Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

RIP Sean Hughes

My single favourite Sean Hughes moment was when he turned up on one of those series about Battersea Dog's Home. He got his terrier Chalkie from there, and had the staff in stitches, showing them how he'd trained Chalkie to bark at certain words. Words like "Nuns!", "Priests", "The Pope, Chalkie! The Pope!". We then found out that Chalkie barked at the sight of nuns too, when Sean took him for a walk around northern Battersea. Chalkie saw a pack of nuns and went doolally! :D
 
DMRGn_9WkAIk0hi.jpg:large

That's great Idris, thanks for posting it. Forgot about that from years back. Very apt and moving.
 
My sister loved Sean's Show in the 90s.

So, you know. Hashtagkissofdeath and all that.

He seemed like one of the less obnoxious people that I disliked because she liked, though. (Most of the others being pretty much every 80s pop star ever, and particularly Bros.)
 
My single favourite Sean Hughes moment was when he turned up on one of those series about Battersea Dog's Home. He got his terrier Chalkie from there, and had the staff in stitches, showing them how he'd trained Chalkie to bark at certain words. Words like "Nuns!", "Priests", "The Pope, Chalkie! The Pope!". We then found out that Chalkie barked at the sight of nuns too, when Sean took him for a walk around northern Battersea. Chalkie saw a pack of nuns and went doolally! :D


I remember Chalkie! I was trying to remember his name. Sean and Chalkie had only recently met each other, and this was why we went walking in the woods and through parks together. And I realise now that most of the times I was with him, he wasn't drinking. Although we often rounded off the day with a bevvie.

As we were kicking through the leaves one day and Chalkie was walking ahead and snuffling about, criss crossing the path in front of us, Sean said "The problem with having a dog is that you mostly just get to see his arse when you're walking around with him. It's other people who get the benefit of his strikingly good looks."
 
Last edited:
A piece on him here that shifts between his cruelty and kindness - mostly the former - and hints at seriously bad behaviour towards women.
Remembering Sean Hughes: ‘The sadness is he didn’t get to be old, just lonely’
This struck a chord:

I always wondered if he had been lonely. “I think he was a lonely person,” Donnelly says. “And he found it hard to hold down relationships. He would call friends claiming he needed to check something, but really he wanted someone to talk to.”

I might try that one myself.

As for Sean. . . the Irish Tony Hancock?
 
I found that article in the Guardian a troubling read, as with a lot of revelations in recent times about mistreatment of women by men who were ostensibly nice right on types.
 
I found that article in the Guardian a troubling read, as with a lot of revelations in recent times about mistreatment of women by men who were ostensibly nice right on types.
It's a problematic read because it doesn't specify how he treated women badly. It sounds like he treated women he was in relationships with badly, but it doesn't even hint at how. tbh I don't quite see the value in such an article.
 
It's a problematic read because it doesn't specify how he treated women badly. It sounds like he treated women he was in relationships with badly, but it doesn't even hint at how. tbh I don't quite see the value in such an article.
Indeed, not making a direct comparison on actually what they did, but it feels a bit like that “we all knew really” attitude around Weinstein
 
It's a problematic read because it doesn't specify how he treated women badly. It sounds like he treated women he was in relationships with badly, but it doesn't even hint at how. tbh I don't quite see the value in such an article.
I agree. If a journalist has evidence for something, they should say what it is they have evidence for. If they don't have evidence, they shouldn't say anything.
 
I agree. If a journalist has evidence for something, they should say what it is they have evidence for. If they don't have evidence, they shouldn't say anything.
It's a bit more complicated than that in this instance, though, because they are writing as Hughes' friend soon after his death, trying to make sense of the man and his life, yet also interviewing other friends in the manner of a more dispassionate, ‘objective’ account.
 
It's a bit more complicated than that in this instance, though, because they are writing as Hughes' friend soon after his death, trying to make sense of the man and his life, yet also interviewing other friends in the manner of a more dispassionate, ‘objective’ account.
Not following why that means vague hints become worth publishing. The writer is an experienced journalist, writing for a national newspaper.

If any of us have ever known problem drinkers, we get the picture. That's not the point.
 
It's a bit more complicated than that in this instance, though, because they are writing as Hughes' friend soon after his death, trying to make sense of the man and his life, yet also interviewing other friends in the manner of a more dispassionate, ‘objective’ account.
I'm sure you are right, the important thing is that it's his friends/former friends saying things, not some mutter mutter, nudge nudge expose. We can only guess what it was, how much, how bad - maybe best not to guess (not that anyone has been doing on this thread). I think we can though, take it that there was some grim behaviour. :(
 
I'm surprised to hear this - I've chatted to him a couple of times, many years apart, and he seemed lovely
Just read Jah Wobbles version of this. Obviously an unreliable narrator but he said he slapped him after he thought hughes was “trying to intimidate him back stage” and said there were buzzcocks crew coming up and shaking his (wobbles) had when they heard. The inference being he wasn’t a popular guy at the time

Wobble is a strange one though
 
Back
Top Bottom