> Graham Robinson wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, KYER, JEFFREY wrote:
> >
> > > Prostitute? Really?
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm. I seem to be the only one who has come across 'low entertainer'
> > as
> > euphemism for 'prostitute'.
> >
> > Perhaps I am reading more into some of this than I should be...
> >
>
> I think you might be? I didn't think of them that way. Unless there's
> some impilcations of Puppet Show that I didn't know about...
>
It's been quite common at various points in British history. This is, for example, the reason that Shakespeare didn't work with any actresses - it was a respectable company, fit for nobles and monarchs to associate with.
Part of the problem is that without mass distribution or heavy patronage (making you by definition high entertainers) it is very difficult to make money out of acting, dancing, juggling, etc. So other means were used to supplement income.
This is drifting off topic rather.
Cheers,
Graham
-- Graham Robinson The Stableyard - Internet Solutions gjr_at_... http://www.thestableyard.net
Powered by hypermail