Dear Darts,

Re: Duke of Earl

Unless I am very much mistaken, the dignitary to whom you refer only has the powers invested in him to preside over a territory or duchy, and his jurisdiction does NOT cover another member of the nobility appointed to rule in the stead of a monarch. Admittedly, not unlike the superb vocal range of your bouyant marine animal monikered singer Bob Fish, this is still very ‘high up'. Sadly, however, in addition to this incongruity, there are also other errors that I feel should be addressed.

It would be foolhardy to believe that being bestowed with an aristocratic title allows one to stride about willy nilly or globally perambulate without either endangering one's self or spoiling the enjoyment of others. One doubts, for example, that the‘armour’ of gentrification when walking over a level crossing when the lights are flashing and the barriers are down, or onto Wimbledon’s centre court on the final day of play, would either render one indestructible or endear him to strawberry eating spectators.

In conclusion we find your statement that as he ''walks through the world nothing can stop the Duke of Earl'' to be at best not cool (daddy cool).

Furthermore, I saw Bruce Forsyth being Knighted on London Tonight and am fairly confident that a title cannot be bequeathed to another just by amorously clutching hold of them. It would also be hardly suprising if ‘the girl can’t help it’ should she find his upper-crust order of precedence molestation an ‘invasion of her personal space’, or worse

We feel therefore, Darts, that unless these perceptions are all in my ''Ima ma ma ma ginaaaation''* you would be best advised in affecting an ‘One hundred and Eiggggghty!’ degree turn and telling your deluded dignitary to calm down a bit.


Yours,

Derek Philpott

 

*Sorry - I’ve just realised that was actually Rocky Sharpe and The Replays.

 

 

©2009-2014 Dawson-Rice | Website designed with the splendid help of Oast One.