Everything is not peachy-keen, at least not for the peach. When it comes to the peach’s reputation and goodwill, it certainly is not all peaches and cream. The reason for the peach’s downturn in notoriety and esteem has everything to do with newspaper headlines over the last six months, most of which have been dominated by the word “impeachment.” Lately, people in the news say “impeachment” more than people in the pews say “amen.”
Unfortunately, you cannot say impeachment without saying peach, and therein lies the problem. Saying impeachment automatically conjures up images of the peach as a bad apple, so to speak. Every time someone uses the term “impeachment,” which typically is uttered with a negative connotation, the peach is adversely affected by association, whether consciously or subconsciously. This is highly problematic because the peach already has enough competition from other fruit. Imagine how hard it is for a peach to hear that someone is the “apple” of someone’s eye or that at work they received a “plum” assignment. Such positive references to other (better) fruit leave the lowly peach feeling inadequate and insecure. It’s enough disappointment to drive a peach insane or to make it go bananas.
For the record, the term “impeachment” itself has absolutely nothing to do peaches or any other fruit. In other words, purely from a meaning and usage standpoint, we’re talking apples and oranges. The term “impeachment” is found in the United States Constitution, at Article II, Section 4 states: “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” It also is used in Article 1, Section 2: “The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” It is repeated in Article 1, Section 3: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” The Constitution, however, does not refer to any other fruit, which is incredible when you consider that: (i) one of the Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, owned a fruit farm which he referred to as the “fruitery,” (true) (ii) another Founding Father, James Madison, grew up in Orange County, Virginia (also true) and (iii) yet another Founding Father, George Washington, was famous for his honest admission that he chopped down a cherry tree (myth).
The etymology of the term “impeachment” also has nothing to do with peaches or any other fruit. Most experts agree that the term “impeachment” derives from Old French’s “empeechier” and from Latin’s impedīre which mean to ensnare, impede or prosecute. These terms also have connections to the modern French verb empêcher (to prevent) and the modern English impede. In contrast, the term “peach” and its scientific name persica derive from an early European belief that peaches were native to Persia (today’s Iran). Ancient Romans referred to the peach as malum persicum or “Persian apple,” which later became pêche (French) and then eventually peach (English). One wonders whether the English term “peach” would have been coined if the coiners knew or fully considered the potential negative association with the term “impeachment.” Similarly, one might wonder if “reason” is negatively impacted by “treason.”
The peach is not the only fruit to suffer from political terminology. For example, the term “banana republic” pejoratively refers to a politically unstable, weak and corrupt country. It was coined by American author O. Henry (no, the Oh Henry! candy bar was not named after him) in 1901 to describe how certain countries were exploited by foreign corporations. No country wants to be known as a “banana republic” just like no performer wants to be known as a second banana and no student wants to be known as a banana head.
Other fruit also suffer from bad association. When American author John Steinbeck wrote the award-winning novel “The Grapes of Wrath” (published in 1939), many grapes were not too thrilled because they feared being associated with having anger management issues. How do I know this? I heard it through the grapevine.
More generally, there is an American legal concept known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree” objection, which is used to prevent consideration of evidence that is obtained illegally. The idea is that if the source of the evidence (the “tree”) is tainted, then anything gained from it (the “fruit”) also is tainted. The term was first used by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter in 1939. (Yes, the same year in which the “Grapes of Wrath” was published. It was a bad year for fruit.) Of course, one might expect a judge named after a hotdog, Justice Frankfurter, to have relatively little affinity for fruit.
Final thought: Why did the envious raisin make fun of the sweet wine? He was crying sour grapes.
By Jon Kranz
