English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-06-28 08:43:00 · 16 answers · asked by kittyboo2 1 in Education & Reference Quotations

16 answers

from my perspective (as we all differ in point of view), it means basically that although it might look good (where they got the "glitters" part from) but probably isn't as good as it seems (why it's "not gold")...

2007-06-28 08:48:06 · answer #1 · answered by sarcastabytch 2 · 0 0

I think the saying goes as "All that glitters is not gold." The "glitters" represents those that are important to you. The "gold" are the material things in life like money, and jewelry... Basically it is telling us that the important things in life do not always come in material things. Love and family are more important than others.

2007-06-28 09:58:24 · answer #2 · answered by jeny g 3 · 0 0

There are many things in life that attract us, not all of them are good for us.

Fools gold glitters like gold but it has no value.

2007-06-28 15:49:07 · answer #3 · answered by Kathi 6 · 0 0

I can see how you can be confused here but what you're getting confused about is the definition of 'all'. All can certainly mean everything when it is being used as a predeterminer but in this context it is being used as an adverb for emphasis, and that is why the two sentences have the same meaning. Hope this helps.

2016-05-22 00:18:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The actual source of the quote (for most people) is from Shakespeare's "The Merchant of Venice". Would be suitors had to choose one of three chests, gold, silver or lead. Inside the golden casket was this note:

"All that glisters is not gold;
Often have you heard that told:
Many a man his life hath sold
But my outside to behold:
Gilded tombs do worms infold.
Had you been as wise as bold,
Young in limbs, in judgment old,
Your answer had not been inscroll'd:
Fare you well; your suit is cold."

In other words, for thinking that gold is the only thing worth having, YOU LOSE.

The same concept was earlier written by Chaucer, but since he wrote it in Latin, it's doubtful that many who quote it have that as their source.

2007-06-28 10:25:56 · answer #5 · answered by open4one 7 · 0 0

It means that just because something looks good it is not necessarily what it seems. It's like meeting a really attractive person and than finding out that they are a jerk. The way something looks does not always equal the inside. Anothere example is that stars are not as happy as they seem.

2007-06-28 08:53:25 · answer #6 · answered by darltk1 2 · 0 0

It means that things are not always what they seem. It might be shiny and pretty, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's valuable. And that goes no only for material things but also people and ideas.

2007-06-28 08:52:33 · answer #7 · answered by kingsdaughter73 2 · 0 0

Just because it's "shiny and pretty" does not mean it's not a bad thing. It could be too good to be true.

2007-06-28 09:03:10 · answer #8 · answered by itsme 3 · 0 0

It's the same as:
"The grass isn't always greener on the other side"
or
"Things aren't always as good as they seem to be"
or
"If it looks too good to be true, then it probably is"

2007-06-28 09:31:30 · answer #9 · answered by JohnnySmoke 4 · 0 0

basically means that things are not what they may seem to be. or if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, dont always mean it's a duck

2007-06-28 08:54:51 · answer #10 · answered by rich b 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers