Thursday, May 6, 2010
Now these are entertaining. I don't know if they are all to or from cheatin' hearts, except the last one - and in fact they might not be "love" ads as this blog is meant to be about, but whatever. I've been putting up so many depressing ads lately (they are the easiest to find!) that I thought something more amusing might be in order...
To threatening printed Valentines. - You have most unjustly accused us. We will take an oath we never did, and defy you to bring even a shadow of proof. Even in a case of revenge we would be above such paltry and contemptible acts.My my. At first I assumed this was an accusation of infidelity because of the "Valentines." And it might be, but the line about "even in a case of revenge" suggests perhaps not. I mean, I suppose people might cheat on their partners as a form of revenge if their partner cheated first (thankfully this is an issue I know nothing about), but somehow that doesn't seem to fit in this context. Plus, would the accused pair defend themselves in a personal? That seems odd. So I wonder what A. and T. were accused of? What are these "paltry and contemptible acts"? That sounds pretty intriguing. And why are they standing up for themselves in this venue? And, while we're asking unanswerable questions, what's up with the "printed Valentines"? I suppose that last is that maybe A. and T. each received a Valentine with the accusation inside. This ad was right around (though not on) Valentine's Day, so I guess that might be a way to contact the pair without being detected. That would suck. Imagine receiving an anonymous Valentine and thinking, oooh, someone likes me! And then it turns out it's an ugly threat. What a bummer.
SP - FF - D. - Truly right; answer, changing same for Personal; but who tells me the whole thing is not a conspiracy to destroy my character, and that you are tools in his hands? Otherwise he would not have complied so easily.This is an even greater mystery. The best I can do is that the author asked "him," whoever "he" is, to do something for the author, and "he" agreed a little too readily. The author gets suspicious about this easy compliance, so starts to think that maybe there is this conspiracy, and SP, FF, and D. are in on it and aiding and abetting the mastermind. I dunno, like the author asked "him" to do something illegal or at least disreputable (hire him a high-end prostitute? Something like that), but the conspirators only agreed so they could expose the author. So hard when you have to use pronouns without initials or names! But what the first part means, I have no idea. Still, I like my theory in general.
And my favorite by far:
Honest Heart - My wife received your anonymous letter; any future ones will be handed me unopened; I am as certain of author as though seen dictating same; you may fool others, but not me; drop it; if you were a man I would wring your nose; you are a snake, a fool and a liar. P.R.W.Ooooooohhhhhh!!!!!! This is awesome!! So, "Honest Heart" sent a letter to P.R.W.'s wife telling her that P.R.W. cheated on her. Either P.R.W. saw it first, or saw her reading it, or she showed it to him on her own accord, and he made her promise that any letters from the same handwriting go to him first. He instantly guessed who this apparently dishonest "Heart" was, and forthwith placed this ad in the paper. What did P.R.W. do to "Honest Heart"? And is HH a man or a woman? He says "if you were a man," but I wonder if he means that as an insult (like: "you're not a true man"). "I would wring your nose" is a pretty aggressive thing to say to a woman, even a lying, foolish snake of a woman. Although, wring your nose? Heh. Not your neck? Not a threat to shoot the offender? I wonder if P.R.W. did cheat on his wife? He doesn't ever explicitly deny it, after all.
Having trouble reading the ads? Click one to enlarge!
©2010 Pam Epstein