Sunday, July 22, 2007

Reasons to cheerful Part 803

One one side of an A4 sheet (filed away):

If Koestler was a rapacious man, this aspect of his character must be set against his art. The unsavory sexual nature set against genius.

Attributed to a 'Raphael' (possibly Frederick, me rethinks).

Conclusion: the necessity of writing down in a more scholarly fashion things one comes across. Was that what FR thought or my precis? Or a combination of the two?

The point? In 10 seconds an answer from the web from the Independent, 23 February 1999 :

Storm as Raphael defends Koestler


On the other side of the A4 a joke or a quote:

Woman seeing two dogs in street 'procreating' asks policeman to "Do something".

Policeman: What?

W: Throw a bucket of water over them or a biscuit

P: Would you stop for a biscuit?

And there too, the mystery is solved (though as the sentence was typed into Google between inverted commas the hypothesis was "That won't be there!").

A source: interag Miscellany 39, which includes another classic from Irish News further down, conjuring up a whole world or overworked apprentice journalists and type-setters, strangely echoing the rushed posting in blogs when the technology has conquered this problem by replacing hot metal with light.

Exchange between a Mull policeman and a lady tourist, who was upset by two dogs engaged in the act of procreation:

Tourist: Officer, can’t you stop them?
Policeman: What would you want me to do?
Tourist: I don’t know, throw a bucket of water at them ... or a biscuit.
Policeman: Would you stop for a biscuit?

Wester Ross local paper.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Site Feed