4

I do not get the meaning of the expression: "They are not in it with the bees". I need an equivalent that can be understood by everybody.

This is the full text:

ALIN CAILLAS, L’Apiculteur, p. 464, estimates that a bee carrying .0007 oz. of honey at a load will make 12,632 trips to fill a section 4 inches square and 1 inch thick. If it average 5/8 of a mile to the trip, it will travel as much as a third of the way around the world. In a colony of 120,000 bees, if 80,000 are fielders, and each one makes 10 trips of 5/8 of a mile daily, the total travel for the day will be more than twice the distance to the moon. As flyers, the Wright brothers are not in it with the bees. [If a bee carried .0007 oz. of nectar it would have to make nearly twice 12,000 trips in order to make enough honey to fill a section 4 inches square and 1 inch thick. — ED.] Source: Gleanings in Bee Culture, March 15, 1911, p 160, bottom of the first column.

Improve this question
5
  • 1
    How very interesting indeed. These annals are pre-World War I. I cannot locate the exact page. I wonder how they put these things together in those days. I guess participants sent in their ideas by snail mai?? Robert, are you an English speaker? This English is not idiomatic but **it means" the Wright brothers are not in the SAME LEAGUE as the bees. :) The bees are faster is the idea.
    – Lambie
    Commented Oct 15, 2016 at 17:26
  • I don't recall ever encountering this usage before, but I'm sure the intended meaning is what I'd be more likely to express (informally) as The Wright brothers are not exactly [right] up there with the bees. That's to say, they're not in the same league as the bees.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 15, 2016 at 17:28
  • 1
    @Lambie: Dunno about bees are faster. I admit I've no idea how fast early Wright planes or bees travel, but the context seems to be more about carrying / cargo capacity (relative to total weight, I suppose). Or perhaps it's about total distance travelled.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Oct 15, 2016 at 17:32
  • In any event, Mr. Root says below that he has a hard time understanding the fellow's comments and those of his countrymen....I can delete that post in French but I just wanted to show it to the OP. Gosh, my Dad attended Amherst agricultural some years after that. In the late teens. :)
    – Lambie
    Commented Oct 15, 2016 at 17:43
  • The meaning could be that the Wright brothers did not fly as often as a bee?!
    – Robert Werner
    Commented Oct 15, 2016 at 18:44

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

As flyers, the Wright brothers are not in it with the bees.

The phrase means that the Wright brothers are not as good flyers as bees are.

To be

in it

is to be able to participate, compete, or be at the same level as something, thus the lottery phrase

You got to be in it to win it!

Your phrase is saying bees are far superior flyers than the Wright brothers were.

As flyers, the Wright brothers are not in league with bees.
As flyers, the Wright brothers are not comparable to bees.

Bees can fly vast distances while carrying over 50% of their body weight in nectar, whereas the Wright brothers could at best manage a few hundred feet of flight at very low altitude with minimal payload here.

Improve this answer
2
  • The text is from 1911. At that time the Wright brothers flew for hours without landing and their planes could carry over 200 kg of payload, excluding the weight of the pilot.
    – Robert Werner
    Commented Nov 10, 2016 at 1:06
  • Suggestion: "are not in league with bees" sounds like there's no collusion. Better: "are not in a league with bees" or "are not in the same league as bees".
    – fixer1234
    Commented Jun 21, 2018 at 21:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .