Yes, it's another round of that classic guessing game - Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, Abstract [or any combination thereof]. This effort - '03/'04 should address any queries, but then again, may just serve to confuse and baffle which some might say is the point of the game. Patience, integrity and a decent search engine may be useful ....
[Chalks] Sand sculpture? NO, not sand, nor exactly a sculpture. [NJ] Has a screen? YES, of a sort, though this answer may mislead you. *nodding and murmuring from audience*
Hmmm. Maybe I'll use the eight-ball to answer all the questions for this round. That might make it more interesting. This one is ANIMAL with ABSTRACT connections.
All right. Reluctantly I think I need to abandon the 8-ball, or I risk confusing and infuriating you all. Die after 2000? No. Francophone? I can't tell from the sources I have checked. French was not his mother tongue, but there are some reasons to believe he may at least have had a working knowledge of the language. Well-known in the UK? Concentrate and ask again. Oh, sorry. I do not think that, at the present time, you would say that. But the abstract connection is at least somewhat well-known.
Quisling? It is decidedly so! An impressive leap there. The answer is indeed Vidkun Quisling, leader of the Norwegian collaborationist government from 1942-45. Tuj asked the wrong question. One baton inscribed "with best wishes, Adolf" handed over.
[Software] Devilish? - NO [Quen] human/nonhuman connection (until they caught him at it)? NO, not particularly, except in the context of the AOTC [Dujon] Abstract = Occupation? - NO
[Chalky] multi-species? NO - (There's a misapprehension behind your question - I assume based on my answer to Tuj. I counted the human as a creature) So to be clear, the AOTC includes a human and another creature. [Quen] First written about pre 1900? - YES *some chuckles in the audience*
BTW - I've done some research and can't find a book title that matches the AOTC - though there are several which incorporate most of it, at least one of which is by a well-known writer. I don't think it's a useful approach for you.
[Chalky] H.....? - NO - didn't forget - just got interrupted. All your statements are correct You can derive from what I have told you that we have a mythical greek human and a non-mythical animal. If you get these you will not quite have the AOTC, but that will be obvious.
[Chalky] Creature 'owned' by human? - NO [Phil] Band Name? - YES (or at least the name of a band is included in the AOTC, but I'd never heard of it - thank you Google) [Tuj] Birdy creature? - NO [Chalky] Someone & the Something? - YES *audience perks up* But that's not the entire AOTC
[Phil] Mammal? - NO [Quen] A song? - NO (I'm not going to bother to google that, so I may be wrong!!) [Tuj] Watery? - NO I'll see if I can think of a clue.
[Quen] A title? - NO [GLogin] A reptile? - Technically NO, but in common parlance some people may consider the non-human animal to be at least reptilian in some characteristics.
A couple of clues: 1. The format of the answer is actually 'THE something abstract OF someone AND THE something 2. Consider what else has come down to us from the Greeks apart from their myths and legends