For almost a century Huntley & Palmers biscuit tins have been seen on the tea tables of well-to-do Brits. What few of those Brits realized is that the tins contained a surprise... not in the biscuits themselves, but in the illustration on the outside of the tin. Apparently a rogue employee, early in the twentieth century, hid various sexually explicit scenes in the illustrations. For instance, a tin now up for sale at Lawrences Auctioneers in Somerset shows two dogs having sex in the flowerbed, if you look very carefully. Reuters has rather
pruriently prudishly blurred the cover of the tin in the picture accompanying their article, so you can't see the dogs,
but luckily Lawrences' itself has a picture of the tin, in which you can just see the dogs. They're in the flowerbed on the right-hand side.
Comments
The eBay listing has blown-up photos and... there's apparently more hidden rudeness! Part of a dirty word on the jam jar (looks like "-hit") and also a couple doing it in the grass. Go to eBay and enter "Huntley Palmers tin" -- it's going for $200 last I checked!
This raises an interesting topic - hidden vulgarity on products - In the eighties, there was a can of air freshener (I can't remember what brand!) that had a lot of flowers on it and the photographer supposedly hid a picture of his scrotum in the photo. I've seen it, and like many things like this, it's sort of hard to tell.
Anybody know of other examples/supposed examples like this?
Karen
http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/mermaid.htm
from the cited web site...
"Rush(ing) to complete the video artwork (featuring towers that were rather phallic to begin with), the artist hurried through the background detail (at "about four in the morning") and inadvertently drew one spire that bore a rather close resemblance to a penis. The artist himself didn't notice the resemblance until a member of his youth church group heard about the controversy on talk radio and called him at his studio with the news. "
If I want to see a naked person, I can just watch those reruns of the last Superbowl.
It reminds me of a period in my life during which I had to endure a dangerous operation and a period of successively working my way back to solid foods. After about 2 weeks of nothing but weak liquids and saline, I started to see food in every image, hear names of food products in every conversation, and even began to dream about orgies of roast duck and chocolate ice cream. Seems like the same psychology to me; only difference is, there's no religious agenda.
Most of these Disney rumors were started in the early to mid-1990s by little soccer moms and spread through church groups and other rumor mills. Teenagers (and those with teenage minds) just love them because they are usually sexual in nature, and elicit that little giggle of knowingness and naughtiness. This is no different than the back-masting craze of the 1950s and 60s, and people will hear what they want, see what they want, and believe what they want.
When in doubt, however, I often turn to http://www.snopes.com. That way, I have less of a chance to make a fool of myself.
For instance:
http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/aladdin.htm
2. The penis on the cover. I own the original Little Mermaid from 1990, and sex doesn't have to be on one's mind constantly to see the penis plain as day. I myself do not have sex on the brain constantly, and my mind is not forming the penis on the cover--I know what I see. I am very sexually satisfied and am not picking out potentially perverse things from Disney movies as a result of the non-existent lack of the former. One can plainly see the head of the penis, as well as veins. Someone please explain to me why on earth people actually BELIEVED this guy's claim that he "accidentally" drew a penis while rushing to finish? ACCIDENTALLY?! Come on! I'm sure men know more about the appearance of a penis than the rest of us (even if some of us women think we're pros...they've had it their whole life). For example, if I were drawing something, I would certainly know if what I was drawing resembled boobs or not--I know I would not "accidentally" throw a pair of tits in there just because I was tired and in a hurry.
It's like the picture of the little Manneken Pis easily picked out on the side of the camel on a pack of Camels. Why would some old advertising artist in the USA even be interested in putting him in there, even if he'd known the Manneken Pis existed? Yet, anyone who's succeeded in finding him can easily see him for the rest of his life.
The phallus was not really there, the knee was a knee, and not all that believable even when I'm LOOKING for it, and rather stupid to imagine someone could be so oddly...constituted. It's easier to imagine your parents conception of yourself. (I conceive of you as an idiot, myself, I do, I do.)
chris
Great Post!
I remember when the childrens TV programme - Captain Pugwash was taken off air because of Seamon Staines and Master Baites were suddenly discovered!
Great mate... Great!
Take care, Mary