Often when I’m walking around the 16ème, I try to pick ownership. Kids, dogs, apartments… I feel that anything is a commodity here. Having started my stint in Paris here, I find it pleasantly surprising that the rest of Paris doesn’t have concierges and maids. But I’m a little disappointed that we don’t have a red-light district* or nightly street mosques – in fact the only people on the streets of an evening are scavenging furniture. I know this, because Guillaume and I are amongst their ranks, but I feel we have some professional competition (antique restorers?) because we’ve previously had to race against cars to the next furniture hotspot.

But I’ve been developing a theory of property according to dog-walkers. It’s a stark contrast of nuances – aloof vs. indifferent. Now all this might seem quite oxymoronic at the moment (or just moronic, but run with me), but observing various degrees of distain, I think I can pin-point if the dog is owned by (or provides an income to) the dog walker. Either the distain is for the dog (hired help) or life in general (the owner). Aloof is what the owners manage to exude, the paid walkers can only ever muster up indifferent. It’s either an acculturated distance or apathy, and whilst there is a fine line between the two in terms of definition, there is a vast income bracket gulf between the two in practical application.

I feel like a sore thumb.

* According to all sources, the Bois de Boulogne holds some after-dark prospects. I’m curious to check it out, all in the name of research of course…