, , , , ,

Dave has deserted me for the weekend, leaving me and Teddy to fend for ourselves. I know. SELFISH. He’s just phoned to let me know that he’s halfway to Manchester and he’s got the pram in the boot of the car. So not only are we going to have to fend for ourselves, we’re going to have to fend for ourselves in the house. So while Teddy’s watching his fourth hour of Cbeebies, I thought I’d get on here and, y’know, ramble.

So last night, Dave and I were in the middle of an episode of Newsroom, and we’d paused to retrieve 17 packets of biscuits from the kitchen, and he asked me one of those questions that we ask each other a lot.  “Would you look at me differently if…” I can’t remember the exact scenario, but it’s usually something to do with having two heads, speaking in a really high voice or having poo somewhere on our person. Something like that. Intellectual. And in reply I wanted to do some stunningly witty, Wildean reposte, which should have been: “No, I will look at you with the same levels of pity and disgust that I always do.”

(Honestly, if you’d been there, you would have been inconsolable with mirth.)

However, when I’d got to the word ‘pity’, I thought a really good word instead of ‘pity’ would be ‘condescension’. “Ooh that’s good,” I thought. “I’ll use that one instead.” Only at this point I’d already used the word ‘pity’ and was halfway through the sentence. Not only that, but by the time I’d got to the word ‘pity’, Dave was already laughing – I’d won the battle of wit already and I hadn’t even finished! Quickly, I thought, “Instead of ‘disgust’, I’ll use ‘condescension’, because it sounds better, even though it means roughly the same thing as pity,” (Yes, people, this IS how quickly my mind works. Terrifying, isn’t it?)

And then this came out: “No, I will look at you with the same levels of pity and condensation that I always do.”