When someone at work cruelly told me:

It takes two to make it.

It takes two to break it.

in regard to my marriage, I knew it wasn’t true due to reason, but was it true due to rhyme?

To confuse the reason/rhyming issue, the first version of the expression, penned around 1460 by John Russell in The Boke of Nurture, is put to rhyme:

As for ryme or reson, ye forewryter was not to blame,
For as he founde hit afore hym, so wrote he ye same.

Not a quote I apply to a whole lot of situations. Not a good Final Jeopardy, even for Ken Jennings.

Shakespeare uses the expression a couple of times, confusing things even more by rhyming  the word “reason” itself with “season” in The Comedy of Errors.

And if either one would suffice, why do people want rhyming and reasoning? For example, if some people are so confident that their interpretation of the Bible is reasonable, why do they have to add a little rhyme to it?

It’s Adam and Eve

Not Adam and Steve.

I’m no Bible scholar, but I don’t think that’s in there. Nobody begets anyone named Steve. It’s too modern-sounding for the Bible, like Nikki Chapter 20, Verse 18.

On the other hand, this, along with a lot of poetry and lyrics, is reasonable and rhymes:

It takes two to make it.

It takes one to break it.

But maybe the best way for me to survive these next couple of months of employment is to be totally irrational, but rhyme for eight hours. Like Dr. Seuss at work with an attitude.

Advertisements