I don't care how silly the name is, sporks are pretty awesome. They combine the stabby tines of the fork and the scoopy goodness of the spoon. Sporks are the utensil of choice at KFC, whichever dish you desire, all you need to be able to eat it is a spork. It's hard to see why sporks are not more mainstream. Why do we still rely on three independent pieces of cutlery to eat? There have been attempts to combine all three into one, but that normally results in a double ended cutlery nightmare. Besides, we still want to eat with two hands, we just don't want to change between fork and spoon whenever we come to something different.
While your first time using a spork may blow you away, the limitations do become apparent after a while. The tines are not really long enough, so you can't pierce a whole stack of meat to drop into your eager mouth, nor can you scoop up a massive amount of soup, if you're less ruggedly manly. Yes, the spork was revolutionary, but these bad points are stopping it becoming a mainstream form of cutlery. Until this, that is:
Look at that, it's amazing. Clearly when combining two things isn't good enough, a better solution is just to put them on top of each other. Perhaps not effective in most situations, but in this it seems to do the job. You could pierce a thick hunk of beef and scoop up enough gravy to wash it down with this beast. Although, thinking about it now, how would you get the food off the spoon? In an awkward sideways eating motion, or at the risk of stabbing yourself in the back of the throat? Perhaps this isn't the revolutionary design the spork is crying out for, but it's certainly a start. There is always hope for the spork, because it's seriously an awesome idea, and has helped many people save the strain of switching utensils for many years.
My rating: 4/5
No comments:
Post a Comment