Monkey business at The Palace Hotel


No, she wasn’t growling at the ladies.  Or barking.  Just carrying on with some narrative or another, more or less removed from her surroundings.  Per usual.

Story of the day soon to follow.  Some hint as to our whereabouts earlier that afternoon might be found in my pants (velveteen) and her animal (rabbit).

Also: I promise this will be the last quasi self-portrait this week.  The psychoanalyst in me sez all this outward self-representation, after a long run with the equivalent of a bag over my head, must be overcompensation for the fact that I feel muter than usual, unable or unwilling to articulate the true angst at the core.  Either that or, you know, coincidence.

6 Responses to Monkey business at The Palace Hotel

  1. virgotex December 17, 2008 at #

    The rabbit appears to be attached to her butt, though I assume otherwise.

    My first reaction, because my brain is a musty attic full of pop-cult references, was to recall Monty Python’s Killer Rabbit, leaping up from out of the frame.

  2. Lesbian Dad December 17, 2008 at #

    You assume correctly, my perspicacious Texan chum. Though if the rabbit were attached to her butt, it would certainly explain the snarl. Leastwise I would probably snarl if I found one attached to my butt.

    Now for the frame-leaping bunny (“What’s he do, nibble your bum?”). Watch carefully at 1’20”, people!

    And brace yourself for a bit of carnage. Not of the rabbit.

  3. SJnky December 17, 2008 at #

    Coincidence – bah! Everything has deep, psychological reasons that simply MUST be examined at great length. While depressing songs play in the background.

    Only fitting for an overthinker such as yourself (and myself!)


  4. Ruffian706 December 18, 2008 at #

    Perhaps the little one is expressing your angst for you, hence the snarl.

    Also, I wanted to mention that I was bummed to bow out of the ongoing discussion with Caitlin about the Supreme Court case. It was certainly not out of avoidance, just out of the realities of first year law school! (which Caitlin can attest to, I’m sure.)

    I was especially interested in the comments by Eugene Volokh. He’s a prof here at UCLA, and while he’s incredibly conservative, he’s also incredibly smart. I can only hope the court sees beyond that somewhat small-minded “few words = nonsubstantial change” rationale.

    At any rate, responses are due on Friday, and after I’m done with my last exam that day, I’ll be poring away!

  5. wyliekat December 18, 2008 at #

    I’m not sure that two photos posted represents any kind of flagrant self-promotion.

  6. Lesbian Dad December 18, 2008 at #

    Thanks for the reality check. Now Cindy Sherman can rest easy.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.