What a surprise, it's 8:06. Different day, same time, but you can't step in the same stream twice unless you run quickly. Now an interview with an elephant that has forgotten! In this case to turn up for the interview. Hello, Nelly, are you there? [Silence.]
I'm going to hand this over to VAR owing to the closeness of 'trainspotting' before, if someone doesn't get this soon. [Raak] No, we had that one. [Chalky] No. [Simons Mith] Not model trains.
And that's it folks, this program is now closed owing to further notice.
[Rosie] Nope. Anyway the entity known as Raak is declared the winner for getting "Trainspotting", whether or not it has a 'p' in it. The AO(T)C was "Closely Observed Trains", but the direction you were coming from, allied to how close "trainspotting" actually was, as well as the usual quantity of lines drawn and etceteras, means that VAR has forced my hand. Take this telescopic baton and go on to better things.
[Tuj] The less misleading answer is no, not unique. (A pedant in the audience gets to his feet and begins, "Actually..." The chair cuts him off with, "We've read that Wikipedia article too, and yes, you have a point, but the answer stands.")
[B] Yes! Partly, it does represent an animal. [B] No! It is not made of wood. [T] It could be smaller or larger than a toaster. [T] Not yet. Maybe if we're still on this by Christmas.
To get past the awkwardness of the uniqueness thing, I retroactively declare that we are looking for the unambiguously unique, physical, original object, which indeed in part represents a human, was created in a known year, etc. Clue: not many people have seen the original, and I can find no information about whether it even still exists.
Is it the photograph of the Tiananmen Square protestor and tanks?
Hail Radox! I note that the aforementioned Wikipedia has a "List of photographs considered the most important", though I'd think we're a few weeks away from recourse to that.
What springs to mind is either the photo of the Montparnasse train crash, although it doesn't have anybody on it, and the Conan Doyle 'fairies at the bottom of the garden' photo, but that has a whole person, not part of one, so I'm going to ask if the photo was taken before 1930?
[P] Not Miss Napalm 1972. Remember, this was not created to be a record of something. [RtG] Not a record sleeve, or anything else to do with "records" in that sense.
Sorry, I missed Boolbar and Simons: [B] The person's face is visible. (Knowing murmurs from the audience.) [SM] Not scientific (but approving murmurs from the audience).
[SM] It is not, but that's on me for not having any previous knowledge of a landform called Lord Hereford's Knob. [b] It...certainly protrudes from it, but no, more localised than that.
[blamelewis] Aye! It is indeed Arthur’s Seat. Take these bagpipes and a sturdy pair of hiking boots, and either play to the wind or chuck them off the top, I guess.
[Tuj] Not aware of any of them going by Arthur. [Raak] Not an individual. [Projoy] 25 more guesses. [Simons] Possibly, but it's not a regular part of the human diet. Also lots of people would be quite cross.
[RTG] No! [g] No! or, by a certain reading of that sentence, Yes! *the audience mutter amongst themselves about different meanings of the word 'act'* [R] No!
[B] No! [R] I think No! is the clearest answer here, though there's certainly an interpretation of that question which could yield a Yes!.*the audience, clearly a pleasantly diverse group of thinkers, politely interlocute about the meanings the words "assembly" and "together" can have*
[R] No! [P1] No! *a large proportion of the audience goes ooh!* [SM] No! Either I've forgotten it, or that's before my time... [P2] No! *a smaller number of oohs from the audience, but also some eye-rolling ;)*
[C] No! *a few audience members over-excitedly swoon* [SM] No! [P] No! So the answer would be... "not the answer"? I think what I've set is much more straightforward than that, but time will tell :D