Quote Investigator® – Page 160

Quote Origin: Only Monarchs, Editors, and People with Tapeworms Have the Right to Use the Editorial ‘We’

Mark Twain? Robert Ingersoll? Edgar Wilson Nye? John Phoenix? George H. Derby? Roscoe Conkling? John Fiske? Horace Porter? Henry David Thoreau? Hyman G. Rickover

Question for Quote Investigator: Some writers use “we” as a form of self-reference. For example, an author might state: We base our opinion on the highest authority. A comically reproachful remark about this practice has been attributed to Mark Twain:

Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial ‘we’.

Similar comments have been ascribed to humorist Bill Nye (Edgar Wilson Nye), transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau, and orator Robert Ingersoll. Would you please examine this topic?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The earliest pertinent citation known to QI appeared in the November 1855 issue of “The Knickerbocker” which contained an evaluation of a forthcoming book titled “Phoenixiana: Or Sketches and Burlesques” by John Phoenix. The reviewer reprinted a passage from the prospective volume by Phoenix that included a simple instance of the joke. Boldface has been added to excerpts:¹

It will be perceived that I have not availed myself of the editorial privilege of using the plural noun in speaking of myself. This is simply because I consider it a ridiculous affectation. I am a ‘lone, lorn man,’ unmarried, (the LORD be praised for His infinite mercy!) and though blessed with a consuming appetite, which causes the keepers of the house where I board to tremble, I do not think I have a tape-worm; therefore I have no claim to call myself ‘WE:’ and I shall by no means fall into that editorial absurdity.

John Phoenix was the pen name of the writer George H. Derby who was a Lieutenant in the U.S. Army originally from California. When his book “Phoenixiana” was released in 1856 the printed text differed slightly from the passage above with the addition of the word “whatever” to yield the phrase “no claim whatever”.²

Derby’s early version of the quip and other important citations were identified by linguist Ben Zimmer who currently writes a wonderful column about language for “The Wall Street Journal”. The jest has metamorphosed over the years, and a wide variety of risible rationales have been presented to justify the use of the pronoun “we” including these:

A person with a mouse in their pocket
A king, queen, emperor, or president
A pregnant woman
A newspaper or magazine editor
A person with a tapeworm
A schizophrenic individual

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: The Difficult We Do Immediately. The Impossible Takes a Little Longer

Charles Alexandre de Calonne? Lady Aberdeen? George Santayana? Fridtjof Nansen? Nicolas Beaujon? Baron de Breteuil? Mrs. William Tilton?

Question for Quote Investigator: There exists a family of entertaining sayings that cheerfully displays inordinate confidence:

1) If the thing be possible, it is already done; if impossible, it shall be done.

2) If it is simply difficult, it is done. If it is impossible, it shall be done.

3) The difference between the difficult and the impossible is that the impossible takes a little longer time.

4) The difficult is that which can be done immediately, the impossible that which takes a little longer.

5) The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer.

6) The miraculous we do immediately. The impossible takes only a little bit longer.

These phrases have been linked to the French statesman Charles Alexandre de Calonne, the American essayist George Santayana, and the Norwegian polar explorer Fridtjof Nansen. Would you please examine this topic?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The earliest evidence located by QI was published in a 1794 collection of tales titled “Domestic Anecdotes of the French Nation”. The saying was ascribed to Charles Alexandre de Calonne who was the controversial Finance Minister for King Louis XVI of France and Queen Marie Antoinette. Before the excerpt below had been published, the French Revolution had swept the King and Queen from power, and both had died on the guillotine in 1793. Boldface has been added to excerpts:¹

When the queen asked Calonne for money, he more than once made use of this singular expression: If it is possible, madam, the affair is done; if it is impossible, it shall be done! Appropriate language for a French petit-maitre addressing his mistress, but not for a financier in whose hands was reposed the prosperity of an oppressed people!

The expression has been circulating and evolving for more than two hundred years. The popular novelist Anthony Trollope included an instance in his 1874 book “Phineas Redux” ascribing the words to a French Minister. Fridtjof Nansen spoke a version of the saying when he was a delegate to the League of Nations in 1925.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: When a Good Old Good Note Is Blown, All the Cats Dig It

Louis Armstrong? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: The renowned jazz trumpeter and vocalist Louis Armstrong believed in the universality of musical appeal. I think he once said:

When a good note’s blown, all the cats dig it.

The underlying challenge of this adage is to remain open to the appreciation of multiple musical styles and genres. I have relayed this perceptive quotation to others for many years, but I have not been able to find a solid citation. Would you please help?

Reply from Quote Investigator: In 1965 U.S. Senator Jacob K. Javits placed into the “Congressional Record” an article dated March 23, 1965 from the “San Francisco Chronicle”. The newspaper discussed Louis Armstrong’s well-received visit to the country of East Germany, and the title used his nickname: “‘Satchmo’ Takes Another Country”. Boldface has been added to excerpts:¹

. . . he has affected audiences of various races and tongues and creeds for a half century—again proving his contention that regardless of the language or political beliefs, “notes are all the same, everywhere” and “when a good old good note is blown, all the cats dig it.”

The wording differed slightly from the version given by the questioner. The word “good” was used twice. Also, the context indicated that the saying had been used by Armstrong at some time in the past; hence, an earlier citation probably exists, but this was the earliest close match located by QI.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: One Would Risk Being Disgusted If One Saw Politics, Justice, or One’s Dinner in the Making

Nicolas Chamfort? Marchand? Anonymous?

Question for Quote Investigator: You have previously examined a well-known comment comparing the construction of laws and sausages:

Laws are like sausages. It’s better not to see them being made.

I believe that a similar remark was made earlier by the Frenchman Nicolas Chamfort comparing justice and meals, but I have not been able to find a citation. Are you familiar with his statement? Would you please explore this topic?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The French writer Nicolas Chamfort was a famous wit and epigrammatist who socialized with the aristocracy but supported the French Revolution. He died in 1794 and several collections of anecdotes and aphorisms were published posthumously. In 1798 the periodical “L’Esprit des Journaux” printed material from Chamfort’s pen that included the following item:¹

Un certain Marchand, avocat, homme d’esprit, disait: On court les risques du dégoût en voyant comment l’administration, la justice & la cuisine se préparent.

Here are two possible translations into English:

A clever lawyer named Marchand used to say, “It can be disgusting to see what goes into public administration, justice, and food.”

A certain witty advocate, Marchand, observed: “One would risk being disgusted if one saw politics, justice, and one’s dinner in the making.”

Interestingly, Chamfort disclaimed credit, but his name has remained firmly attached to the saying because of his long-lived fame.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: The Race Is Not Always to the Swift, Nor the Battle to the Strong; But That Is the Best Way to Bet

Damon Runyon? Franklin P. Adams? Hugh E. Keough? George D. Prentice? Luke McLuke? Grantland Rice? Burns Mantle? Anonymous?

Question for Quote Investigator: A famous verse in the Bible instructs readers that the advantages enjoyed by an individual do not guarantee his or her success:¹

I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

A humorous reaction to this proverbial wisdom has become popular. Here are two versions:

1) The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that is the way to bet.
2) It may be that the race is not always to the swift, but that is the best way to bet.

These words have been attributed to Damon Runyon, a newspaperman whose short stories inspired the Broadway musical “Guys and Dolls” and to Franklin P. Adams, an influential columnist who composed “The Conning Tower”. Would you please explore this topic?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The earliest close match for the expression found by QI appeared in the widely circulated magazine “Collier’s” in February 1919. Franklin P. Adams wrote the saying, but he did not take credit for the remark; instead, he ascribed the quip to a prominent sportswriter named Hugh E. Keough. Boldface has been added to excerpts:²

As Hugh Keough used to say: “The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.”

Damon Runyon also employed the saying, but he credited Keough. In addition, other well-known columnists such as drama critic Burns Mantle and sportswriter Grantland Rice ascribed a similar joke to Keough.

Yet, the situation was complicated because the jest has been evolving for more than one hundred and eighty years, and multiple versions have achieved wide distribution during this long period. A precursor that presented betting odds appeared in 1833 in “Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine”:³

Now we say that the race is—if not always—ninety-nine times in a hundred—to the swift, and the battle to the strong.

In July 1861 “The New York Ledger” printed a collection of sayings under the title “Wit and Wisdom”. The following instance used the phrase “ninety-nine times in a hundred”, and the quip structure was parallel to the modern version:⁴

To be sure the race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but it is ninety-nine times in a hundred.

The newspaper article was prepared by George D. Prentice, and it was described as a mixture of original and reprinted material. On the same day, a matching saying was printed in “The Springfield Daily Republican”⁵ of Springfield, Massachusetts. The article was titled “Selected Miscellany”, and no author was listed. Perhaps Prentice reformulated a statement he had previously read or heard.

Special thanks to top researcher Barry Popik for his invaluable efforts on this topic that were recorded on his web page here.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It

Voltaire? François-Marie Arouet? S. G. Tallentyre? Evelyn Beatrice Hall? Ignazio Silone? Douglas Young? Norbert Guterman?

Question for Quote Investigator: Would you please explore a famous saying that apparently has been misattributed to Voltaire:

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

The words above reportedly originated with an English author named Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906. There is a different version in French, but I do not think it is authentic:

Monsieur l’abbé, je déteste ce que vous écrivez, mais je donnerai ma vie pour que vous puissiez continuer à écrire.

Here is one rendering in English:

Monsieur l’abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.

What do you think?

Reply from Quote Investigator: Voltaire was the pen name of François-Marie Arouet who died in 1778. The earliest evidence of the saying appeared many years afterwards in the 1906 book “The Friends of Voltaire” by S. G. Tallentyre which was the pseudonym of historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall.

Her book described an incident involving the French philosopher Claude-Adrien Helvétius who in 1758 published a controversial work titled “De l’esprit” (“On the Mind”). The book was condemned in the Parlement of Paris and by the Collège de Sorbonne. Voltaire was unimpressed with the text, but he considered the attacks unjustified. After Voltaire learned that the book by Helvétius had been publicly incinerated he reacted as follows according to Hall:¹

‘What a fuss about an omelette!’ he had exclaimed when he heard of the burning. How abominably unjust to persecute a man for such an airy trifle as that!

‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,’ was his attitude now.

The above passage was confusing because Hall enclosed the now famous statement in quotation marks. Yet, the elegant phrase depicted Hall’s conception of Voltaire’s internal mental attitude and not his actual spoken words. Indeed, Hall asserted that the words were hers and not Voltaire’s in a 1939 letter published in the journal “Modern Language Notes”. Nevertheless, the misunderstanding persists to this day.

The questioner highlighted a French version of the saying, and QI has located a new matching citation in 1950, but the origin of this French statement remains uncertain. Detailed information is given further below.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: It Is Better to Know Nothing than to Know What Ain’t So

Josh Billings? Artemus Ward? Will Rogers? Abraham Lincoln? Mark Twain? Friedrich Nietzsche? Anonymous?

A drawing of a man with long hair and beard.

Question for Quote Investigator: Here are two versions of an expression I am trying to trace:

1) It’s better to know nothing than to know what ain’t so.

2) It is better not to know so much, than to know so many things that ain’t so.

Should these words be credited to Mark Twain, Josh Billings, Artemus Ward, Will Rogers, or someone else?

Reply from Quote Investigator: In 1874 the following compendium was released: “Everybody’s Friend or Josh Billing’s Encyclopedia and Proverbial Philosophy of Wit and Humor”. The apostrophe in the name Billings was misplaced in the title. The work employed nonstandard spelling which causes headaches for modern researchers who are attempting to find matches using standard spelling. One section was labeled “Affurisms” because it contained “Aphorisms”. The book included two thematically relevant statements:¹

A) I honestly beleave it iz better tew know nothing than two know what ain’t so.

B) Wisdum don’t konsist in knowing more that iz new, but in knowing less that iz false.

Here are the two sentences written with standard spelling:

A) I honestly believe it is better to know nothing than to know what ain’t so.

B) Wisdom don’t consist in knowing more that is new, but in knowing less that is false

QI believes that Josh Billings can be credited with the sayings above. There exists a large family of semantically overlapping expressions that form an inclusive superset, and QI will eventually examine some of the other members of this extended group.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Drunk on the Idea That Love, Only Love, Could Heal Our Brokenness

F. Scott Fitzgerald? Christopher Poindexter? Anonymous?

Question for Quote Investigator: Goodreads is one of the most popular community websites for readers, and it includes a massive collection of quotations. Since anyone can share a quotation it is unsurprising that some of them are misattributed or inaccurately stated. Recently, I came across the following words which were credited to the classic novel “The Great Gatsby” by F. Scott Fitzgerald:

And in the end, we were all just humans, drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness.

This statement has been propagated through social media channels such as Twitter, Tumblr, Pinterest, and Facebook with an ascription to Fitzgerald, but I know it definitely is not in the “The Great Gatsby”. This is confusing. What do you think?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The poet Christopher Poindexter crafted this expression. The earliest evidence located by QI was a tweet dated May 14, 2013 from the account @healthesebones. This account is currently inactive, but in the past it was used by Poindexter.¹

The tweet referred to the fourth short poem in a cycle called “The blooming of madness” written by the artist, and the link within the tweet pointed to an image shared by Poindexter via his Instagram account that displayed the verse as a typewritten palimpsest fragment using black and red ink. See here.²

When QI used twitter to ask Poindexter about the quotation he replied emphatically via his current account @ChristopherPoin:³

. . . this is my quote. It has been misquoted everywhere on the Internet. You will not find it in Fitzgerald’s books.

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Have You Tried Curiosity?

Dorothy Parker? Leonard Lyons? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: The famous wit Dorothy Parker was a friend of Alexander Woollcott, a notable writer for “The New Yorker” magazine. When Woollcott’s ancient cat developed a serious malady he was told by a veterinarian that the animal would have to be put to sleep. Uncertain of how to proceed, he consulted with Parker who said, “Have you tried curiosity?”

I offer my apologies to cat lovers for retelling this anecdote. Would you please examine the veracity of this incident?

Reply from Quote Investigator: To understand Parker’s quip the reader must be aware of an odd piece of proverbial wisdom that was in circulation by the 1800s:

Curiosity killed the cat.

A precursor proverb using the same template employed the word “care” instead of “curiosity”; the term “care” referred to worry and anxiety. For example, Shakespeare wrote in “Much Ado About Nothing” circa 1599:

What! courage, man! What though care killed a cat, thou hast mettle enough in thee to kill care.

The earliest instance of the Parker quip located by QI appeared in the popular syndicated gossip column of Leonard Lyons in 1966.¹ This version of the tale did not involve Woollcott, and the incident described occurred one week before the publication of the column when Dorothy Parker visited the residence of the actor Zero Mostel. Boldface has been added to excerpts. Ellipses were present in the original text:²

Ian Hunter also was among the guests, and Mostel asked him about his cat — which terrorizes everyone: “Have you killed that cat yet?” … “No, I haven’t,” Hunter said. “Frankly, I can’t afford it — to pay the fee for killing my cat.” … Mrs. Parker suggested: “Have you tried curiosity?”

Below are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Government Is Like Fire, a Dangerous Servant and a Fearful Master

George Washington? John Tillotson? Jonathan Swift? James Fenimore Cooper? Frederick Uttley Laycock? Robert Heinlein? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: A cautionary statement about statecraft has often been attributed to George Washington. Here are three versions:

1) Government is like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
2) Government, like fire, is a troublesome servant and a terrible master.
3) A government is like fire, a handy servant, but a dangerous master.

Washington died in 1799, but I have seen no citations in the 1700s or 1800s; therefore, I am suspicious. Would you please examine the provenance of this remark?

Reply from Quote Investigator: Several researchers have attempted to trace this saying, and no substantive evidence supporting the ascription to George Washington has yet been located. The earliest linkage to Washington appeared in “The Christian Science Journal” in 1902 which was more than one hundred years after his death. Boldface has been added to excerpts:¹

The first President of the United States said: “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence,—it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.”

The master-servant metaphorical framework has a very long history. In 1562 water was described as a good servant but a cruel master. The spelling of the period was not standardized as shown by this excerpt:²

Rayne water is bynding and stopping of nature, water is a very good seruaunt, but it is a cruell mayster.

In 1637 the report of a great conflagration led a writer to state that fire and water were both good servants but evil masters. Indeed, the context suggested that this assertion was already considered proverbial. The word “evil” was spelled “evill”:³

… the Temple St Marke was almost all burnt, and the Dukes Palace was preserved with great difficulty; which verifies, that fire and water are good servants but evill masters.

A sermon in 1674 employed the master-servant figurative language by embedding it within a simile about fancy. Here “fancy” meant imagination with a strong connotation of desire:⁴

Fancy is like fire, a good Servant but a bad Master; if it march under the conduct of faith it may be highly serviceable, and by putting lively colours upon divine truth may steal away our affections to it.

The words attributed to George Washington followed the same template, but “government” was substituted for “fancy”. Examples presented below will show that over time each of the following terms has been placed into the simile template: “zeal”, “the passions”, “love”, and “the press”. In addition, the following terms have replaced “fire and water” within the proverb: “the bank”, “the press”, and “opium”. These examples are not meant to be exhaustive; instead, they illustrate the variability of the expressions.

Interestingly, the instances ascribed to Washington have shifted the semantics of the phrase about fire. Traditionally, fire was described as a good servant, but the revised remark used words such as dangerous and troublesome. Hence, the connotations of fire were negative as both a servant and a master.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.