Cardinal Place, cardinal sin
Nov. 17th, 2017 05:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
metrocentricWe were returning from daytime dining at the near edge of Belgravia. We crossed reformed territory opposite the station, where the cafes were chains pretending not to be and protective plastic was impatiently peeling from the new facades.
I saw a couple kissing goodbye - and not perfunctorily - then separating to return to their respective offices. And then another, taking leave of each other with similar warmth. It was not the first time I'd noticed this, in this place and time, and I remarked on it: I said how heartening it was to see partners taking that time in the middle of the day to be with each other; I went on to say that this probably makes for a healthy relationship.
My companion looked at me, smiling, then searching: as if I were to say a little more, or that what I had said was not quite understood. I now realise he had thought my intent was humorous, then detected it hadn't been.
'[Metro]', he said 'this is lovely for them, I'm sure. They might be in relationships - but not with each other.' He went on to explain that for many this was the only time not accounted for between the demands of work and home. There might be other moments grabbed here and there by fabricating overtime, gym visits, evening classes, and so on. But at lunchtime, people who should not be with each other, could be - and without constructing a specific alibi to do so.
I was too struck by the revelation to be embarrassed at my naivety: that there was this further layer in the street scene, and I had not really seen it. It was as when someone points out the plain clothes policemen in a crowd: you kick yourself you did not clock them immediately, but thereafter, you see them here and there.
Additionally, now I know who forms the clientele of those eerily generic restaurants of a weekday lunchtime.
I saw a couple kissing goodbye - and not perfunctorily - then separating to return to their respective offices. And then another, taking leave of each other with similar warmth. It was not the first time I'd noticed this, in this place and time, and I remarked on it: I said how heartening it was to see partners taking that time in the middle of the day to be with each other; I went on to say that this probably makes for a healthy relationship.
My companion looked at me, smiling, then searching: as if I were to say a little more, or that what I had said was not quite understood. I now realise he had thought my intent was humorous, then detected it hadn't been.
'[Metro]', he said 'this is lovely for them, I'm sure. They might be in relationships - but not with each other.' He went on to explain that for many this was the only time not accounted for between the demands of work and home. There might be other moments grabbed here and there by fabricating overtime, gym visits, evening classes, and so on. But at lunchtime, people who should not be with each other, could be - and without constructing a specific alibi to do so.
I was too struck by the revelation to be embarrassed at my naivety: that there was this further layer in the street scene, and I had not really seen it. It was as when someone points out the plain clothes policemen in a crowd: you kick yourself you did not clock them immediately, but thereafter, you see them here and there.
Additionally, now I know who forms the clientele of those eerily generic restaurants of a weekday lunchtime.
