Kelly Xu
mutilate metaphor??? It was well into the spring of 1940 before he picked up an envelope from the hall table of his lodgings, which, when opened, proved to be a buff-coloured directive from the Air Ministry telling him to report to Lord’s Cricket Ground for an interview. The summer before he went up to Oxford, his father had taken him to Lord’s to see the first All-India test match. It seemed strange that this, of all places, was to be where he would be admitted into war. ‘England won by 158 runs,’ his father recalled when he told him of the venue. And how many runs would it take to win this war, Teddy wondered? – even at this stage of his life inclined to mutilate metaphor. Although in fact it took exactly seventy two runs not out – the number of sorties he had flown by the end of March 1944. I would like to know what does " mutilate metaphor" here mean? not good at metaphor? Thanks.
May 6, 2015 6:07 AM
Answers · 3
Essentially yes, the writer or character is saying he's had difficulty phrasing metaphors effectively and is implying by this reference that his current attempt is likewise no good.
May 6, 2015
It's referring back to the metaphor earlier in the sentence , 'how many runs would it take to win a war.' He feels that it is a strange situation to be called to a cricket ground to have a meeting with the Air Ministry, so he uses a metaphor in which the 'runs' you need to win a cricket match are compared to the airborne sorties you need to make in order to win a war. This comment about mutilating metaphor is by way of apology for this rather odd expression. He's implying that when he was a child he tended to use strange metaphors, and that he is still doing this even as an adult.
May 6, 2015
Still haven’t found your answers?
Write down your questions and let the native speakers help you!