Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
In a recent read of Bill Bryson's In A Sunburned Country was this sentence: "He killed several people, often in cold blood, sometimes for no very good reason." That sentence made me stop and wonder where that came from. Warm blooded mammals killed in cold blood. Hmmm.
The question -- what is the derivation of the phrase "killed...in cold blood".
Lloyd
I didn't really understand this phrase either, until I learned about the French phase "garder son sang-froid," or "keeping one's blood cold" which is used as we would say to keep your cool, to not lose your temper, to start to panic. Doing something in cold blood means that you're not in the middle of a heated, emotional confrontation; you're completely cool and relaxed and in full control. It just seems that the "blood" part of these other expressions (to keep your cool, a heated exchange) sort of dropped off in English.
In fact, I would say that is (not "also") what it refers to. One who murders in a fit of anger did not do it in cold blood, no matter how the DA describes it in his summation. (I heard that done recently, a prosecutor emphasizing "in cold blood" about a man accused of second-degree murder. Clearly in this case it was used as a mere emphatic-but-meaningless idiom, like saying "it literally blew my mind".)
Not without it being a joke! Come to think of it, I once had a manager like that …
Now that you mention it, that is one big difference between the English and its French equivalent. I can't think of one situation where we can use "in cold blood" in a constructive sense. In French, however, unless I am mistaken, one might applaud a bomb-squad member for her sang froid.
"He killed several people, often in cold blood, sometimes for no very good reason."
When I first read this post, I was hoping the question might be concerning "no very good reason." Do we need to describe a murder as having "no very good reason"? Or the more frequent phrase, "a senseless murder"? I am waiting for a news story that says, "This story is about a very sensible murder." I will admit that I can think of situations in which murders may have a degree of logic (e.g. self defense) and that could be called sensible, but it probably would not be called murder. However, such things are in a very small minority as far as murder goes, so why must murder ever be described as "senseless"? I think that would be understood.
Just a rant on a pet peeve which has very little to do with language.
People get into these habits of speech and use them without thinking. Myself, I'm going through a period of reaction against teeth, fangs, claws and so forth that are "razor-sharp" or "needle-sharp". By itself it was an interesting metaphor the first time, tiresome the fourth and annoying well before the four-hundred-twenty-third. But it's worse: It's often supported by full-sentence claims that "this animal can take your leg off cleanly in one bite", or "one swipe will tear your wet suit to shreds". If it were a sheer lie there might be a reason for it; what annoys me is that the folks who write such schlock aren't even thinking about it.
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)