Bitch on the Blog

February 6, 2011

That Woman – Take One

Synopsis: That Woman – CONsorted trials and tribulations of a sound box in urgent need of rewiring

Location: A  make shift court in a forest, preferably one with a clearing to receive echo (Note to sound technician: Echoes will never bounce back intact- so do allow for errors and omissions).

Props: A rope

In the dock: That Woman

Defence for the defendant: None

Witnesses for the defendant: Currently auditioning

Prosecution: Con and GM

Witnesses for the prosecution: GM and Con

Surprise witness for the proscecution: Barath whose testimony is hoped to squash That Woman faster and more efficiently than you can say balls

Gallery: Ashok. It’s his day off and he is hoping to learn something from proceedings dating back to the dark ages

Traffic warden: Looney

Jury: Outstanding

Stylist: Nick

Court Jester: BHB

On stand-good bye with get away car: Magpie

Administering last rights: Ramana

Understudy: Jean

gaelikaa: Bum job – court reporter (keep it short)

Cameo Appearance: Count of Monte Cristo

Other roles: Minor

Note to production assistant: Make sure Con and GM get full credits for original idea (Source: Fag end of R’s Walker comments)

Back to your trailers.

U

Advertisements

18 Comments »

  1. This sounds fun. I am going to ticket all the Prius’ that I can find.

    Comment by Looney — February 6, 2011 @ 16:21 | Reply

    • Please do. Though meant you to take on role of what do they call them: Traffic police. You know those guys who point you in the right direction, particularly when stuck in a jam. Will try and do an ‘edit’ on my post. Emphasis on TRY.

      U

      Comment by bitchontheblog — February 6, 2011 @ 16:45 | Reply

  2. For one horrible moment I thought you were implying that I needed cosmetic surgery.

    Comment by gaelikaa — February 6, 2011 @ 18:28 | Reply

    • gaelikaa, you don’t need cosmetic surgery. You are lovely as you are. Even in the flesh, I am sure.

      What you do need is me. I was horrified at your admission to thick skin on your heels. Still, there are always two sides to a coin: I admire people who are candid, particularly when it comes to their own callus. So, I am here, pumice stone in hand and since, in an idle moment, I qualified as a reflexologist (practicising not least on my son’s baby feet) you’ll be walking on air by the time I’ve finished with you. Or you with me.

      U

      Comment by Ursula — February 6, 2011 @ 18:38 | Reply

  3. Sorry, U, but I’m guessing Conrad and GM would think this game is a waste of their time. Nice try, though.

    I love the idea of BHB as court jester. She keeps people from taking themselves too seriously. I’m willing to be her understudy any day. 🙂

    Comment by Cheerful Monk — February 6, 2011 @ 23:09 | Reply

    • GM & Conrad “waste” a lot of time with silly comments back & forth. I’m on their silly comment list & thank goodness. We need silliness in these times. (Just jesting the court as I’m ‘Court Jester’.)

      Comment by bikehikebabe — February 6, 2011 @ 23:17 | Reply

    • Jean, please do not fall into trap of making assumptions: I wasn’t trying anything. I wrote a little sketch, that’s all. You tell me what Conrad and GM think. Who knows what they think. I wouldn’t go there if I were you. The dynamics here escape me, Jean: They called me That Woman. So that’s ok then.

      U

      Comment by Ursula — February 7, 2011 @ 00:35 | Reply

      • Where was “That Woman” said? No wonder I didn’t understand what this post was about.

        I have trouble thinking of Conrad and GM as prosecutors. To me they’ve moved on and you’ve been trying to get/keep something going. So a “That Woman” reference might change my mental picture.

        Comment by Cheerful Monk — February 7, 2011 @ 03:54 | Reply

        • Sorry, Jean, I should have made my “source” clearer: Please see comment section, the ones towards the end, of Ramana’s “The Walker” 1st Feb.

          U

          Comment by Ursula — February 7, 2011 @ 07:01 | Reply

          • Thanks. I was completely confused. You did write, “(Source: Fag end of R’s Walker comments)”. I would have gotten it if you had made that a link to Ramana’s post. Anyway, thanks again for clearing up the mystery.

            Comment by Cheerful Monk — February 7, 2011 @ 07:43 | Reply

            • Jean, ever the optimist. “Link”? Are you crazy? You are talking to me, remember? I wouldn’t know how to link if you threatened me with a rat. Neither do I know how to insert smileys 😦 For starters, I don’t even know where they are hiding. Which probably explains a lot.

              All I do is type. Never seem to get round to finer detail of what’s possible on the net, emails, blogs etc. 🙂

              Isn’t it bedtime soon your side of the world? O – that’s a yawn.

              U

              Comment by Ursula — February 7, 2011 @ 08:12 | Reply

              • Jean, I am so excited: No sooner had I pressed send when my little measley attempts at expressing regret and joy by using punctuation turned into smileys! Bring on the angels’ chorus! I have joined the club!

                U

                Comment by Ursula — February 7, 2011 @ 08:15 | Reply

                • Welcome! (Hope this isn’t a repeat, my first attempt didn’t work.)

                  Comment by Cheerful Monk — February 7, 2011 @ 08:46 | Reply

  4. I had to look up Barath’s take on women in rummuser’s blog to understand your saying this: ‘Barath whose testimony is hoped to squash That Woman faster and more efficiently than you can say balls’

    He doesn’t see why women can’t take care of children & get a career later, because they can multi-task & men can’t. I agree men can’t multi-task. That’s because we HAD to multi-task. Baby on hip, put in laundry or stop to add softener, turn stove down & stir, put yogurt on to start yogging, answer phone, cancel doctor’s appointment or pay the $50, shovel a snow path for the mailman, put everything away (BIG job), rush to grocery store–need I go on.

    Comment by bikehikebabe — February 7, 2011 @ 01:43 | Reply

    • BHB, I couldn’t give a toss about Barath’s wisdoms. See last few comments towards end of Ramana’s ‘The Walker’ 1 Feb which will also help to understand my reference to “That Woman”.

      Make sure you stay in fine fettle, (I don’t know why but I love the word “fettle” – old English I believe),
      U

      Comment by Ursula — February 7, 2011 @ 08:03 | Reply

      • I like “fettle” too. It comes from Middle English but that doesn’t mean it’s out-of-date. I haven’t used it in years but will be looking for an opportunity.

        I’ve been watching an Australian TV series (McLeod’s Daughters) and love the phrase, “No worries, mate.” I’m looking for a chance to use it too.

        Then there’s “don’t get your knickers in a knot.” Such beautiful alliteration shouldn’t be wasted. Thank you for telling me about it.

        Comment by Cheerful Monk — February 7, 2011 @ 08:42 | Reply

        • Oh, Jean, that is so sweet of you, trying to figure out when to use “No worries, mate”. Can’t stop smiling. It is so NOT you. Now, of course, I do not know whether your average Sheila uses ‘mate’. In the UK, unless I move in the wrong circles, that expressions seems to be used exclusively by guys when addressing other guys. Worth asking Magpie. I can be pretty chummy but I don’t think the word ‘mate’ has ever passed my lips. Good luck, Jean; on’t be surprised if the guy you are addressing thus will fall of ladder mouth wide open.

          “Knickers in a knot”. That’s even better than the here more commonly used “Don’t get your knickers in a twist” – which sounds more accidental and less intentional than your version. First time I used the phrase, shortly after my arrival in England ca. 1982, my then to be husband was aghast. Apparently only great grand aunts use that expression. I don’t care. I like knickers in a twist. And from now on I shall KNOT them. Which reminds me, and maybe you can ask your readers what strange sayings cum believes they remember from their youth: My grandmother – when she needed to remember something – would tie a knot into her handkerchief (these were the pre-paper tissue days). My young self raised on a diet of fairy tales was fascinated. Still am. You know, to me that’s a nightmare scenario: There I am with a white handkerchief and a knot (sometimes two): HOW ON EARTH does anyone remember what those knots stand for? She always did. Extraordinary.

          Back to knickers. Then there is “Knickerbocker Glory” – a dessert of frilly proportions;special glass as well. Loved it (ca 1982). Can you imagine husband-to-be (the coolest guy in town) taking his girl friend out, her asking for a “Knickerbocker Glory” as dessert?

          U

          Comment by Ursula — February 9, 2011 @ 11:48 | Reply

          • Actually in McLeod’s Daughters the women use “mate” a lot. The only people who use the term Sheila are MCPs, and there are very few in that series.

            MCP, you have to look deep on Google to find that definition. Interestingly enough a mate of ours used it to describe himself, tongue in cheek I presume.

            Comment by Cheerful Monk — February 10, 2011 @ 00:29 | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: