So the other day I came across this article from January discussing your...can I call it "elevation to damehood"? Is damehood a word?...No it is not. Neither is "dameness". Why is knighthood a word but damehood isn't? Isn't a dame kind of the equivalent?
Whoa off track. What I wanted to say was that not only is it a nice little interview (or, you know, mini-bio, I mean gosh), but the words "She is writing a book to accompany them" (them being your collected photographs of older women in your Infinite Variety show) make me skippingly happy. Also making me happy are little things like the positive ending, the fact of people paying attention to you (nottheonlyonehwawaha) and the fact that you still get, you know, work. And damehoods. (Dammit, it ought to be a word.)
Oh, and regarding the article's...sub-heading I think one calls it, their use of the word "throes" is, like, Awkwardsville. I mean, do intelligent, well-rounded, experienced 60-year-olds really go through "throes" with new romancings? Is that even something that happens?
On a related note, I don't know if it means anything beyond extreme and bone-deep flippancy but when we heard from this article that you've got romance happenin' (yay), my sister and I both independently wondered if you and Janet McTeer were gay with each other now. Seriously. It's so weird, I don't even know why. I had just decided not to wonder it out loud when my sister did so and I was like "...".
But the end of the article says that the (stupid-lucky) person you're embarking on a beach-walk-of-the-heart with is an American actor, so Janet's not really an option!
I expect to hear from the tabloids that you're dating George Clooney. Any day now.
 |
| Image taken from the article in question, lazy me. Also, this image's url ends in "/Harriet-Walker-007.jpg". The name mishap is rather wince-making, but the "007" is...intriguing. "Walter. Harriet Walter." |
No comments:
Post a Comment