriend and I are caught in a tornado, we are both in danger. If I push her into a ditch and shield her with my body, I have placed myself in harm’s way.
I tend to think that it has something to do with journalism and that other explanations are perhaps over-thinking (At the risk of using another journalistic cliché.) it a bit.
Another vote for mindless journalistic cliche.