h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A536582

This entry started as a title suggested by, I think, Ashley (in italics) and was intended as a series of not very subtle puns and innuendoes.

Alas, as the the entry developed, I was so moved by the plight of the sock that the exclamation mark in the title has become heavily ironic.

I am very open to suggestions and corrections and welcome any input.

You're a weird dude, Pheroneous...

This dances very nicely along the line between made-up whimsy and factual accuracy, but there are a few places where your frighteningly indepth appreciation of the sockist life mean that it might not get through as a recommended entry...

...do you *want* it as a recommended entry?

Wierd? Me? Very strange.

MADE UP???. Which bits precisely do you presume to be made-up??? (Go on, hit me where it hurts.)

As for your last question. Dunno!! I seek the grail of the perfect entry, but then, as I am my own judge, that will not coincide with what (hushed tones) The Guide (/hushed tones) wants or considers desirable. It would be disingenuous to suggest that I am oblivious to acceptance by (hushed tones) The Guide (/hushed tones), but if I like it and (hushed tones) The Guide (/hushed tones) doesn't, then I win!However, I don't claim to be able to reach that perfection unaided. Therefore, I need your help. Please answer the question above.

Chill out! Weird is definitely good!

How about this for 'subjective': "Not all socks are as resiliant as others, and many find such a forgotten existence hard to bear. A few lucky ones may, of course, revel in the single life, and welcome the release from constant wearing."

Now, of course, you may be able to provide details (in silhouette of course) of socks who have lead you to these opinions, or perhaps you've been masquerading as a sock to do research in some knitted footwear chatroom, but otherwise, someone might just accuse you of making this bit up...

Should you delve deep into the World of Socks, you will find that some have soles described as resilient. These are often tough socks, built for fell walking and such. The resilience of a soul (As partly described by Gloria Gaynor) implies a sort of robust acceptance, or even enjoyment of, a solitary life if and when necessary. Part of that enjoyment may come from the relief of no longer being obliged to participate in the bump and grind of the social whirl necessary if one is still 'in the game'.

It is not, I would contend, 'made up', but a logical deduction, an empirical fact.

Of course, you could contend, in return, that socks do not have the same type of emotional life as humans. Their soles are not the same. But then 'u' would say that, wouldn't 'u'.

The truth is, my furry purry friend, that I got myself so wrapped up in the account that, by the end, I was no longer able to separate fact from fiction, through the blur of tears, as my two fingers tapped out the terrible and sad story.... When I have recovered, I will look again.

*Deeply moved*

What about those 'strengthened' socks with the rubber dimples on the bottom? Resilient? or just kinky?

Dimpled bottoms are not only a sock characteristic.

The World of Socks is vast, and contains many odd and idiosyncratic members. Let us embrace and celebrate diversity. (And wonder a little as we look at 'pop socks')

(I was not repudiating the epithet 'wierd'. But, lets just keep it a secret between us two.)

I'm wearing two pairs (true) - does that mean I'm bi-socks-ual?

I think so CC. I know that wearing odd, i.e. two different, socks means you are heterosocksual, and wearing just one (a) sock means you are asocksual. I presume that the wearing of two socks exactly the same makes you homosocksual.

On the other hand, maybe you have cold feet!

I've lost a slipper - I think its in the washing machine!

Mind you, when we started this conversation I was still at work and oh-so-correctly dressed, including... ladies' hosiery. You may feel that socks are a joy, but believe me, anything that counts as hosiery is far from funny

Poor, poor slipper!

There are a great many things about ladies that I have never understood. One of which is their choice in hosiery. To clad ones legs in man-made fibre of any sort on a daily basis seems to me... well lets just say peculiar. Up with socks, I say, plain, common or garden, 100% cotton or 100% wool, socks. It may be one of the few things that men have got right when it comes to attire. Trousers. also, seem a pretty good idea. Don't start me on shirts, and ties, and cuff-links...

If I thought I could get away without hoisery, believe me, I would - I don't know a woman who likes them, but there are a few blokes out there...

Slipper's not in the washing machine - help!

Phew, close escape! (Slipperwise!)

Well, I suppose (we are taught) that there are few sights as alluring as the sight of a stocking top deliberately exposed for a chap's view. Imho it is the exposure that is the thrill, not the slippery and slidy thing itself. Besides, how often does that happen in a life? And then there's all those twangy things to negotiate etc etc. The rest of it, though, (by which I mean tights and those aforementioned pop-socks) you can keep to torture yourself with. There is no uglier garment than a pair of tights (panti-hose if you are American).


If you don't like them, why wear them? Whats wrong with trousers and socks. Socks don't suck!

Ahhhh!! Socks!

Well you see, it's like this:
I prefer to wear trouser suits (office environment) but I'm aware that I look better in skirts = hosiery.
If I do wear trouser suits, and if team them with socks and flat shoes (socks and stilettoes are sooo 1983, dahling!) then I look like the standard cliche of a dumpy lesbian (no offence to lesbians, but I'm petite and happily married, thank you!)= hosiery again
But who in their right mind wears a pair of *tights* under trousers? Those twangy things, as you so charmingly call them, are no good under trousers as they show right through... what a dilemma!

This is getting complex. I can feel a companion entry coming on!

Females should always wear pantyhose - even when wearing trousers - when driving any distance out of town. If the vehicle's fanbelt breaks, replacing it with pantyhose will see you on your way again quick smart

Incidently, I think this yarn is splendid and should be included in the Edited Guide.

It makes an excellent companion for my yarn, "In defence of pyjamas". http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A272512

Hi, Loony. I remember that one. vg it was too.

I fear, alas, that you miss the distinction. Pyjamas are of the past. Yours is a lost cause. Socks, on the other hand speak of the present and the future.

Have you ever seen socks and pyjamas together? I think not! (Nightgowns and socks, yes. Tee shirt and shorts together with socks, yes. Pyjamas and socks, never!) No sir. Opposing sides methinks.

IMHO an absolutely superb entry. Something different, all feels factual to be - just seeing things from a different perspective.

I hope it does make it into the Guide (ITG) because it has such a different style and people are always bemoaning the lack of humour ITG.

One thing I did think of while reading "The Death Throw" is that in times when socks were rarer, darning was seen as an option to keeping them going for a few more months. I fear however that this is a fashion no longer.

Nice work. Gets my recommendation.

BBS

Thanks BBS. Darn it! Forgot that. I've slipped in a little reference. Thanks again.

For men and women of a certain age there is nothing better than lying on the couch wearing your striped pyjamas and thick woollen socks while watching Coronation Street and sipping a cup of hot cocoa.