Quote Investigator® – Page 194

Quote Origin: If the Bee Disappeared Off the Face of the Earth, Man Would Only Have Four Years Left To Live

Albert Einstein? Charles Darwin? Maurice Maeterlinck? E. O. Wilson? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: A dramatic quotation about the dangers of environmental upheaval is attributed to the brilliant physicist Albert Einstein. Here are two versions:

If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man.

If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live

Some commentators are skeptical about this ascription. Could you examine this expression?

Reply from Quote Investigator: There is no substantive evidence that Einstein ever made a remark of this type about bees. Alice Calaprice, the editor of the important collection “The Ultimate Quotable Einstein”, placed the saying in the “Probably Not by Einstein” section of her reference.¹

The earliest evidence known to QI of a connection between Einstein and disastrous environmental scenarios caused by the disappearance of bees was published in the “Canadian Bee Journal” in 1941. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:²

If I remember well, it was Einstein who said: “Remove the bee from the earth and at the same stroke you remove at least one hundred thousand plants that will not survive.”

QI has located no supporting evidence that Einstein made the remark above. Instead, QI has determined that a statement of this type was made by the major literary figure Maurice Maeterlinck in his work “The Life of the Bee” in 1901. The saying was widely disseminated in the decades afterwards.

In May 1965 a French periodical about nature and animals called “La Vie des Bêtes et l’Ami des Bêtes” stated that Einstein had calculated a grim four year time limit for humanity if bees disappeared. This was the earliest evidence known to QI of a connection between Einstein who died in 1955 and the dire deadline. Details are given further below.

Below is a selected chronological sequence of citations that attempt to roughly outline the evolution of this expression and its conceptual formation. Because this task is difficult and the available information is fragmentary this entry is lengthy. QI is indebted to the pioneering research of Bonnie Taylor-Blake and Ray Girvan who explored this topic and located many important citations including the two given previously.

Quote Origin: Every Time I Smell It, I Shall Be Reminded of You

Oscar Wilde? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: I saw an article on the web about brilliant repartee that listed the “Top 10 Best Comebacks”. One of the response lines was from the famous wit Oscar Wilde who addressed an audience from the stage after the performance of a play he had written. The acclamation for his work was great, but it was not universal. One unhappy and agitated person threw a bouquet with a rotten cabbage at the playwright. Wilde reportedly picked up the bouquet and without hesitation delivered the following riposte:

Thank you my friend. Every time I smell it, I shall be reminded of you.

I have been unable to find solid support for this entertaining story. Could you explore this anecdote?

Reply from Quote Investigator: QI believes that this tale is inaccurate; however, it was created by modifying and embellishing an incident that did occur on the opening night of Wilde’s play “The Importance of Being Earnest”. One version of the fictionalized story was depicted in the 1960 film “The Trials of Oscar Wilde”. This movie popularized the tale of a caustic encounter, and the screenwriters may have even concocted the clever riposte.

The earliest evidence known to QI appeared in an undated letter sent by Oscar Wilde to Lord Alfred Douglas who was the son of Lord Queensberry. The person attempting to insult and humiliate Wilde was Lord Queensberry, and in Wilde’s letter he was referred to as “the Scarlet Marquis”:¹

Yes! the Scarlet Marquis made a plot to address the audience on the first night of my play !! Algy Burke revealed it and he was not allowed to enter. He left a grotesque bouquet of vegetables for me! This of course makes his conduct idiotic—robs it of dignity.

In this version of the tale the bouquet was not given directly to Wilde, and he did not speak to Lord Queensberry.

Oscar Wilde died in 1900, and the next published evidence known to QI appeared in the 1914 book “Oscar Wilde and Myself” by Lord Alfred Douglas:²

Failing to make disruption between myself and Wilde, Lord Queensberry adopted a different line of tactics; and, I believe, with the sincere view of saving me from what he knew was an undesirable entanglement, he went ahead to disgrace Wilde publicly. At a theatre where one of Wilde’s plays was running he caused a bouquet of carrots to be handed up to Wilde over the footlights, and he left his card on him at his club with certain odious remarks written on the back of it.

In this version the bouquet was composed of carrots, and it was not thrown. No jocular retort from Wilde was reported by Douglas.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Continuous Effort — Not Strength or Intelligence — Is the Key to Unlocking and Using Our Potential

Winston Churchill? Liane Cordes? Liane Cardes? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: On two popular websites with large collections of quotations I found an appealing statement ascribed to the famous statesman Winston Churchill:

Continuous effort — not strength or intelligence — is the key to unlocking our potential.

No citations were provided, and I have been unable to determine when this was written or said by Churchill. Is this an accurate quotation and attribution?

Reply from Quote Investigator: No. This saying is not listed in the key reference “Churchill by Himself: The Definitive Collection of Quotations”,¹ and there is no substantive support connecting the words to Churchill.

The earliest evidence located by QI of a version of this saying was printed in the 1981 book “The Reflecting Pond: Meditations for Self-Discovery” by Liane Cordes:²

Continuous effort — not strength or intelligence — is the key to unlocking and using our potential.

This work was from the publishing arm of the Hazelden organization, and the website of this group presented the following goal:³

The mission of Hazelden Publishing is to provide products and services to help people recognize, understand, and overcome addiction and closely related problems.

In 1986 a version of the saying was included in a compilation titled “Fitzhenry & Whiteside Book of Quotations”; however, the quotation was slightly modified by the deletion of two words. In addition, the ascription was shifted from “Liane Cordes” to “Liane Cardes”. QI believes this was probably due to a simple spelling error:⁴

Continuous effort — not strength or intelligence — is the key to unlocking our potential.
Liane Cardes

In 1987 this reference work was re-released as the “Barnes & Noble Book of Quotations”, and the same saying and ascription were included in the volume.⁵

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Is That a Gun in Your Pocket, or Are You Just Glad to See Me?

Mae West? Aristophanes? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: Screenwriter and sex symbol Mae West is usually credited with the following ribald line:

Is that a pistol in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?

But I have seen many variations of this comical remark:

Is that your pipe in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?

Is that a banana in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?

Are you packin’ a rod or are you just glad to see me?

Is that your sword or are you just glad to see me?

Can you determine which joke is the original and when it was spoken or written?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The earliest evidence located by QI was in a 1958 book about a New York theatre producer titled “The Nine Lives of Michael Todd” by Art Cohn. In 1944 the play “Catherine Was Great” which was produced by Todd and starred Mae West opened on Broadway. Cohn stated that West improvised the humorous line of dialog when she was interacting with her fellow star Gene Barry:¹

Barry, playing Lieutenant Bunin, was unaccustomed to carrying a sword, and in the second act, during an embrace, his scabbard came between him and his Empress.

A covert smile stole over Mae’s face. “Lieutenant,” she ad-libbed with a Westian leer, “is that your sword or are you just glad to see me?”

There is some confusion about whether a version of this quip was used by Mae West in a movie during the 1930s or 1940s. Top quotation expert Fred R. Shapiro writing in The Yale Book of Quotations states that the line was not used by West in her early films:²

Often ascribed to West’s film She Done Him Wrong, but the line does not appear in that or any of her other pre-1967 movies.

West claimed in remarks published in the 1980s that she employed the saying in the 1930s while speaking with a policeman. In addition, West did utter the saying in the 1978 film Sextette which was based on a play she wrote. Details for these citations are given further below.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Academic Politics Are So Vicious Because the Stakes Are So Small

Henry Kissinger? Wallace Sayre? Charles Frankel? Samuel Johnson? Jesse Unruh? Courtney Brown? Laurence J. Peter?

Question for Quote Investigator: The following saying is often attributed to the prominent U.S. foreign policy figure and Nobel laureate Henry Kissinger:

Academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small.

But I have also seen it attributed to the political scientist Wallace Sayre. Could you examine this adage?

Reply from Quote Investigator: There are many different ways to state this basic idea. Here are some additional forms to help depict the range of possible expressions:

Academic politics is the most vicious and bitter form of politics, because the stakes are so low.

Politics on the university campus are the worst of all kinds of politics because the stakes are so small.

Campus politics are so nasty because the stakes are so small.

The republic of learning and letters works by especially bitter squabbling because the stakes are so small.

This exploration begins with a fascinating precursor in 1765 from the pen of the lexicographer and celebrated man of letters Samuel Johnson. In the following excerpt a “scholiast” referred to an academic commentator:¹ ²

It is not easy to discover from what cause the acrimony of a scholiast can naturally proceed. The subjects to be discussed by him are of very small importance; they involve neither property nor liberty; nor favour the interest of sect or party. The various readings of copies, and different interpretations of a passage, seem to be questions that might exercise the wit, without engaging the passions.

But whether it be, that small things make mean men proud, and vanity catches small occasions; or that all contrariety of opinion, even in those that can defend it no longer, makes proud men angry; there is often found in commentaries a spontaneous strain of invective and contempt, more eager and venomous than is vented by the most furious controvertist in politicks against those whom he is hired to defame.

Another precursor was delivered in 1964 by Robert M. Hutchins whose long career included service as Dean of Yale Law School and President of the University of Chicago. Hutchins called academic politics “the worst kind”, but he did not include the sardonic explanation given in the full version of the saying:³

Though I do not know much about professional politics, I know a lot about academic politics — and that is the worst kind. Woodrow Wilson said that Washington was a snap after Princeton.

The earliest direct evidence known to QI of a full statement that fits in the grouping above was printed in the transcript of a speech given in February 1969 at the annual convention of the American Association of School Administrators. The speaker was Charles Frankel who was a Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University, but his phrasing indicated that the adage was already in circulation, and he provided no attribution:⁴ ⁵

It used to be said of politics on the university campus that it was the worst of all kinds of politics because the stakes were so small. We should be able to take at least minor comfort, then, from the present situation in the educational world: The stakes today are not at all small.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: A Short Story Must Have a Single Mood and Every Sentence Must Build Towards It

Edgar Allan Poe? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: On a popular website I saw an intriguing list of “Indispensable Writing Tips from Famous Authors”. The following words were attributed to Edgar Allan Poe, the master of mystery and the macabre:

A short story must have a single mood and every sentence must build towards it.

I was unable to determine where this statement originally appeared. Did Poe really say this?

Reply from Quote Investigator: QI hypothesizes that this sentence is a rough synopsis of comments written by Poe in a book review published in 1842. Poe used the phrase “single effect” and not the phrase “single mood” when describing the importance of concision and unified purpose in short stories. This important essay was published in Graham’s Magazine, and Poe was reviewing Nathaniel Hawthorne’s collection titled Twice-Told Tales. Here is an excerpt with boldface added:¹

A skilful literary artist has constructed a tale. If wise he has not fashioned his thoughts to accommodate his incidents; but having conceived, with deliberate care, a certain unique or single effect to be wrought out, he then invents such incidents—he then combines such events as may best aid him in establishing this preconceived effect. If his very initial sentence tend not to the outbringing of this effect, then he has failed in his first step.

In the whole composition there should be no word written, of which the tendency, direct or indirect, is not to the one pre-established design. And by such means, with such care and skill, a picture is at length painted which leaves in the mind of him who contemplates it with a kindred art, a sense of the fullest satisfaction. The idea of the tale has been presented unblemished, because undisturbed; and this is an end unattainable by the novel. Undue brevity is just as exceptionable here as in the poem; but undue length is yet more to be avoided.

In 1846 Poe published an essay in Graham’s Magazine titled The Philosophy of Composition in which he expatiated on his vision of literary creation:²

Nothing is more clear than that every plot, worth the name, must be elaborated to its dénouement before any thing be attempted with the pen. It is only with the dénouement constantly in view that we can give a plot its indispensable air of consequence, or causation, by making the incidents, and especially the tone at all points, tend to the development of the intention.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Origin of Deathbed Remark: This Is No Time To Be Making New Enemies

Voltaire? Niccolò Machiavelli? Newgate Prisoner? Wilson Mizner? Dying Irishman? Canny Scot? Aging Rock Star? Apocryphal?

Question for Quote Investigator: While reading speeches given by Nobel Prize recipients I came across an entertaining anecdote about Voltaire from the eminent economist Robert E. Lucas:¹

When Voltaire was dying, in his eighties, a priest in attendance called upon him to renounce the devil. Voltaire considered his advice, but decided not to follow it. “This is no time,” he said, “to be making new enemies”. In this same spirit, I offer my thanks and good wishes to the Bank of Sweden, to the Nobel Committee, and to everyone involved in this wonderful occasion.

Reports of deathbed pronouncements are notoriously inaccurate, and the speaker was probably knowingly presenting a lighthearted fanciful tale. I have heard the same story told about the famous political schemer Niccolò Machiavelli. Could you explore this anecdote?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The earliest instance of this joke known to QI appeared in the “Staffordshire Advertiser” of England in June 1795 within an anecdote about Newgate Prison in London. The person facing death was not famous. The word “Devil” was written as “D—l”. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:²

One of the criminals lately under sentence of death in Newgate, was visited by the Ordinary, who gravely urged him to acknowledge the justice of his sentence, &c. to which the culprit answering—the Divine demanded to know whether he renounced the D—l and all his works?—to which the poor fellow shrugging his shoulders, replied—that he begged to be excused, for, as he was going to a strange country, he did not wish to make himself any enemies.

Also, in June 1795 the tale above appeared in “The Cambridge Intelligencer” of England.³ By 1805 the tale had travelled across the Atlantic Ocean and appeared in “The Post-Boy” newspaper of Windsor, Vermont.⁴ In 1816 the Newgate anecdote appeared in the “New Hampshire Gazette” of Portsmouth, New Hampshire.⁵

Over the decades the identity of the main character has shifted between: a Newgate prisoner, an Irishman, a Scotsman, Wilson Mizner, Voltaire, Niccolò Machiavelli, an aging rock luminary, and others.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: If At First You Don’t Succeed, Try, Try Again. Then Quit. There’s No Use Being a Damn Fool About It

W. C. Fields? Stephen Leacock? Justin J. Burns? Henry Morgan? George Burns? Anonymous?

Question for Quote Investigator: A well-known saying about persistence has become an energyless cliché:

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

The following parody version is usually attributed to the famous comedian W. C. Fields:

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There’s no point in being a damn fool about it.

Did Fields create this twisted proverb?

Reply from Quote Investigator: Based on current evidence QI believes that it is unlikely W. C. Fields wrote or said the statement above. He died in 1946, and the earliest known instance of the quotation attributed to him was published in September 1949. An anonymous version of the saying was already in circulation by 1946. Details are given further below.

A very similar joke was crafted by the Canadian humorist Stephen Leacock and published in 1917. QI hypothesizes that the 1940s quip evolved from Leacock’s words. Here is an excerpt from his comical essay “Simple Stories of Success or How to Succeed in Life”:¹

According to all the legends and story books the principal factor in success is perseverance. Personally, I think there is nothing in it. If anything, the truth lies the other way.

There is an old motto that runs, “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.” This is nonsense. It ought to read—”If at first you don’t succeed, quit, quit at once.”

If you can’t do a thing, more or less, the first time you try, you will never do it. Try something else while there is yet time.

In September 1917 a Flint, Michigan newspaper printed a short filler item with a parody saying:²

Motto of the Russian army: If at first you don’t succeed, quit, quit again.

In 1925 the Buffalo Evening News of Buffalo, New York reprinted Stephen Leacock’s essay which included the excerpt given previously. The following title was bannered across the top of the page:³

“If at First You Don’t Succeed, Quit, Quit at Once”

In April 1946 a version of the saying under investigation was printed in a trade magazine called Commercial Car Journal. A page titled “Laugh It Off” presented a collection of jokes compiled by Skag Shannon. This instance used the word “silly” instead of “damn fool” and the words were attributed to an anonymous “Fireman”:⁴

Our Fireman says, “If you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then stop. No use being silly about it.”

The day after the death of W. C. Fields in December 1946 the Associated Press news service released an obituary that included a discussion of lawsuits that were filed by Fields and his physician over compensation. Fields lost the lawsuit, and he appealed the decision. Interestingly, Fields was quoted using a simple instance of the cliché maxim. He did not employ the derisive quotation that has been attributed to him in modern times:⁵

“I struck out this time,” Fields told reporters, “but next time I’ll hit a home run. Onward and upward’s my motto. Try, try again.” He appealed and the judgment was pared to $2000.

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: Do One Thing Every Day That Scares You

Mary Schmich? Eleanor Roosevelt? Kurt Vonnegut? Baz Luhrmann? Ralph Waldo Emerson? Jane Addams? Mark Toby?

Question for Quote Investigator: To achieve personal growth it is sometimes necessary to move outside of a comfort zone. Unjustified fears can constrain exploration and positive development. Here is a saying I find valuable:

Do one thing every day that scares you.

The above advice is typically attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt who was First Lady for many years and a noted social activist. But I have been unable to find any justification for this ascription. What do you think?

Reply from Quote Investigator: An exact match for this quotation appeared within a June 1997 essay by Mary Schmich, a columnist for the Chicago Tribune. She began her article with the statement: “Inside every adult lurks a graduation speaker dying to get out”, and she continued by presenting a staccato sequence of items of advice aimed at young students. Boldface has been added to excerpts below:¹

Don’t worry about the future. Or worry, but know that worrying is as effective as trying to solve an algebra equation by chewing bubble gum. The real troubles in your life are apt to be things that never crossed your worried mind, the kind that blindside you at 4 p.m. on some idle Tuesday.

Do one thing every day that scares you.

Sing.

Don’t be reckless with other people’s hearts. Don’t put up with people who are reckless with yours.

Floss.

Don’t waste your time on jealousy. Sometimes you’re ahead, sometimes you’re behind. The race is long and, in the end, it’s only with yourself.

Mary Schmich’s essay went viral and became a smash hit by August 1997, but the words were not credited to her. Instead, the work was retitled “Wear Sunscreen” and was incorrectly described as a graduation speech given by the well-known author Kurt Vonnegut at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).²

In 1999 the essay was transformed into a popular spoken-word song titled “Everybody’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)” by the prominent film director Baz Luhrmann who credited Schmich. The quotation was included in the lyrics.³ ⁴

The famous transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson employed a precursor to the saying in the nineteenth century. The conception of incrementally conquering fears as a pathway to growth evolved over many decades. The following five instances of expressions are examined in greater depth further below:

Always do what you are afraid to do. (1841) —Popularized by Ralph Waldo Emerson

To do what you are afraid to do is to guide your life by fear. How much better not to be afraid to do what you believe in doing! (circa 1881) —Jane Addams

You must do the thing you think you cannot do. (1960) —Eleanor Roosevelt

I’m supposed to do one thing every day that I want to do but I’m afraid to do. (1961) —Mark Toby

Do one thing every day that scares you. (1997) —Mary Schmich

Here are selected citations in chronological order.

Quote Origin: They Haven’t Done Anything to My Book. It’s Right There on the Shelf

Raymond Chandler? James M. Cain? Alan Moore? William S. Burroughs? Larry Niven? Stephen King? Elmore Leonard? William Faulkner? Owen Sheers?

Question for Quote Investigator: I have heard the following anecdote told about Raymond Chandler, James M. Cain, Stephen King, and Elmore Leonard. A journalist once visited the house of a popular author who had sold the movie rights to several of his novels to Hollywood. The quality of the resultant movies had been lamented by critics. The reporter attempted to commiserate with the writer by saying that Hollywood had ruined his books, but the author led the visitor into his study and pointed to a bookshelf:

They haven’t done anything to my books. They’re still right there on the shelf. They’re fine.

Is this story accurate? Who were the participants?

Reply from Quote Investigator: The earliest evidence for this tale known to QI was published in the New York Times Book Review in March 1969. The influential cultural critic John Leonard visited James M. Cain at his home in Hyattsville, Maryland. Cain had written several best-selling books in the 1930s and 1940s including: “The Postman Always Rings Twice”, “Mildred Pierce”, and “Double Indemnity”. These works were transformed into movies of variable quality. Leonard reported on the remarks of Cain:¹

All the early novels were made into movies. (Hollywood made $12-million from Cain; Cain made $100,000.) He has seen only two of the movies made from his books. “There are some foods some people just don’t like. I just don’t like movies. People tell me, don’t you care what they’ve done to your book? I tell them, they haven’t done anything to my book. It’s right there on the shelf. They paid me and that’s the end of it.”

The citation above was located by top researcher Bill Mullins. In 1974 a book titled “Graham Greene: The Films of His Fiction” referenced the comments of Cain. The phrasing presented matched the version in the New York Times:²

The American novelist James M. Cain once remarked that he had rarely gone to see the screen version of one of his novels. “People tell me, don’t you care what they’ve done to your book? I tell them, they haven’t done anything to my book. It’s right there on the shelf. They paid me and that’s the end of it.”

Here are additional selected citations in chronological order.