Literary greatness.
Jan. 24th, 2008 09:44 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
davywavyOne of the first things you learn about travelling on the tube in London is 'Don't make eye contact'. Instead of interacting with your fellow man as you cram yourself into the poxy little clockwork box that passes for a train, you find a patch of wall and fix your gaze on it and don't look at other people. This is because if you make eye contact with someone then they may want to talk to you, and one of the rules of life is that anyone wanting to talk on London public transport is always an escaped mental patient.
A good way of not making eye contact is to read, and this explains the rise of free newspapers and magazines which are given out morning and evening at tube stations. Some people actually read books, but their numbers are declining as the volume of free newsprint like Metro, London Lite and The London Paper rises.
One of these papers a while ago had a space-filling article on how we judge people by what we see them reading, and how flirtation on the tube can be born simply by impressing people by your reading matter. It contained lots of voxpops like this one:
Emily Guttersnipe, 19, said: "When I see someone reading sumfink on the tube, 'specially if it's sumfink dead interlekchewal like Dan Brahn, I'm dead impressed, like, an' fink 'I'd like me some of that, like.'"
Well, needless to say, if there's hot totty to be had just by changing my reading matter I'm interested so I ditched my copy of Five go to Kirrin Island and started carrying Les Miserables instead. Not that I actually read it - moving your lips and running your finger along each line is a dead giveaway.
On the train home last night I looked up from my copy of Goethe's Faust and saw that everyone else in the carriage was reading London Lite. I wonder why I bother.
What do you reckon - do you judge people (and become interested or dismiss them) on what you see them reading?
A good way of not making eye contact is to read, and this explains the rise of free newspapers and magazines which are given out morning and evening at tube stations. Some people actually read books, but their numbers are declining as the volume of free newsprint like Metro, London Lite and The London Paper rises.
One of these papers a while ago had a space-filling article on how we judge people by what we see them reading, and how flirtation on the tube can be born simply by impressing people by your reading matter. It contained lots of voxpops like this one:
Emily Guttersnipe, 19, said: "When I see someone reading sumfink on the tube, 'specially if it's sumfink dead interlekchewal like Dan Brahn, I'm dead impressed, like, an' fink 'I'd like me some of that, like.'"
Well, needless to say, if there's hot totty to be had just by changing my reading matter I'm interested so I ditched my copy of Five go to Kirrin Island and started carrying Les Miserables instead. Not that I actually read it - moving your lips and running your finger along each line is a dead giveaway.
On the train home last night I looked up from my copy of Goethe's Faust and saw that everyone else in the carriage was reading London Lite. I wonder why I bother.
What do you reckon - do you judge people (and become interested or dismiss them) on what you see them reading?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-01-24 12:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-24 02:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-24 02:03 pm (UTC)Ezekiel 13:18-20
"Thus saith the Lord God, Woe to the women that sew pillows.... Behold, I am against your pillows."
no subject
Date: 2008-01-24 02:07 pm (UTC)H
no subject
Date: 2008-01-24 02:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-24 02:11 pm (UTC)H
no subject
Date: 2008-01-25 01:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-25 01:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-25 03:32 pm (UTC)It has a lot to answer for.