So the second part of S's email this morning was talking about a granddaughter's disappointment that her grandmother had more pictures of old, naughty, smelly dogs that she did of her children and grandchildren PUT TOGETHER.
OM had too. She did insist on having pictures of the last two Jack Russells in prominent positions. Unfortunately they were the MOST unattractive of the lot, throughly overfed and disproportionate. My brothers and HWISO nick-named them the Rugger Balls because that is exactly what they looked like.
Feeling smug, I went to make my bed. Left my bedroom tidier but considerably less smug. The pictures on the walls are mostly pastel portraits of the dogs, all 11 of them, including one that dates back to 1977, that I acquired from Mum. The photos - well there are a couple of the girls as small children, lots of photos of Tubby, the Jack Russell my parents gave to my father in law for his 40th birthday (some 38 years ago), Bruce, HWISO's 21st birthday present from his godfather - HWISO was 46 last week - and other labs from then onwards.
There is a photo of HWISO with a huge salmon in Iceland, some 30 years ago and a wedding picture of us in 1994, both in big frames so sort of scooched to the back of the display so as not to obscure any of the smaller (and more important) photos.
We "humans" are outnumbered about 6 to 1 by photos of the dogs.
Personally, I think dogs are less camera shy, are quite unbovered about photos of them asleep with their tongues hanging out and don't know what mascara is. They don't have bad hair days, need lipstick or stick their chins out at a peculiar angle to make themselves taller. No wonder, there are more pictures of them.....
Oh Charlotte you do make me chuckle.ReplyDelete