Talbot and Tennis
Jun. 24th, 2007 07:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllOne other Ethel Talbot down (The Foolish Phillimores), one to go (Sally at School). The Foolish Phillimores wasn’t as bad as Diana the Daring, probably because of my lowered expectations as much as the merit of the tale. The abuse of the ellipsis still remained a problem, but at least the story didn’t go where I was afraid that it would, after suffering Diana’s mix of inverted snobbery and the other kind.
The Phillimores have inherited a large house and a fortune, which they were not expecting, and some of the family of six youngsters definitely did not want. The story is about how they adjust to it, and in fairness, the second to last resolution is a gun in the first act. The last resolution, well, it’s a means to go ‘and the Phillimores lived happily ever after’. Having said that, none of them are fit to lick Joy Shirley’s boots and I wanted to sic Rosamund Kane on them a la Margery and the Roses at one point.
I watched the Eastbourne final – the only bit of that tournament that I caught, but I did watch a lot of Queen’s the week before. I love this part of the year, as we switch from bright orange to lush green courts. And of course, as I gibber to anyone unfortunate enough to be in my general direction, tomorrow WIMBLEDON starts. Cue a fortnight stuck to the screen, or as much of it as possible (MacEnroe! Michael ‘surprisingly hilarious’ Stich!! Not to mention Hawkeye.). There’s the paradox that the first week provides a glut of matches (weather allowing) and the second week is about intense singles matches that are over before I arrive back from work, and filler doubles. Though it is entertaining, it is filler. Of course, the idea is that you get quality matches as the cream of the crop come up against each other. Yet, the second week can feel more bare, like the courts that shed their grass as they become harder as the days go past.
After his performance at Queen’s, I’m really glad that Mahut qualified, and I hope that he does well, he should do with the variety he had to offer. I’m more interested in the male championship and not just for the eye-candy, but because of the longer matches and the greater depth of contestants. The final male eight is far less likely to include the top eight seeds than their female counterparts. I mean, obviously some of them will prevail, and the world would like to see Federer take on Nadal finally. If he starts playing exquisite tennis, it’s unlikely I’ll harden my heart against Federer winning again (which I admit was the case with Sampras for most of his reign). But I'd like to see Roddick and Nadal push him, though all Roddick seems to have to offer, based on Queen’s, is grit and a serve.
I don’t want to see Murray on court if he’s not fit (though I expect them to show his fitter brother playing doubles. Cough cough.)
Henin and Mauresmo would make for a good final at Wimbledon (is it possible?), even though I dozed off by the end of the Eastbourne final, due to tiredness not the standard of play. They bring variety, which I do like. I’d rather that han a Williams/Williams final – which is the total opposite of Federer-Nadal in terms of watchability. Although this isn’t the French Open, I do think Henin can contain Serena and Sharapova and, well, whoever. I sort of want her to win, in all her five foot nothingness ranged against giantesses, although it’ll seem strange that she’ll have won all the grand slams when the sublime Federer hasn’t (thanks to the who really knows how good he’ll be yet Rafa). Anyway, lefties and people with variety will get my support. And Olivier Rochus and Marat Safin for being eye candy.
The Phillimores have inherited a large house and a fortune, which they were not expecting, and some of the family of six youngsters definitely did not want. The story is about how they adjust to it, and in fairness, the second to last resolution is a gun in the first act. The last resolution, well, it’s a means to go ‘and the Phillimores lived happily ever after’. Having said that, none of them are fit to lick Joy Shirley’s boots and I wanted to sic Rosamund Kane on them a la Margery and the Roses at one point.
I watched the Eastbourne final – the only bit of that tournament that I caught, but I did watch a lot of Queen’s the week before. I love this part of the year, as we switch from bright orange to lush green courts. And of course, as I gibber to anyone unfortunate enough to be in my general direction, tomorrow WIMBLEDON starts. Cue a fortnight stuck to the screen, or as much of it as possible (MacEnroe! Michael ‘surprisingly hilarious’ Stich!! Not to mention Hawkeye.). There’s the paradox that the first week provides a glut of matches (weather allowing) and the second week is about intense singles matches that are over before I arrive back from work, and filler doubles. Though it is entertaining, it is filler. Of course, the idea is that you get quality matches as the cream of the crop come up against each other. Yet, the second week can feel more bare, like the courts that shed their grass as they become harder as the days go past.
After his performance at Queen’s, I’m really glad that Mahut qualified, and I hope that he does well, he should do with the variety he had to offer. I’m more interested in the male championship and not just for the eye-candy, but because of the longer matches and the greater depth of contestants. The final male eight is far less likely to include the top eight seeds than their female counterparts. I mean, obviously some of them will prevail, and the world would like to see Federer take on Nadal finally. If he starts playing exquisite tennis, it’s unlikely I’ll harden my heart against Federer winning again (which I admit was the case with Sampras for most of his reign). But I'd like to see Roddick and Nadal push him, though all Roddick seems to have to offer, based on Queen’s, is grit and a serve.
I don’t want to see Murray on court if he’s not fit (though I expect them to show his fitter brother playing doubles. Cough cough.)
Henin and Mauresmo would make for a good final at Wimbledon (is it possible?), even though I dozed off by the end of the Eastbourne final, due to tiredness not the standard of play. They bring variety, which I do like. I’d rather that han a Williams/Williams final – which is the total opposite of Federer-Nadal in terms of watchability. Although this isn’t the French Open, I do think Henin can contain Serena and Sharapova and, well, whoever. I sort of want her to win, in all her five foot nothingness ranged against giantesses, although it’ll seem strange that she’ll have won all the grand slams when the sublime Federer hasn’t (thanks to the who really knows how good he’ll be yet Rafa). Anyway, lefties and people with variety will get my support. And Olivier Rochus and Marat Safin for being eye candy.
