Weird Granny Slater wrote:Hardly an 'attack' TB, just a gentle snigger from the back row. Politicians certainly seem unable to ‘do’ casual.
But it's really a wink at power and the function of clothing as sign: the language of the presence, absence, gaining and loss of power is, as it were, knitted to the language of clothing (invest, defrock etc.). Surely you of all people will be familiar both with that emboldening shiver of authority that accompanies an enrobing and with the emptiness of the subsequent undressing?
I hoped as much. I take my hat off to your reply. I wasn't getting unnecessarily shirty, I say sock it to 'em as long as it is based on merit/lack of merit (actually isn't merit an anagram on mitre?).