I recently saw "Maggie's Plan".
Bill Hader used the phrase "like a hatchet" to describe the face of the relative of a prospective sperm donor. Not for him. For a friend. Not that . . . You know. There'd be nothing wrong with that. It wouldn't be eminently practical, but uses could be found for it.
Anyway, I'd always heard the term "hatchet face" in reference to visages that were supposed to seem as though they'd been mauled by hatchets. When I'm asked to imagine a face that actually resembles a hatchet, it's much more benign. I picture something like Ben Kingsley.
The film also discussed the potential damage that could befall a child through growing up in a loveless marriage. I realise that this idea is not one in which I have faith. I can't say that I ever scrutinised it, but if I were asked, I would not say that passion was a defining characteristic of my parents' relationship through most of my acquaintance of them. Despite that, our household was always filled with love, and they certainly functioned as companions to each other. But I'm inclined to think that the important thing for the child is recipience of love from each parent. If the parents can get along around each other, is that not sufficient? It doesn't just keep the marriage intact; it keeps the right sort of emotions around. You know how some people only work as friends in the company of a mutual connection? It's like that. The Earth has a great relationship with the sun and moon, but those two propably wouldn't have much to do with each other in the planet's absence. Despite that apathy, the union they form with Earth succeeds brilliantly, and the planet thrives in the glow of both.
The one that was always.