A bit of humour, a bit of grammar …
“Poor mite.”
“Who?”
“Jack Nicholson.”
“The famous actor?”
“The very same.”
“Why?”
“Apparently, he was born out of wedlock and grew up believing that his grandmother Ethel May – they called her Mud – was his mother.”
“Oh dear.”
“But there was worse.”
“Worse?”
“Apparently – some depravity in the family.”
“Good grief! What sort of depravity?”
“Kids getting spliced.”
“Jeez! With a cable?”
“No, no, they apparently forced them to get married – or something like that.”
“Kids? Surely not.”
“Well, that’s what they wrote.”
“Who?”
“The Sunday Times. Actually, it was John Harlow. From Los Angeles.”
“From Los Angeles?”
“Yep, look.”
“It is unclear whether Nicholson can explain what happened to Mud’s husband John, who went to a bar when he was a toddler and never returned.”
“Just a sec, just a sec, but it’s … ha, ha, ha … it’s about … about elega … elegant … ha, ha, ha …”
“Elegant? What’s elegant about kids frequenting bars? Not only that but …”
“No, no, what he needed was elegant variation.”
“If you ask me, what he needed was firm discipline.”
“No, no, no, not Mud’s husband – this reporter.”
“How do you mean?”
“‘He’ is at fault here.”
“You are confusing me now – who?”
“No, not who – what. You have to be extra careful with pronouns. But this John obviously didn’t realise this.”
“Mud’s husband?”
“No, no, John Harlow – the reporter. Pronouns are very easy to confuse; you simply cannot use the pronoun ‘he’ there – you must use elegant variation.”
“What’s elegant variation?”
“A replacement phrase – even if it’s only one word.”
“And it would have solved Jack Nicholson’s problem?”
“It would have certainly solved yours! Look, what this reporter should have written is this.”
It is unclear whether Nicholson can explain what happened to Mud’s husband John, who went to a bar when Jack was a toddler and never returned.
“Are you sure?”
“Positive.”
Advertisements
Brilliant. You make me laugh, Anna. Thank you. I wonder how many journalists read their work once they’ve written it or, should I say, read it with comprehension.
LikeLike
I am absolutely delighted to have amused you, Jennie, and grateful, of course, for yet another ego-boosting comment. You have hit the nail right on the head: writing is one part scribbling to four parts editing – or, at least, it should be. I will send you a direct message on Twitter. xxx
LikeLiked by 1 person
Excellent! I think I like these Daily Frolics better than your normal posts! These ones are so much fun!
LikeLike
Thank you so much for your feedback. I have been experimenting with different post formats, and comments like yours are invaluable in helping me to plan future articles. Needless to say, I greatly look forward to your next fabulous post!
LikeLike
Very good, as usual. 🙂
LikeLike
Many thanks and warmest birthday wishes, Dave – have a fantastic day!
(One of these days, you must explain how to conjure these funny faces and other squiggles – I’ve no idea how to produce them.)
You’ll collapse in fits of giggles:
I can’t really do the squiggles!
LikeLike
I try to watch my pronouns and make sure the reader knows to whom I am referring. Already I fear I have made a grammatical error. Anyway, found you on NaBloPoMo. Hope you will visit me too. I am learning how to make the smiley faces too. To make a smiley face you type a colon followed by the second side of the parenthesis mark. 🙂
LikeLike
Thank you so much, Deborah; I am in the middle of writing something but will certainly visit – and follow – your blog. And many thanks for the instructions: this is my VRY FIRST smiley face! 🙂 Oops, it worked in Word – not sure whether it will copy. Never mind …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your smiley worked. I know what you mean. It won’t show up in Word but when you publish it does. Look forward to your visit.
LikeLiked by 1 person