Every year at SXSW, there’s a short film bumper before every screening. (The best-known of these is Mario) This year, the bumper shows a whole bunch of festival-goers arguing whether it would be better to have raw hot dogs for fingers or cooked hamburgers for feet. Among the salient points brought up:
*Hamburger feet are easier to hide.
*But hamburgers probably couldn’t support the weight of a full-grown person.
*Unless they’re well-done?
*You might be tempted to eat your fingers if they were made of hot dogs.
*If you walk on the beach, sand would get embedded in your burger feet.
*You could probably still pick things up with hot dog fingers.
*If you’re in a survival situation, cooked meat is better to have on-hand than raw meat.
So. How ‘bout it? Which would you prefer? Personally, I’d imagine both hot dog fingers and hamburger feet would be destroyed eventually. Well-cooked or not, hamburger feet couldn’t withstand the constant downward pressure of a human body, and hot dog fingers would get destroyed via normal wear and tear. Either way, you’re almost guaranteed to be looking at an eventual amputation (or unconventional snack), at which point the issue becomes “which would you rather live without, hands or feet?” Me, I’d rather live without feet. I write for a living. I need my hands to type.