The trouble I have had in completing this task is that depending on where you look, phrases can be described as proverbs, idioms or metaphors.
I can only hope that what I have settled with meets the task criteria.

For the first proverb below, I have gone into detail. I have then covered a few others briefly.

"You can't judge a book by its cover"

On hearing this, my initial response is always that, yes, you can judge a book by its cover, but you may not be able to judge correctly.
I investigated this proverb by picking books from around the house, and attempting to imagine how I would judge them if I hadn't read them or heard of the author. I then compared this to the reality.
Starting with the books in my room, I picked out this:

The cover of this book is quite sophisticated, with a plain background and some interesting graphics in a single colour. From this it could be judged to be a more adult book, as it is not bright and colourful. Not much about the story can be guessed from the graphics.
It is difficult to judge this book by its cover, but the assumption of a more grown-up target audience is correct.

Secondly, this book reminded me of another I've had lying around unfinished for a while:

It has rather a battered cover, which suggests it has been read a lot and is popular. This might make me interested to read it. This cover is, if anything, more sophisticated than the last. A simple picture of an old statue gives the impression of it being quite an old, classic work. Seeing a book like this on a shelf I would be tempted to place it in my mind with classics such as Wuthering Heights or Pride and Prejudice.
In reality, the book is a lot older than that, and was originally published as a factual book. Herodotus was a traveller, and his book is a mixture of history and geography. I suppose it is an Ancient Greek equivalent to a travel guide.

Next up, the book which has re-introduced me to Charles Dickens:

This cover contains pictures from a television series, which may suggest it is an easy read for the less sophisticated types of people who don't like to think too much. Not a common steriotype, perhaps, but one I hold, quite unfairly, I'll admit. I often avoid 'television covers', but it was the only edition I could find in the shop.
However, Dickens' novels are in no way easy and uncomplicated. They are marvellous works of fiction, with plenty of the satire of his age weaved into the storylines.

A rather strange series starts with the following book:

Now, this is harder to place. From the drawing style and coloured spine, I would assume this was a book for children. Something you'd find in the 9-12 years fiction section in Waterstones, maybe. The face on the front looks like a bad guy, because of the grey skin. A zombie, perhaps?
Indeed, the man on the front is the bad guy. I honestly don't know which age category this is put in, but I still enjoy the series now. I've found that it is sometimes best to ignore where the book is in the shop, as long as you like it. However, the storyline seems a bit obscure and depressing to be counted as children's fiction.

The last book from my room was the following:

The image of a dinosaur skeleton silhouetted against a green background, along with the strapline, give me the immediate impression that it is a science fiction book. About dinosaurs.
This is indeed the basis of the book, but it does go deeper than that. It is also a general reflection about what will happen when humans take science too far, and, with the inclusion of chaos theory, incorporates elements of maths as well.

I then went upstairs to the loft, where the household library is. This gives me a chance to show the metaphorical meaning of the phrase I am investigating.
This just looks like a normal bookcase:

But you should never assume you know everything about an object from outward appearances:


We have many bookshelves in this 'secret' room, and I picked out some of the books to look at.

Another sophisticated-looking cover here, with simple colours and no graphics. It must be a classic or something because of the lack of graphics on the front. Obviously nothing of the content can be decided from this cover.
George Orwell's books are indeed classics. Very entertaining too, for the most part.


Another classic possibly, but there isn't even an author and title on the front page. I think that, even without knowing, I would guess at it being some kind of referance book. So yes, this book can be judged, to an extent, by its cover.


This is possibly my favourite book. The cover doesn't give much away. There is a pleasant, tranquil landscape and, very small at the bottom, a group of travellers. This landscape, and the trees bordering the design, suggest that the story may be closely involved with nature and natural events.
However, the Lord of the Rings is, in the simplest way of looking at it, about the ongoing struggle of good vs. evil, and the peace of the landscape pictured is the opposite.


These last two books look pretty similar. They both have plain covers, which are a little battered. This suggests either lots of use or age. It is hard to tell what will be in the books, as there are no clues on the covers (apart from the words on the dictionary, which make it a bit obvious). The second book is a Bible.

I can conclude that whether or not a book can be judged by its cover depends entirely on what the cover looks like. And what the book is. There is no definite answer which is true for all books.

"A picture paints a thousand words"

The SFZero logo is a very nice little picture:


However, I don't think that it can literally paint a thousand words. The picture below is the first 1000 words of the About SFZero page in a Word document. I doubt that anyone would be able to infer these words from looking at the logo. Pictures are not better or more detailed than words, they are a completely different thing. The best way to present anything is with the careful balance of both pictures and words, not just one of the two.
"You can't get blood out of a stone"

I found this to be true. After testing a few methods which would have easily got blood from a human, the stone had taken a little damage, but no blood was evident.


"No man is an island"

First, we should be clear on the definition of 'island':

island
noun
1. a land mass (smaller than a continent) that is surrounded by water
2. a zone or area resembling an island

So this proverb can be interpreted as saying that no man can be surrounded by water. This is untrue, as a quick Google search can prove.

I did think about proving this one myself:

However, it was cold, and I'm no Lincoln. I didn't want to end up catching pneumonia or something just to prove an old proverb wrong.