fot
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: a bit of history?

To: "jonmac" <jonmac@ndirect.co.uk>, "Baxter Culver" <peyote222@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: a bit of history?
From: "Mordy Dunst" <mordyd@email.msn.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 09:31:23 -0600
What fabulously charming wit...please continue this tale and resurrect more
history...

thanks,

Mordy

----- Original Message -----
From: jonmac <jonmac@ndirect.co.uk>
To: Baxter Culver <peyote222@email.msn.com>
Cc: Friends of Triumph <fot@autox.team.net>
Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: a bit of history?


> >While the woman shrieked and screamed, demanding that someone defend her
> and
> >chastise the soldier, an English gentleman sitting across the aisle spoke
> >up,  "You know sir, you Americans do seem to have penchant for doing the
> >wrong thing.  You eat holding the fork in the wrong hand, you drive your
> >autos on the wrong side of the road, and now, sir, you've thrown the
wrong
> >bitch out of the window."
>
>
> Not bad for a first attempt, Baxter - not bad. We'll forgive you for a few
> inaccuracies as there are important inconsistencies in language, nay
> mannerisms as well.
>
> If he was a true English gentleman, and before addressing the soldier, I
> think he would have stood up to raise his hat, then plug a monocle into a
> bloodshot eye-socket. At that point, he would have moved across to the
> soldier and spent some time just looking down at him in an almost vertical
> posture - and in silence. This is a sound strategic move, as the soldier
> would not have known what was about to be said and it would have helped to
> make him feel inferior. You prolong this for as long as you can. THEN you
> speak. I suspect the wording would have been something along these lines,
> stained heavily with sarcasm.
>
> "Sir," long pause, "Americans periodically demonstrate preclivities and
act
> in error. Your table manners are odd to say the least, you drive your
> motor-cars on the wrong side of the road - and now, Sir - NOW you have
made
> a serious error of judgement and mistaken the appropriate victim. I'm sure
I
> make myself clear?"
>
> Only fairly recently has 'bitch' entered our regular usage. We use it to
> describe a female dog and even now it's quite a strong word to use in the
> company of women. 'Sonofabitch' just isn't in our usage either, so you can
> keep that one all to yourself. He would never have used such strong
> language - though he might well have thought it.
>
> Another small point concerns the occupancy of the train itself. Tedious in
> detail perhaps, but crucially important, because we're talking here of
class
> within our social structure - as it once was. On the assumption the
> gentleman and the lady with her dog were of good stock, they would have
been
> travelling in First Class - possibly Second Class and certainly not Third
> Class. There again, we have to consider the soldier himself. If he was an
> NCO, he would have been issued with a Third Class Rail Warrant. If an
> Officer, and depending on his actual rank, First Class might have been a
> possibility - but certainly not if he was anything below the rank of a
full
> Colonel. The Railway Company (then privately owned and run) would have
seen
> to that. Majors, Captains and Lieutenants would have travelled Second
Class
> and all Other Ranks would have gone Third.
>
> But, in spite of all this, a capital effort, quite capital. You show
> promise, Sir - and give us reason to believe that better things could be
> just around the corner - don't y'know.
>
>



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>