Saturday, April 28, 2007
Those Beans
Concepta and Tom P. put their elegant fingers on the burning question of the week - what was Hugh Grant doing with those baked beans? Surely he can afford something better and, even if he can't, why would anybody wish to eat thousands of these ovoid, oversweetened clones of Charles Kennedy, swimming in a sticky 'sauce' that coats your palate with a thick layer reminiscent of...? No I'd better not. Anyway, I have the answer. Poor Hugh was scammed by the same company, a subsidiary of Zak Bastard Global, that sold sheep to Japanese women as poodles. He thought they were rare Italian truffles made exclusively available to film stars with floppy hair. Actually, the sheep-poodle (shoodle?) story wasn't true, but, trust me, the bean truffle (buffle?) one is solid as a rock.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A blog about, among other things, imaginary ideas - What ifs? and Imagine thats. What if photographs looked nothing like what we see with our eyes? Imagine that the Berlin Wall had never come down. What if we were the punchline of an interminable joke? All contributions welcome.
Why did HG have the baked beans? Given his previous 'form' no doubt there's a sexual connotation.
ReplyDeleteI'm worried about you, Bryan. First you think the frogs have got something right, and now you haven't got a good word to say about beans on toast.
ReplyDeleteYou'll be dissing Marmite next.
Marmite? Food of the Gods
ReplyDeleteNow you're talking Bryan. My about to be brother-in-law gave me a jar of mmmmmmarmite made from the malt from the Guinness factory. It's definitely the food of the liffey
ReplyDeleteI can see where this is leading. Marmite as the new weapon of mass destruction.
ReplyDeleteConcepta, shoreleigh shome mishtake. A weapon of mass consumption.
ReplyDeleteI agree. It would be rather difficult to chuck. But we are still no nearer to the question of the meaning of beans.
ReplyDeleteWere they not Heinz? Because that's the meaning of beans
ReplyDeleteOr fines, as far as Hugh's concerned.
ReplyDeleteit was proven in Ohio that wealth was no indication of intelligence. I would go one further and say it was no indicator of taste.
ReplyDeletehowever, are you jumping to the conclusion that these beans are fodder of the masses? most beans I've seen do not in tubs come, but tin cans - a much more effective projectile. I would guess these beans were hand-reared, baked individually in clay kilns and the tubs carry a photo of the smiling polish emmigré who picked them.
They were for little Damien's tea.
ReplyDeleteit's hard to say for sure (the beans may have been for sexual purposes), but a can of baked beans, actually any can of that kind, makes a pretty good ranged weapon, and as long as you don't have really small hands would make a good melee weapon too. Even if you have small hands, you could (i suppose) grip the can of baked beans in both hands and then bring it down on your adversary's noggin with an apelike cry of rage. If it helps you could imagine it's not a can of beans but a human thighbone, it's all the same to me.
ReplyDeleteIf you think about it, even a girly man like Hugh Grant could seriously discombobulate someone if he hurled a can of baked beans at their head, as hard as he could.
The sheep thing will go down as fact, its just too sweet a story.
ReplyDeleteBut Grant, lobbing a package of beans. Which I first thought were properly contained in a tin can the bore and weight of items one shoves up the spout on a tank. To discover that its not a hospital issue, a dry cleaning one, only. He may as well have lobbed muffins.