Apparently, every pot has its own lid. That’s according to an old Afrikaans adage I grew up hearing: “Elke pot het sy deksel.” I wonder sometimes if that makes me the pot or the lid. Logistically I suppose one could explore the whole “who’s the top” and then alternatively “who’s the bottom” thing , the lid being the one on top who seals the deal and the pot being the receptive bottom who actually does most of the cooking. I guess that means that if you’re versatile you’d be self-contained being both the bottom and the top (bet you guys like that idea!)
Taking the analogy further then, as I often do, does that mean if you find yourself to be this lone lid cruising for a pot, then you can’t really get cooking until you find a pot that fits?
You can’t really cook in a lid. But, you can in a pot (although it will take longer without the lid.) I am finding many similarities here. In fact the lid doesn’t really have much purpose without the pot, which I find quite sad, for some reason. I imagine this lonely pot-less lid trying to lead another life as a defective and somewhat lethal frisbee . We all know the danger of trying to be something that you’re not. What is the lid supposed to do if it no longer has its pot or never found one that it could fit to begin with!
What if all the pots Mr. Lid has come across so far have been too big and in the cooking process has found himself plunging to the bubbling bottom of the pot unable to seal it and complete the cooking process and come out feeling scalded and useless. I’m not even going to go into the implications of the pot being too small. Notice how I don’t say that it is the lid that is too small or too big. It’s all the pots’ fault. Personification can be fun.
So if I were to see myself as this lone lid who has been attempting to pair with suitable pots is there a cut off point that should be considered in terms of how many pots are approached? I mean, how many pots should one consider “fitting” before you find yourself being labelled a “loose” lid?
Now I know why people use the term, “going potty.”
Taking the analogy further then, as I often do, does that mean if you find yourself to be this lone lid cruising for a pot, then you can’t really get cooking until you find a pot that fits?
You can’t really cook in a lid. But, you can in a pot (although it will take longer without the lid.) I am finding many similarities here. In fact the lid doesn’t really have much purpose without the pot, which I find quite sad, for some reason. I imagine this lonely pot-less lid trying to lead another life as a defective and somewhat lethal frisbee . We all know the danger of trying to be something that you’re not. What is the lid supposed to do if it no longer has its pot or never found one that it could fit to begin with!
What if all the pots Mr. Lid has come across so far have been too big and in the cooking process has found himself plunging to the bubbling bottom of the pot unable to seal it and complete the cooking process and come out feeling scalded and useless. I’m not even going to go into the implications of the pot being too small. Notice how I don’t say that it is the lid that is too small or too big. It’s all the pots’ fault. Personification can be fun.
So if I were to see myself as this lone lid who has been attempting to pair with suitable pots is there a cut off point that should be considered in terms of how many pots are approached? I mean, how many pots should one consider “fitting” before you find yourself being labelled a “loose” lid?
Now I know why people use the term, “going potty.”
My friend...can you say OVER ANALYSE!!!!!
ReplyDeletehmm at times i feel like a lid floating about london town, i havent found a pot just the right size... i wonder wouldnt it be nice to become a pot of my own... or is it more fun to to be the decapitating lethal, frisbee?... na, how do i become a pot?
ReplyDeleteBrilliant!!!
ReplyDelete