If I remember all the sources from the past, the phrase 'rest is history' always talks about the positive results. Is there any way that this phrase is used for the negative results or in that sense, does this phrase has any negativity?

  • 1
    The rest is history is neutral. This is shown by the Cambridge Dictionary entry linked to by Maulik V. Whether the well known events are positive or negative are up to the reader. For instance, whether what happened after the Beatles had their first hit record is positive, neutral, or negative is up to the reader. – user6951 Apr 7 '15 at 10:59
  • @δοῦλος the question is whether we have any instances using the phrase negatively? In most of the examples, it's positive only. – Maulik V Apr 7 '15 at 11:05
  • An example of a negative usage is In 1492 Columbus "discovered" the so-called new world and the rest is history, when I follow that statement with 999 reasons how and why this 'history' has been negative. – user6951 Apr 7 '15 at 11:20
  • 1
    "The rest is history" is a somewhat jaunty phrase, and people tend to reserve their jauntiness for situations where it would not be inappropriate. So the preponderance of uses is in relatively happy contexts. – Tᴚoɯɐuo Apr 8 '15 at 12:26
  • @TRomano I would happy if you elaborate this with some examples. Comment clarifies doubt to an extent. – Rucheer M Apr 9 '15 at 4:31

It's strange but true. Even I think of all the instances I read and remember that most of the times, if not every time, 'rest is history' talks about the positive things.

But then, actually it is meant to say that 'something is known there after'. Cambridge dictionary has an entry for this.

the rest is history: everything that happened since then is well known.

Hey, check that...there too it is positive! A good question (+1)

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.