Slacks

Are there words you hear that seem illogically annoying? Like, they just irritate you for unclear reasons? One word that makes me particularly and bizarrely angry is: Slacks. I hate that word.

(Via Pinterest)

When I hear the word slacks an image of a plump middle-aged man with glasses and rolled hems sitting on a chaise comes to mind. It’s the 1950’s and he’s smoking a cigarette in an office. Maybe the 1940’s. And he’s as obnoxious as heck. I do not like this man, but I feel guilty disliking him because he seems kind of decent.

Unfortunately when I look at him I think of the word slacks. He either has actually used that word or maybe he just seems like the kind of man who would wear slacks.

Slacks.

In my mind this article about Meghan Markle reminds me of the word slacks and this one is just *shrug* accurate. Objective. Truthful. Real.

…I actually kind of like the Duchess of Sussex. She concerns me because I’m not sure despite her Herculean drive, brilliance, shrewdness and beauty she’s actually in possession of the best judgment. She does seem potentially so self-serving that it might become self-destructive. But…I can see why Harry married her. When I compared her to Wallis Simpson years ago and recently I meant it in an objective way not as a compliment or an insult. Some people are just possibly a lot alike.

And I’m not a racist either…

Honestly though…I also love The New Yorker. They can be scary. Always have been… They know how to really use words.

But golly. Slacks. *thinking face*

The thing is the article in The New Yorker seems very similar to my post from last night, which intrigues me. I do think Meghan is driving Harry to hustle. But he shouldn’t have to. He’s not just a celebrity. He’s the Duke of Sussex. Or, at least, he has been. He doesn’t need to hustle. For status or for anything.

And that’s what the author seems to misunderstand. She points out that they’re royals but, as masterful as her writing is, she seems almost obtuse in regard to the implications of that word. He’s already at the top (some of his family are higher). The only hustle (almost all hustles involve some social climbing) that would possibly exist or make sense for him and Meghan involves money. His family is worth billions but he’s individually not worth that much. Neither is Meghan. Right?

(i.e. They couldn’t afford this home yet.)

And maybe…maybe that’s actually what Meghan wanted and wants after all: To be a self-actualized Jasmine French.

She wants a handsome prince with a background at the top, and then she wants to be the master of her own fate by also “having it all” in gold. Pure gold.

It’s kind of fascinating. It’s also very American. However! However…we’ve had that kind of money with and without aristocratic connections in our past (still do) and regardless that’s not how one becomes “American royalty”. If Bernie Sanders wins the Presidency he’ll have more of a claim to that title than the Mountbattens. The Windsors of Orange County? No, what they will be, if Meghan possibly has her way is astronomically glamorous and thrilling in a way we’ve never seen before in the US. Even given Wallis and Edward and the Vanderbilts and everyone else who’d they might resemble from our 20’s, 30’s, Gilded Age Past or otherwise.

But until then Harry is embarrassing himself trying to hustle. He’s also embarrassing his entire family and his ancestors as well, which is telling considering how insecure Meghan’s embarrassing relatives seemed to make her feel. Maybe she’s more like them than she wants to admit. …Also the Duke of Sussex is kind of…rebellious…

That being said, again, if she gets her wish…the 2020’s may roar after all. *shrug* And, while I admire a pristine fitted shirt, I guess it’s better to wear a neat pair of slacks than a wrinkled skirt. *smile*

%d bloggers like this: