“The proof is in the pudding.”
A fairly common turn of phrase, but one that confused me when I was a child. (Yes… I am easily confused). The context of the statement makes it clear that the speaker intends to communicate that further evidence or personal experience is required before the speaker will be convinced. Although I understood the intent, I remained deeply confused as to how (creamy, delicious) pudding could be a catalyst of understanding. It wasn’t until I was in my teens (and had eaten lots of pudding) that I finally heard the phrase fully, and correctly, spoken.

“The proof of the pudding is in the eating.”
Wow! Revelation! When I heard that phrase uttered, it all came clear to me. The implication is crystal clear. Outward appearances can be deceiving. To judge the matter it must be fully examined. The pudding may look beautiful, but until it is tasted, one cannot truly judge its quality. Unlike the bastardized phrase, the full sentence has a subtlety of meaning. It is not dependent upon context to make the statement clear. It stands on its own and communicates a clear, deep meaning.
(more…)