Context: The informant was four years old at a preschool birthday party when she first heard this phrase, said to her by a friend’s mother after she asked for a different popsicle flavor.
Analysis: This rhyming phrase is typically said to children in response to expressions of dissatisfaction (I’ve heard it many times as well). It seems to encourage a philosophy of being grateful for what one has, and not to trouble others with your own disappointment.
You’re in the woods – it’s dark, there’s no electricity, and you’re running from something (e.g. a bear, a ghost, or some other scary thing). You come across an empty building and go inside. Before you are three doors (may vary among tellers): a circle one, a triangle one, and a rectangle one. Which do you choose?
After you choose one, you are presented with another three doors: for example, one red, one green, one blue. You choose, and again there are three doors: one covered in velvet, one covered in glitter, and one made of wood. This may go on until you are presented with a final set of three doors: one that leads to a den of hungry lions, one to a room with an electric chair, and one with a rising flood. Which do you choose?
The other two doors may vary, but all are meant to present an inescapable death – except the electric chair. As said at the beginning of the riddle, there is no electricity – therefore, upon choosing the room with the electric chair, you will survive, and have thus solved the riddle.
The informant also mentioned a variation of the riddle where one room instead leads to a group of lions that haven’t eaten in a hundred years – in this case, you are meant to be distracted from the fact that the lions would be dead from starvation.
Context: The informant first heard this riddle somewhere between the ages 9 and 13, while at a junior lifeguard summer camp.
Analysis: This seems to fit into a trend of ‘catch’ riddles that a) casually introduce a key detail (lack of electricity), b) distract the receiver with irrelevant information made to seem important (choices between doors + a sense of urgency), and c) ask a question that, unbeknownst to the receiver, depends solely on the key detail. The receiver is then meant to feel foolish for missing the obvious.
Q: If a rooster lays an egg standing on a roof in the middle of the day, which way does it fall?
A: Roosters don’t lay eggs!
Context: The informant heard this riddle from her dad as a child, and speculates that all the extra context given in the riddle (i.e. the roof, the time of day, etc) is meant to throw off the listener from the obvious answer.
Analysis: This seems to fit into a trend of ‘catch’ riddles that a) casually introduce a key detail, b) distract the receiver with irrelevant information made to seem important, and c) ask a question that, unbeknownst to the receiver, depends solely on the key detail. The receiver is then meant to feel foolish for missing the obvious.
Context: The informant heard this saying primarily from her mom as a child; similar to “different strokes for different folks,” this phrase is meant to say that there are different people or things suited for different situations. More specifically, as the informant adds, “not all horses are racehorses.”
Analysis: I was confused when I first heard this, but in context it makes sense – racehorses are meant for racecourses, while others are not. It’s an interestingly horse-specific way of acknowledging individual differences.
When the informant made silly faces as a child, their grandmother would tell them that their face “would stay stuck if [they] kept it in a silly position for a while.”
Analysis: This appears to be a humorous/somewhat friendly way to stop a child from making silly faces, by scaring them into thinking their face will get stuck like that. It takes advantage of children’s gaps in general knowledge.