Talk:Eating crow

??? The phrase in the US is--Macrakis 03:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC) "to eat crow" ... in a half-century of traveling around American, I've never heard "boiled" added in. - DavidWBrooks 03:31, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Not a joke. You just haven't been wandering long enough. For the past half century, the phrase has been "to eat crow". Circa 1850, "boiled" was added more often than not.

Then perhaps the name of the article should be 'to eat crow' with a note that in the 1800s people tossed in 'boiled'. 204.69.40.7 12:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

"proven wrong after having strongly expressed your opinion"

Proven wrong about anything particular? Opinions are neither right nor wrong. -- Smjg 09:09, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

It is assumed that the person putting forth the incorrect point of view does not present it as fact. That would be an example of being caught in a lie, not eating crow. To eat crow, one must voice an opinion that is later proven, to the satisfaction of the opinion holder, to be false. --skia 05:56, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Bit late to the party, both commentators are possibly dead of old age. However Skia entirely missed Smjg's point. An opinion cannot be wrong, as an opinion is not factual based but theoretical. It can be inaccurate, sure. Further, 'it is assumed that the person putting forth the incorrect point of view does not present it as fact. that would be an example of being caught in a lie,' is a woeful non sequitor. When you put forward your point of view of course you present it as fact. If I am quite positive that elephants all weigh more than a VW beetle and say so, I am putting it forwards as a point of view and presenting it as fact. That's not being caught in a lie, for it to be a lie you have to KNOW that that 'fact' you are presenting is incorrect and still present it as fact. Smjg said "A square cannot be a circle, because it isn't circular, it's a square." and Skia countered, "Yes but squares aren't triangles because that would be an triangle, not a circle." It's patently absurd and made my head hurt to read (and to have to paraphase using the above analogy. :P) and is incorrect. The lead should not mention opinion being right or wrong, because it's not a circle. Uh, I mean a squa... fuck. .__. BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 12:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

[It is well known that Crows are carriers of disease....

I removed this paragraph after not being able to confirm it with a simple web search. If it is in fact true, it should be footnoted. The only disease currently associated with crows is West Nile virus, and the expression predates WNV by many years.

Link to Crow Article

Kind of funny that an article on eating crows doesn't actually link to crows themselves, no? :) Added link to where seemed to be an appropriate location. --Shane Lawrence 06:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Look this has nothing to do with corvids except via punsters. The crow is the crow of the rooster, and in human terms a brag. To eat your own brag is to be humble and not to live up to your claim.

Similar origin: Peter Pan 'Crows', in that case it meant both a rooster like noise and sometimes meant a brag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.65.83 (talk) 04:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Unlikely histories

I have removed two paragraphs claiming to explain the expression because they are implausible and give no sources:

Another possible connection comes from a short story by Rudyard Kipling. In his story “The Strange Ride of Morrowbie Jukes,” Morrowbie Jukes falls into a place from which he cannot escape. Another man trapped there catches wild crows and eats them, but Morrowbie in his pride declares, “I shall never eat crow!” After days of nothing to eat, his hunger and desperation finally forces him to do what he swore he would never do—literally eat crow.

The story does indeed involve eating crows, but the OED has quotes of "eat crow" from the 1870's, and the story was only published in 1885. So it seems more likely that Kipling was using an existing expression. (By the way, some previous comments here mention quotes from the 1850's -- documentation, please?)

"Eating Crow" Refers to the Native American Crow tribe. They were crazy and would kill anyone that trespassed on their territory. They were also very superstitious. An early colonist was lost one day and was attacked by a few crow indians. He killed one and pretended to eat it, letting the other indians see him and they left him alone. hence eating crow.

This seems to be pure invention, and was added by a one-edit anon. Any sources? --Macrakis 03:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

How is the 50 Cent tattoo information relevant to this article? 68.103.104.219 (talk) 12:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The Michael J. Fox story

From the [Michael J. Fox] article: "Brandon Tartikoff, one of the show's producers, felt that Fox was too short relative to the actors playing his parents, and tried to have him replaced. Tartikoff reportedly said that "this is not the kind of face you'll ever find on a lunchbox." After his later successes, Fox presented Tartikoff with a custom-made lunchbox with the inscription "To Brandon, this is for you to put your crow in. Love and Kisses, Michael J.Fox." Tartikoff kept the lunchbox in his office for the rest of his NBC career."
Would you think it could be added to this article? Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Kipling example

The Kipling example is noteworthy. 1) The idiom is the primary symbolism of the story. It is central to the story. 2) Kipling is a canonical author, he is central to literature. Any encyclopedia article about an idiom is going to include examples. It is needed to clarify for the reader how the idiom has been used and is used. Examples are typically taken from well known authors: Shakespeare for example. Kipling clearly falls into that same category. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

So be it. Mintrick (talk) 13:35, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The Picture's Relevance

The picture, "Eating Crow on a Wager" only has relevance because of having the phrase "eating crow". Yet, this picture could easily be offensive to some cultures. My first reaction when seeing this article was to think I was using a racist idiom when I said, "eating crow". I don't think that's the message we want people to come away with from reading this article. Is there a better example? Do we need this picture on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fastslack (talk • contribs) 17:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I disagree that it would be considered offensive within the context of this article. It's like saying Huckleberry Finn is offensive for using the n word, or classical paintings are offensive for showing nudity. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and contains a lot of stuff that, taken out of context, might be considered offensive to someone somewhere. If you like I can add a paragraph that ties the image into the article more directly, but as is, the phrase originated in 19th century America and was popular back then and this image supports that. The image is by Currier and Ives, a famous American print maker, part of the comical/satirical Darktown Comics series. Green Cardamom (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok Fastslack, I just did some more research on the Darktown Comics series and the academic literature widely supports this series as being racist and even contemporary blacks were unhappy with it.. it wasn't comical at all, for them, so I agree we should probably not propagate it here unless there was a direct link to the idiom's origin or propagation, which I don't believe there is. Green Cardamom (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Boogers, my dear friends. Boogers.

A gentleman who made an unsigned comment that hit the nail on the head almost got at something I came here purely to add, I'll allow him the glory here: -

Look this has nothing to do with corvids except via punsters. The crow is the crow of the rooster, and in human terms a brag. To eat your own brag is to be humble and not to live up to your claim.

Similar origin: Peter Pan 'Crows', in that case it meant both a rooster like noise and sometimes meant a brag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.65.83 (talk) 04:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Crow is a British slang term for the dark crusty stuff within a booger, be it black or dark brown or otherwise. Flicking a crow at someone means you've flung a booger at them. The play on words stems from the fact that eating snot is quite unpleasant, yet also to eat one's crow is to eat ones words, from the proverbial rooster crowing. I've never heard of the actual bird being involved in it, so I've probably encountered an isolated colonial variant of it being an Australian.

I am presenting this opinion as fact, therefore I am open to eating my own crow on this matter, and I am hoping it IS the bird because that's nowhere near as gross, but surely my education of such fineries as booger eating isn't isolated, and if it were it's consistent with every other kids I grew up with as a child (admittedly I haven't heard the phrase since early teen years as it's more of a child saying here, especially given the profanity laden language Aussie's use (ruled not offensive to a reasonable person per the High Court of Australia many years ago, which is fucking true, so picking on Aussie's for our sailor speak isn't just racist, but it's being a cunt too!) that once one passes into late teens we tend to use far more colorful language to express what we feel our opponent in discussion should eat, snot being the least of our suggestions.

Has anyone else encountered this variant? Surely I'm not mad? BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 12:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

The Cultures That Ate Crow

There are many cultures that acutaly eat crow. it is a dish in the Americas and Britan there are many recipies and infromation on how to fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.104.158.154 (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

A different meaning of crow

There is a different meaning of crow besides the bird. It is a loud boast, for example: "I am the best in the world!", she crowed. In this case when proven wrong she would be forced to take back her own words, to eat a crow. I don't have a source but it is easier to understand then the literal eating of a crow. -- GreenC 15:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eating crow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110826200450/http://scholarsmine.mst.edu/publication/StudiesInSlang_09007dcc8051d83b.html to http://scholarsmine.mst.edu/publication/StudiesInSlang_09007dcc8051d83b.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:57, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eating crow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110826200457/http://scholarsmine.mst.edu/publication/pdf/p119_p122_09007dcc8054a67b.pdf to http://scholarsmine.mst.edu/publication/pdf/p119_p122_09007dcc8054a67b.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:32, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Image

Black crow painted on a plate

This image was removed according to a guideline. The painting of a crow on a plate is not by accident it is clearly meant to be analogous with the idiom which is so well known and popular. Further the article discusses the history of the literal eating of crow and its meaning prior to the creation of the idiom in the 19th century. There is no way this plate is merely "decorative", anyone eating off a plate with a crown on it will get it. Since this is an analogous plate, and the idiom is analogous, it is a useful aid for understanding the article and idiom. -- GreenC 21:05, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

AI image

"I kin eat crow; but I'll be darned if I hanker after it."

Regarding edit comment: Special:Diff/1213361835/1213364120. First of all, there is no policy against AI images. They are permitted in a general sense, there might be some issue over specific images, but there is no blanket policy. Second, the image mirrors the story: an old farmer who is served crow to eat. If you read the story, this was in retaliation for the farmer serving the "boarders" distasteful food ("boarders" originated as a word meaning food that was on a wooden board such a wooden table, or sometimes a board above the fireplace, that lodgers could partake from). And the boarders prepared the crow as a meal, in the same way the farmer prepared meals for the boarders. So no, the image is not an "odd idea", there's no other way to interpret the story. Finally, the caption does not misrepresent the source as literally being any specific 1850 publication, rather it is a generic view. If we had a real historical image I'd use that, but we don't, this one is a good representation of what such an image would look like: an old farmer sitting down at a table ("board") with a plate of crow and eating it as a meal, just as the stories describe. -- GreenC 16:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

No policy revert there, and I'd already heard the story, it just seemed misleading to put this modern but historical-looking image into a section about a story described as being popular in newspapers and magazines in the 1850s. The average reader would assume they were seeing a contemporary illustration from such a publication, and getting some insight into how people of the time would have pictured the idiom "eating crow".

Is the description in the file (Rube mid-19th century country farmer eating crow but not hankering for the taste of it) the literal prompt that you gave the AI, or were you more specific about what the image should include and omit? Belbury (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

The caption can say "[modern image]" or something to that effect, though I don't think it should say AI as it would be a honey trap for every reader who has a bias again AI. Finding images for this page has proven extremely difficult over the years (the best I could ever find was the plate image) so AI is a tool that can help. Since the origin of the phrase is ca. 1850 it would be appropriate, given the option, to use a style of that era. Possibly if we could find an image of the original newspaper/magazine that could be better, to read it in the original would be authentic. (that's not the prompt that was used). -- GreenC 02:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC)