Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[learner12]

"A man is born an artist as a hippopotamus is born a hippopotamus; and you can no more make yourself one than you can make yourself a giraffe." This humorous yet astute assertion by essayist, critic and reformer John Ruskin (1819-1900) is at the heart of this year's 34th Annual Utah All-State High School Art Show: Some of these students were born to be artists.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,635188961,00.html

---->
I am not sure about the first quote: "A man is born an artist as a hippopotamus is born a hippopotamus; and you can no more make yourself one than you can make yourself a giraffe."

This quote says that a man is born an artist and that you can not make yourself one(=an artist). Isn't it logical? Why do you think that the writer didn't use "but" instead of "and"? ----->; and you can no more make yourself one than you can make yourself a giraffe.?

Thank you in advance.

[Bluegum]

"But" is used when the second part of the sentence is in contradiction or opposition to the first part. Here, however, the second part is a further example of the situation given in the first half, so "and" is appropriate.

[learner12]

Dear Bluegum:

Thank you for your quick replies. I don't think that I understand the following sentence well.

"A man is born an artist as a hippopotamus is born a hippopotamus; and you can no more make yourself one than you can make yourself a giraffe."
----->
I understand "A man is born an artist." If you are born an artist, you can make yourself one(=an artist), I guess. Is this idea illogical?

The second part says that you cannot make yourself one(=an artist).

Thank you in advance.

[Bluegum]

No, Learner12, I think the writer is trying to convey the opposite of what you are supposing. We have a saying in English "Great athletes (or whatever) are born and not made" which means that unless you are born with a certain talent, you won't be able to develop it by trying. So, he is saying, you CAN'T make yourself an artist.