Re: Englishmen and cliche'

["Schrade, Scott" <sschrade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> What is a cliche?  It is simply words, and in this case a sentence 
> which includes a verbs, nouns, etc., therefore it does, IMO, fit into 
> your definition, which I agree with, of poetic license.

A cliche' is an overused, commonly known phrase, saying, or even an 
idea.  Your above defense doesn't hold water because Roger used the 
phrase as is:  "a sight for sore eyes."  

He didn't change any of the words or the word order.  He just used it.
And incorrectly for his intended purpose, I believe.

> Just wondering.....why can't it be possible for him to mean exactly 
> what he said? 

That's possible.  It doesn't make sense, but it's possible.  Why doesn't
it make sense?  Because, as I've said, I think Daltrey meant to convey
that he *wasn't* a pretty sight when he was a rough & tumble young lad.

That's the irony he's trying to establish, you see.  Scruffy young hool-
igan who turned into a handsome respectable rock star.  The kid, it turns
out, was alright.

Saying he was someone people were happy to see ("a sight for sore eyes") 
when he was 16 makes no sense followed by the line about the "new chapter"
beginning at 21.  

At *21* he actually *was* a sight for sore eyes because he had become
somewhat famous & people *were* actually glad to see him.

Your *literal* reading implies he was well-liked from 16 to 21 ("a sight
for sore eyes") but after 21 he was not well-liked ("a new chapter begun").
If a "new chapter" began at 21, then that "chapter" was different than 
the one before it (the "sight for sore eyes" era).

The only other theory I'd be willing to entertain is goofy Kevin's "sar-
casm" theory.  Still, my Daltrey-made-a-boo-boo theory makes the most
sense, I feel.

Amazing how much discussion we can squeeze out of four lines of pedantic
verse, huh?  ;-)


- SCHRADE in Akron