« Graffiti's script part 2 | HomePage | Is being safe good enough? »
Saturday, 29 September 2007
Graffiti's script part 3
To interpret or not to interpret that is the question
When commenting about Kahless’ two script figures of:
Carrie Ingalls from Little House on the Prairie.
Elizabeth Walton from The Waltons
I said,
But the real question Kahless is what do you see them as representing?
Of course the same applies for me.
I have mentioned Snorky, Eeyore and Marvin. What do they represent for me?.
One of the main things for new trainee therapists to learn is that clients do not see the world the same way as they do. Whilst this seems simple it is in fact a hard thing to understand. Whilst we all know this in our heads that people are different at the Child ego state level it is much harder to accept.
Of course eveyone is like me, aren't they?
When someone says they are feeling angry how do we know what they are feeling?. By recalling our own experience of anger. So their anger becomes our experience of anger. So when someone says they are feeling angry we can never know what THEY are actually feeling. Instead we know what we feel as anger and assume it is the same for them.
Carl Jung defined the concepts of the anima (The female image in men) and the animus (The male image in women). He says that when a man and a woman marry they will copy or imitate one another. So the man through having a close attachment and relationship with his wife will imitate her thoughts, feelings and actions so that they become part of his personality. This then is how he understands the female and her psyche though his own anima or the female part of himself that he has learnt from his wife. So he never really understands HER instead he can only ever understand the female part of himself. All a bit narcissistic isn’t it!!
At least this husband and wife will have colourful anima(s) and animus(s)
So in essence we are like cannibals (as Kenoath suggested). When we form a strong attachment to another we will incorporate and consume their personality into our own. We literally swallow them. This is called the imitative instinct. It is normal, unconscious and unstoppable. We will imitate or consume others weather we want to or not. We imitate their good bits and their bad bits without discernment.
Have you ever watched a young child who is sitting and just observing with their wide eyes and sometimes even their mouth is open. It is like they are sitting there watching mother and father and they are literally swallowing what they see. Taking it all in. As parents we all hope they imitate our good qualities and sort of, somehow, kind of, hope they just don’t see our ‘bad’ bits. Obviously they do, so when father is sitting there watching the football on TV with his sixth can of beer in hand and baby Johnny is hanging around and soaking it all up, don’t be surprised when cleaning his room fifteen years later and you find a joint stashed in his secret hide away spot. (Which, by the way, you of course came across inadvertently).
And my point is?
How does a therapist know what a client is feeling and thinking. Can he only know by his own self examination?
Can a therapist answer these questions for this man?
This raises a much debated point in counselling. Do you interpret what the client reports or not. When you interpret you are stating how you see the client sees it. Of course interpretation in therapy has a long history that began with Freud and his interpretation of dreams. The client would report a dream and Freud would interpret it and feed back to the client that interpretation. You are telling the client who and what they are. So some see nothing wrong with interpreting what the client reports.
There is another school of thought that says you never interpret what the client reports. They would say that what Freud reported back would be his own personality and not the clients. That Freud simply projected himself on to the parts of the client's dream and reported that back to the client.
So to me Carrie Ingalls and Elizabeth Walton are good, sweet, little girls who do the right thing and are domesticated. But that is my interpretation of them and that will be different from everyone else’s interpretation of those to figures. So when I watch those TV shows they will be mildly entertaining to me but that is all. To some they will have much more impact because the TV watcher identifies with them, they see part of them self in the character. That character becomes one of their script figures or “totems” as they are sometimes called.
This is why some sit coms (Situation comedies) can be so successful as people will identify them self in one or more of the characters and thus they will seek out the show repetitively.
What we really looking for on the big and the small screen is ourselves?
For me Snorky, Eeyore and Marvin have a special script meaning and for other people they obviously wont. Those others will find these characters mildly entertaining and that is all. The next question is why do I identify with these characters? What is it about these three characters that has special meaning for me? And this is where we get to the division in therapeutic approach.
For instance if I was a client the gestalt therapist would say, “What is it about those characters that have meaning for you” In fact they would say, “Be Snorky and say stuff about yourself”. This approach is allowing ME to interpret the features of those three characters that has meaning for me. The good part about this is the the therapist is not given an opportunity to interfere by him putting his projection onto the client's script figures.
On the other hand the the psychoanalytic (Freud) approach would interpret the snorky for me and isolate features of Snorky that were pertinent to my personality. The therapist would tell me these things. The danger in this approach is (as I said before) the therapist projects himself onto the client's script figure. The advantage of this approach is that all client’s lie to themselves and that will include lying to self in interpreting their own script figures. By interpreting the script figures the therapist can circumvent the client lying to self.
I recall on weekend group therapy session a long time ago. There was one woman client and she had a great deal of trouble relating to people. She had very few friends and people would just tend to avoid her. In this exercise the clients were to identify some script figure for self. This woman chose a rose. When asked what was it about the rose that she liked she proceeded to describe the beauty of the rose, the lovely reds and whites, the lovely texture and so forth. This is all good and well but it also included a self lie.
What else are there about roses? They are thorny and spiky and if you grab the stem it hurts!! This described the woman in her relationships with friends. She was thorny and would regularly spike people with one of her thorns and thus people stayed away and she had very few friends. She had lied to her self about being thorny and only through the therapist interpretation did she come to realise that and thus the behaviour changed as a result of that awareness which came via the interpreter.
So what is it about Snorky, Eeyore and Marvin for me?. The first thing that interested me was how I had lied to my self and changed reality to fit for me. When I put the three characters up a week ago I said that they all did not saying anything. Then Roses and Kenoath produced YouTube videos which showed that Marvin did say plenty. I had lied to myself and changed reality. Then I noticed that whilst Marvin has plenty to say he didn’t actually speak. He couldn’t speak because he doesn’t have a mouth.
Perhaps as a little boy I saw Marvin didn’t have a mouth and therefore I didn’t have to listen to him. Over the years I have changed that in my mind to Marvin didn’t say anything when in fact he did. Why would a character who says nothing have some meaning for me.
This young boy saw Marvin didn't have a mouth
Neurological examination has shown that I am an auditory dyslexic. That means I am sort of deaf. My ears function normally but when the information from my ears goes to my brain it is processed inefficiently. Obviously I do listen and understand what people say verbally but listening is more work for me than for others. So I switch like a deaf person does. If one does not listen then one watches instead. Visual information via my eyes is processed quite normally in my brain.
So in a conversation between two people they for arguments sake 50% listen to what the other person says and 50% watches them for body language and so forth. In my case I listen 10% and watch 90%. So when I am with a client I don’t listen to them I watch them.
So I can understand Snorky, Eeyore and Marvin better because you don’t have to listen to them. (Even though me as a little boy got it wrong with Marvin). They communicate by action alone, which of course is what Marcel Marceau is all about.
And of course it has been said to me many times in my life that I am an observer rather than getting involved in verbal conversation. Of course I can converse with others and do so quite well, but underneath all that I do tend to watch rather then getting involved in verbal interchanges. Which is what I see Snorky, Eeyore and Marvin do. So I see me in them and thus they become a script figure for me in that way.
This may also explain why since the latter part of high school I started writing and have never stopped since. Writing allows me to say stuff without speaking and to understand what other people are saying without having to listen to them. I don’t listen to them I read them which of course is a visual exercise.
There is one other feature which relates to Eeyore which I don’t like and would prefer it not to be there but I understand Eeyore for it. As I look back now as a pre-teen child I think quite depressed and it was never diagnosed. I never complained because I thought it was just normal to be like that. With the information I have now if I saw a child who reported the same feelings, thoughts and behaviours I had then then they would be diagnosed as depressed. The way Eeyore moves and his overall presentation is for me a quite depressed one. So me as the little boy saw that and I suppose I understood what Eeyore was about, or saw myself in Eeyore.
Depression
Graffiti
10:15 Permalink | Comments (36) | Email this
Comments
Oh wow. I think you think - marvin. No need for a mouth, you say so much inside hence it oozes out. Just watch your youtubes. You say so much. I giggle when i see you wanting to move on but others want to paddle around in the part of the pool you've led them too. No need for a mouth.
I've always been slightly deaf. It's easy to communicate to some one who is out loud rather than someone who talks. When they just talk it takes so much concentration to work out what they might be saying. Just by picking up the syllables - you know, the loud ones and trying to join them together. Some people speak quite clearly. It's lovely. But most people sound like they mumble with a hand over their mouths. That might be why i love Sign language so much. That would make sense i guess. I guess we grow up learning how to communicate the best we can don't we? I guess so.
Eeyore, i don't see him as depressed. He and Tigger are my faves. But i really like Eeyore cause he seems cuddley but to try and pin Tigger down, well, naa thanks.
Snorkey is just shy and bashful but fun loving and adaptable. He's the kind of person who could be the only one/thing in a room and yet still find some way to blend in to his surroundings. Quite a tricky little chap. Being the only thing in the room and you'd still not notice him. That's why he has a horn. And honks very loudly very often. I like snorkey. He's sweet.
That's how i see your choice of characters. Love this post. It's a beauty Tony. Happy long weekend to you...
Sheesh! Gotta watch out for reflections where there isn't a delete button. No delete button is a great idea!
Posted by: Roses | Saturday, 29 September 2007
This is a really good post, Tony. I understand what you mean when you say you had a self lie in saying that the characters did not talk. I could have told one of those when I commented about relating to Spock and Survivorman (but I was too tired). They are the wasteland (Spock) and the meadow (Survivorman). I felt the feeling of the truth when I wrote that and I just decided not to put words to it to further my own understanding, if you know what I mean. I am detached like Spock in the wasteland. Sometimes that saves me. When I am in the meadow I am too busy just surviving to really get anywhere (this is where all the delightful hysterical stuff comes in).
I also understand what you mean about not taking in conversation and being visual because I am the opposite. Did you know that I have trouble following the plot of a movie because of this? It's a face thing. Lots and lots of people look alike to me unless they are people that I am very familiar with. This can spoil movies because I can't keep the characters straight. I need a movie where the main characters all have some very obvious physical attribute; one is a dwarf, one has a wild shock of red hair, one weighs four hundred pounds, etc...
Tony, does your dyslexia interfere with being able to watch a movie. If it does, how do you get around that?
Posted by: Lynn | Saturday, 29 September 2007
"So in essence we are like cannibals (as Kenoath suggested). When we form a strong attachment to another we will incorporate and consume their personality into our own."
That would probably indicate why in relationships we get a little "indigestion" from time to time. In therapy Graffiti, if client's 'digest' the therapist's personality somewhat as a transitional process to healing there must be a time where that part is purged, cough up, pooed out and replaced with a better idea of self. Woops the grandfinal has just started gotta go.
kenoath
Posted by: kenoath | Saturday, 29 September 2007
Hi Graffiti,
Thanks for sharing this with us.
xx.
Posted by: kahless | Saturday, 29 September 2007
Hi Tony,
You go on a long journey on this post.
I like the idea of reading rather than listening to people Tony and would rather do this myself. Often when I listen to people i wish I could turn the sound down or put them in slow motion. Maybe I ought to get into film as well.
I like words but they're often used to camouflage what's really happening.
Occasionally it's interesting to cut out either the visual or the sound. It's fun to watch TV without the sound and just savour the visual ( or write the visual oneself over the top of the visual). I also like to listen to the radio or the sound and supply the visual.
I suppose by isolating specific senses in this way I aren't staturated by too much stimulus and can really study each one. It's also good to use a stunning visual in a film, but to improve or personalize it by writing one's own words over the top of it.
Best wishes,
Nick
Posted by: Nick | Saturday, 29 September 2007
Ooo G'day, (kind of a report i guess)
I heard Geelong won. Congratulations all Geelong supporters. We've our Rugby league grand final tonight. It's between Manly and Melbourne. Bit of a 'thing' about Manly being the only Sydney team in the GF because they're a wealthier club.
I think also there's a tiny little bit of a ripple in the calm stream of National (meaning New South Wales of course *giggles*) Rugby league watchers, cause Melbourne are the other team in the last officially important game of the year for the NRL. Ohh well. That's just the way it goes i guess.
Nick,
That's a fun thing to do! It's kind of strange, but i love to listen to a story teller. They usually have a clear voice and when there's not too much distraction, its just wonderful to close the eyes and listen. Ohh my goodness, the telly screen in my head is amazing then. I like it if there are pictures or the person is a naturally animated person. Gosh that's fun too.
'Pan's Labyrinth' - a wonderful movie. It's made in Spanish (i think) but if you want you can have English Subtitles if you don't communicate in Spanish very well. I don't do spanish at all so I watched/read it once with and after a little while I didn't realize i was reading. All the other times i watched it, i really didn't need the english translation. It was wonderful! I recomend it to anyone...
Hope everyone's having a great Sunday and happy holiday Monday to those who get one. Cheery cheers...
Roses
Posted by: Roses | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Hi, Tony.
I was just revisiting your post and when I saw that cute picture of you with Santa, I thought of a photo that I have. I'm sure you would appreciate it. I will have to find it, scan it and send it to you. It is cute and funny, too.
Posted by: Lynn | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Roses 29 sept
I guess we grow up learning how to communicate the best we can don't we?
I think that is pretty right Roses and I am glad that you like Eeyore. I like him too. I thought the Winnie the Pooh stories were great. My sister loved Piglet and called her pet dog Tigger
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Hi Lynn,
Glad you liked the post.
I have never heard of Survivorman. Is that a real super hero or one you made up?
You say
does your dyslexia interfere with being able to watch a movie
I may have made out that the dyslexia effects me more than it does. No one would ever know just speaking with me and I can understand movies and all other speech quite well, but it does take a bit more effort for me than others.
What i think I do is just listen to the person and just pick up the theme of what they are saying and then switch off and go into visual mode.
Ocassionally I will have a client say, "Have you been lsitening to me"
I would have switched off the audio in my head and missed something whcih I then ask them about and they have just said it. This only happens quite infrequently
Yes I like that sanata photograph. I looked quite excited and happy and have a band aid on my fore head. In those days you got to sit on santa's knee and have a whispering conversation with him about what you wanted for christmas. Couldn't do that these days!
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Kenoath says:
In therapy Graffiti, if client's 'digest' the therapist's personality somewhat as a transitional process to healing there must be a time where that part is purged, cough up, pooed out and replaced with a better idea of self.
Maybe that is when there is a shift in the relational from the positive transference to the negative transference.?
Graffiti
Posted by: Graffiti | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Thanks Graffiti, I realised later how rediculously my question came out. Such is LIfe
kenoath
Posted by: kenoath | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Not sure if I agree that it was a less than inspiring question Kenoath. I thought the metaphor was quite good
Graffiti
Posted by: Graffiti | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Yeds I guess your right I could have said "transcending" or something.
kenoath
Posted by: kenoath | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Hi Tony and Ken and all,
I like the metaphor of digesting the therapist's personality Tony ( I guess it might be tastier than sheep's head), but will need more stomach space to break down what you say more fully.
I'm not sure whether digesting would shift the transference in the way you suggest Tony. I also think it's more important that the shift could lead to a lessening of transference to build more autonomy in the client, and I supoose this happens with both positive and negative transference.
Must say though I guess it's a lot easier to work with positive transfernce. I suppose, should there be too much negative transference, the client won't stick around too long, which demands an even greater degree of sensitivity from the therapist.
I saw the Hammers on TV Tony. They were unlucky to play Arsenal at the moment as the Hammers are very hot right now, and would probably beat anyone in the league.
Look after your kid Tony and maybe he'll give us a part 4.
Best wishes,
Nick.
Posted by: Nick | Sunday, 30 September 2007
I mean the Gunners are hot. OOps mixing the Hammers up with the Gunners. N.
Posted by: Nick | Sunday, 30 September 2007
I am slowly getting it Nick,
Arsenal are the gunners (and the red devils?).
I think the cannibal metaphor is a good one. The child incorporates the parents identity into itself. Into its bones. The client to some extent incorporates the therapist into their identity, similar to injesting. Indeed we have the process of introjection which is taking the outside object to the inside of us.
One could propose that this happens in the positive transference stage and then finally the client gets sick of it all and poops it out. Hence we have the negative transference where the opposite of introjection takes place in the client or the teenager with a parent.
tony
Posted by: Tony | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Hi Tony,
The best team in the world and the Premiership Champions no less, are Manchester United, aka The Red Devils.
:-)
K.
Posted by: kahless | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Hi Tony,
I suppose in the transference the client uses the therapist as a vehicle to work out their feelings towards their parents which are also impacting on people the client experiences outside the therapy, particularly people who remind the client of their parents.
I guess this happens with both positive and negative, although with the negative the client may hit so much inner anger and pain that they don't want to work with that therapist, even though, provided the therapist is able to track the client, it could be very therapeutic for the client.
I'm not sure to what extent the client spits the therapist out Tony? I suppose it's more a case of resolving the issues around the early parental relationships, although maybe they never disappear, just get softened a lot by the therapy.
Further food for thought, i guess!!
The Red Devils? That's the best nickname and belongs to ( probably) the best club, Manchester United, even though they're not quite on song at the moment. Sadly though, they haven't got a song like West Ham's I'm forever blowing bubbles ( I often sing it when i'm washing up or when i'm in the bath). That must be the best song after You'll never walk alone, Liverpool's anthem.
Best wishes
Nick.
Posted by: Nick | Sunday, 30 September 2007
Nick,
I cant believe you are a true red devil after saying that!!!
:-)
:-)
Do you need me to learn you some of our songs...
though probably a bit rude for Graffiti's blog!
:-)
I also could tell you some alternate lyrics to the songs you mentioned.
lol!
K.
Posted by: kahless | Monday, 01 October 2007
Hi k
Oh but I am a true red K ( honest) . wouldn't mind (whisper) reading some of your devilish lyrics if you wanted to share them.
I see from today's News of the world that Sven's playing away again!!
Best wishes,
Nick
xx
Posted by: Nick | Monday, 01 October 2007
Hi Nick,
I dont read News of the Screws (oops, can I say that?) but I wouldn't be surprised. Though I thought Sven had split from Nancy. I don't know what the women see in him.
:-)
(whisper)
I must say I am rather embarassed *face gone red* to admit that I sing some of these songs
but
:-)
go here
http://www.prideofmanchester.com/sport/mufc-songs-players.htm#park
My favourites are:
Tune: Oh my darling Clementine
"Build a bonfire,
Build a bonfire,
Put the Scousers on the top,
Put City in the middle,
And burn the f*cking lot "
tune: Volare
Nemanja ooah
Nemanja ooah
He comes from Serbia
He'll f*ckin Murder yer...
tune: 'Lord Of The Dance'
Park Park, wherever you maybe
You eat dog in your own country
But it could be worse
You could be scouse
Eating rats in yer council House
tune: 'You Are My Sunshine'
You are a scouser
An ugly scouser
Youre only happy
on Giro Day
Your mums out thieving
Your dads out stealing
Please dont take
my hubcaps away
tune: ??? Maybe I'll have to sing it for you!
In the Liverpool slums,
They knock on the door when they want something to eat,
They find a dead rat and they think it's a treat,
In the Liverpool slums...
In the Liverpool slums,
Your Mum's on the beat and your Dad's in the nick,
You can't find a job 'coz you're too f*ckin' thick,
In the Liverpool slums...
See I definately am no Carrie Ingalls!
I'll slink off embarrassed now....
Kahless
xx.
Posted by: kahless | Monday, 01 October 2007
Oh, and for the non brits...
Park and Nemanja are United players
Liverpool = scousers = greatest rivals
city = manchester city = other team in same town and rivals also.
Football singing is a culture at footie matches.
Oh and btw I am going to Russia in two weeks too! To see England play (v Russia) Going for a week. Anyone been there and can recommend any particular sites?
x.
PS I have nothing against Liverpudlians outside the football terraces!
:-)
Posted by: kahless | Monday, 01 October 2007
I actually don't believe there is a purging of the thrapist from the client. There could be in the case of the client leaving therapy - separating from the relationship in a manner of past patterning or self styled individuation perhaps. It ends somewhere!
The 'object' in the positive transference of therapist continues on long after therapy concludes. A transitional and external object that has been helpful to resolve early childhood and other feelings etc mutates into a beneficial internal object for the client. Perhpas the client would ultimately devour this object rather than the therapist himself. In the end, no pooing required! Just the finishing of the relationship-separation from the instrument for the 'object'.
kenoath
Posted by: kenoath | Monday, 01 October 2007
Hi Ken,
I agree Ken ( i think), even though you get a bit technical.
Thanks Kahless I enjoyed the sing song, even though it's not exactly Lennon and McCartney.
It reminds me of school assembley when a few of us used to change the words in hymms- probably to get our own back on the headmistress who loved them but who was a bit of a dragon.
I read that Sven and Nancy are still a couple Kahless even though she's living in London, giving Sven plenty of opportunities to score away from home.
Best wishes,
Nick.
Posted by: Nick | Monday, 01 October 2007
Hi Nick,
Scoring away from home! Good one.
:-)
Posted by: kahless | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
Hi Graffiti,
I was listening to a news article on the way home from work tonight on the radio and it made me think of you. This is because I know you like to talk about teenagers and the authorities/parents over-protection in your posts.
Today in England the age that someone can buy cigarettes was raised from 16 to 18. In the news article, the presenter interviewed numerous kids on their views. It tickled me when one kid said
‘you are going to die anyway, so why not smoke.’ Good teenage logic that is!
So in England now, you can have sex at 16 but can’t buy a pack of fags to smoke afterwards!
Posted by: kahless | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
Kahless,
Here in Australia the age of consent is 16 except in Tassie and South Australia - 17. But it's illegal to be married till 18. I got some info from Wickipedia but I found another source because i heard that Wickipedia can be interferred with if you want to add or take stuff away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Australia_and_Oceania
This is the other one I found...
http://www.avert.org/aofconsent.htm
at the bottom were some other things added a couple of which were...
1) In Queensland, the legal age of consent for anal intercourse is 18 (regardless of gender), while for vaginal intercourse it is 16.
So, it's ok to have sex just not to get married. I don't understand so much stuff.
"With tobacco and alcohol illegal for under-18s, retailers should further be helped to comply with the law, the Department of Health said. England and Wales will now move into line with Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the US."
I found this statement at this web site...
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2138845.html?menu=
Gee thanks guys for falling into line *giggles*
Really weird. I don't know many people between the ages of 15 - 18 who don't drink alcohol or smoke and/or 'smoke' or aren't sexually active.
I don't know what difference the age thing makes. Perhaps raising the age changed their ability to get honest statistics? I guess we should just let them think they can control people. I think the only people on this planet that will obey the laws, are the law abiding ones. Every one else will just keep doing their own thing. It's quite a giggle watching our leaders trying to parent our nation. It's nice the way they made us go through the birth pains though (oops scarcasm, must be getting a little angry/passionate) Just a thought or two.
Nothing like a session of verbal diarrhoea (sp?) to start the week off don't you think?
G'day, happy week...
Posted by: Roses | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
G'day Roses,
They also banned a few months ago smoking in public places. There was a couple of exceptions placed into the legislation though, one being the house of commons of course. (That is where our politicians meet, debate, etc.)
So one rule for us and another rule for them.
Oh dear, I am not that passionate about the subject really.
:-)
Happy week to you too!
(And I dont think what you say is verbal d...; I can never spell that word!)
Posted by: kahless | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
Kahless,
I giggled out loud just then. Geez... I can't spell it either, i'm just hoping my Word Dictionary can. That's what i do, i have a window with Ms word open so i can type the tricky words into it. Trouble is, i think i've accidently added miss spelt words when i was 'doing with out thinking'.
I'm just taking it as a matter of faith - that it's spelled correctly. I could have written 'the runs' - 'the squirts' - 'intestinal loosage' - 'scowers' - 'poops' (ooo, there's a multitasking word) but I wouldn't want to get Tony's blog all seweraged out.
What time is it there Kahless. It would be nice to know just to work out the time difference. I guess i could look at a time in other countries - type thingy. Actually i'll give that one a go. Happy - what ever it is over there. Cheers mate...
Posted by: Roses | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
Ohh by the way - I think they did the whole ban smoking in public bars and clubs and stuff like that here too. Lots of clubs and pubs built really nice covered out door places for peeps to gather smokingly happy and joyous. Well, not always joyous i guess. *giggles*
Posted by: Roses | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
Its lunch time here now Roses; 12 noon. But that will mean nothing to you as the comments are not time stamped. I think there is a 9-12 hour time difference. I will have a look tonight when I am on my own pc.
We have an internet cafe at work (where I am now) and the pcs are quite limited in functionality (only one screen open at a time) so I cant look now.
I too am reluctant to talk sewage on nice Tony's post. I think you have most common phrases covered. Though a couple of names you mentioned I have not heard of. I will add we might say in the uk - the shits - and politely; loose bowel movements!
Actually, whilst we are on the topic and I cant readily access an online dictionary, I remember my aussie aunt laughing when I used the word, to desrcribe someones dress as uncool, 'well thats really dag-ie.' Remind me, in oz is a dag something to do with the,erm, brown stuff that gets matted into sheeps fur on their bottoms?
Posted by: kahless | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
Its lunch time here now Roses; 12 noon. But that will mean nothing to you as the comments are not time stamped. I think there is a 9-12 hour time difference. I will have a look tonight when I am on my own pc.
We have an internet cafe at work (where I am now) and the pcs are quite limited in functionality (only one screen open at a time) so I cant look now.
I too am reluctant to talk sewage on nice Tony's post. I think you have most common phrases covered. Though a couple of names you mentioned I have not heard of. I will add we might say in the uk - the shits - and politely; loose bowel movements!
Actually, whilst we are on the topic and I cant readily access an online dictionary, I remember my aussie aunt laughing when I used the word, to desrcribe someones dress as uncool, 'well thats really dag-ie.' Remind me, in oz is a dag something to do with the,erm, brown stuff that gets matted into sheeps fur on their bottoms?
Posted by: kahless | Tuesday, 02 October 2007
*Giggles* Kahless,
Yep, that about sums a dag up. You/they actually say 'loose bowel movements' in a normal conversation? Wow! They are the really good talkers huh? The ones that know the english language and use it?
There are quite a few people I've heard use that word. And yes... that's what it is, and when it gets fly blown the sheep can get very sick from infection and die if unattended. It's pretty yucky and so fits right in when used as you had done.
I know people who call other people dags in an affectionate way too. If they don't truely love you, you won't ever be called a dag or "parasite infested faeces impacted infected anus of a sheep". I don't talk to them much. Just in case we become close friends....
Ohh my goodness! In Sydney it's 9.43am Wed while in London it's 12.43am Wed. All at the same time. Well not the same time but now, simultaneously. That's 9 hours exactly! But there's a little asterix next to you guys so aparently this thingy thinks you're on day light saving. This is the site I used. Just the first one that came up...
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/
I'm going to go now. Cause if i don't i'll just keep raving. Cheers mate...
Roses
Posted by: Roses | Wednesday, 03 October 2007
Tony?
I went and applied for my owner builders license yesterday. It's pretty exciting! Hope you're able to keep up with yourself and life. Be well...
Roses
Posted by: Roses | Thursday, 04 October 2007
That sounds like good news Roses, a builders licence.
What are you planning on building?
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, 04 October 2007
It's a license for owners to build. It doesn't make me a builder. Just gives me license to get contractors in to build a house for me. We're moving a little house from up the road and putting it on the block next door to us. It's yucky, we had to chop down some really nice gum trees but i guess we'll grow some more somewhere.
It's fun messing around with the plans. I hope it'll be all good.
Are you being extra busy lately? Makes the weekend really nice when that happens i guess. Hope your time with the boys was enjoyable and nice. Happy end of the week. Cheers...
Posted by: Roses | Thursday, 04 October 2007