Following is the transcription of another phone call between a TV director and her studio head. Both are having second thoughts about pitching my life as a sitcom.

TRANSCRIPTION OF THE TV DIRECTOR’S SECOND PHONE CALL:

Good morning, Sheila. How are you? Me? Well, I’m conflicted. Yeah, it’s about this Sharon J. Anderson thing. I don’t know what to call it. You, too? Uh-huh. I know, I know. Her “glamour” shot is, to say the least, visually challenging. In her art parlance, she is blessed with a face only a cubist could appreciate. She is no Kardashian or Brady or even a Simpson. There is no bold, uncompromising vision here.

So how do we sell this? Admittedly, she’s unique — a sophisticated and eloquent woman who is crass and swears like a sailor. An art and doodad collector. A living, breathing contradiction. An embarrassment of dichotomies.

Did you see the additional photos she emailed overnight?

Action figures in front of Holocaust books and a yellow duck toy train in front of books about death and dying. Then in the kitchen, no less, more yellow ducks atop blue bottles next to a poem in a blue measuring cup that begins, “It may be that when we no longer know what to do . . .” well, I no longer know what to do.

What’s that? Would other networks want it? I thought about that, Sheila. Animal Planet, The Food Network, QVC . . .

But there’s not nearly the swag of subject matter that we have with Sharon’s dichotomies. Art and doodads. Art and tshotkes. Art and Whatits. Yeah, I hear ya, the irony of “whatits” when we don’t know what this is. I say we just cut to the chase and decide whether or not to proceed based on what we’ve got so far.

So what is the mise-en-scène? Is there verisimilitude here vis-à-vis objet trouvé? In other words, art or junk? And I agree with you that we should pitch to the powers-that-be a five-minute “teaser” for either a sitcom or a mockumentary focusing on the art and doodads. But we need a name, a title. A title that will make bank. A title with commercial velocity, elasticity, adaptability, momentum and uptake. You know, something with legs. What do we call it? What to call it . . . .

Hmmmm . . . how about “Art and Zippidoodads”? No, too corny. Too plebeian. Besides, Sharon insists that we emphasize her art. That being a necessity, a title focusing on art must also include an obvious comedic aspect. How about, “Here Comes the Monet“? “Gogh Time“? “Louvre at First Sight“? Hey, hold the phone, I’ve got it! Wait for it . . . how about “Kahlo Her Crazy“?

Thanks, it is brilliant, isn’t it? Let me put together a video of photos of Sharon’s art plus photos of her home and kitsch, and I’ll email it to you for your feedback before we send it upstairs. Then we can circle back on the synergy. In the meantime, I’ll tell Sharon to have her girl call my girl, and we’ll schedule something before my next development window. Ciao!