arrow_circle_left arrow_circle_up arrow_circle_right
AVMA Take 2
help
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 ....
arrow_circle_up
A cartoon character?
Agnus Dei?
If we find out the animal, will we have the answer?
Single specific animal? Yes.
Aslan? No.
Cartoon character? Yes (unless you take a very narrow definition of cartoon) *applause*
Agnus Dei? No.
Animal = answer? Yes.
Clarification: I should probably have answered 'Cartoon Character?' with "In part, yes".
Is the cartoon part animated?
Jessica Rabbit?
A newspaper cartoon?
Animated? In part, yes.
JR? No.
Newspaper cartoon? In part, yes.
There is a noticeable lack of applause accompanying these partly correct suggestions.
Did this fictional carnivore first exist in writing?
Was it first illustrated before 1948?
First exist in writing? I could answer "in part, yes", but I think it is fairer to say that 'in writing' is not how one would typically describe its first incarnation.
First inkspotted, er, illustrated before 1948? Yes. *applause*
Rupert Bear?
RB? No.
Is the animal a mammal?
Mammal? Strictly speaking, I think the answer has to be no. *some muttering in the audience*
Was its creator Walt Disney?
Is the animal aquatic?
Disney creation? No.
Aquatic? No.
Summing up: we are looking for a fictional, carnivorous, single specific animal, which is in part a newspaper cartoon character, and in part an animated cartoon character (we don't know if those are the same parts) and in part comes from written fiction, though "'in writing' is not how one would typically describe its first incarnation." It can be interpreted symbolically, though that's not necessarily helpful, and it is not mythical. Strictly speaking, it's not a mammal (though the audience muttered about that answer). It's neither a Disney creation, nor acquatic.

Was its first incarnation in the 19th century?
No wonder the audience muttered - it's either a mammal or not a mammal - nothing in between, however strictly one speaks!
Does it appear in the works of Lewis Carroll?
Is it aimed at an adult audience?
Hobbes?
[Irouléguy] Excellent summation. Minor clues: I would not put too much emphasis either on newspaper cartoons or written fiction.
[Dandalf] Well, we can discuss that when the round is over. :-)
19th Century? No.
Lewis Carroll? No. *some smiles in the audience*
Adult audience? That's not really the target market, although many adults like at least some incarnations.
Hobbes? No.
A clue: When I set this AVMA I expected a question to which I could give a correct but misleading answer. And you fell right into my trap. Mwahahahaha!
Does the animal take human form?
Human form? Yes! *applause*
A superhero?
Superhero? Yes. *applause*
Superman?
*hands the kryptonite rod to Raak*
Superman? YES!

As for "mammal", my uncertainty was the following. As far as I know, Superman has all of the traits that are usually taken as defining a mammal. But I think that the strict definition of the term has an evolutionary basis, and thus cannot apply to someone not from earth. I expect to be corrected by either a biologist or the morniverse equivalent of Comic-Book Man from The Simpsons.
MINERAL
Largely or exclusively metal?
An engagement ring?
Manufactured?
[CdM] Mostly metal? Yes.
[I] Not an engagement ring.
[Rosie] Manufactured? Yes.
Bigger than a phonebox?
Unique?
[GL] Bigger than a phonebox.
[Néa] Unique.
A sculpture?
Is it in the UK?
[Phil] Not a sculpture.
[I] Not in the U.K. (the audience is amused)
Eiffel Tower? [CdM] You win! but (a) not mythical and (b) carnivore (are you sure?) suggested a real biological species.
[Davdand] Not the Eiffel Tower.
Beagle 2
[Inkspot] (APPLAUSE!) Not Beagle 2.
Extant?
[D] You may well be right about my answer to "mythical?". Since I had already said that the answer was fictional, I interpreted 'mythical' more narrowly. But one definition of 'mythical' is 'fictitious', so perhaps I was misleading. As for carnivore, I recently saw an episode of Lois and Clark (not my fault; my daughter is currently Superman-obsessed) in which Clark Kent ate a hamburger...
A more successful solar exploration thingy?
[Cdm]I would agree with you on your interpretation of 'mythical'. Superman could not be described as a mythical creature or person.
[I] Yes. (More applause! )
Voyager?
Not the Star Trek variety.
[Projoy] Not Voyager.
The Tardis?
I'd agree with CdM too, particulaly as Superman is a member of a particular (fictional) species. Is one difference between fiction and myth that a fiction has a specific author, but a myth doesn't? (Although that would make Robin Hood mythical rather than fictional, so hmm...)
[I] Not the Tardis. (the audience look glum)
Skylab?
I don't agree with CdM, Superman is an omnivore rather than a carnivore just like Ordinaryman.
A European mission?
[GL] Not Skylab.
[I] (pause to research this) Partly European.
Cassini-Huygens?
Yes! When I checked up on the telephone box q, I was quite surprised to find out how big it is.
Yay, thank you for that one Raak, and for my first time in the chair in this game ANIMAL
A single animal?
Mammal?
A single animal - Yes
Mammal - Yes
that should read [Irouléguy]A single animal - Yes [Gusset Login]Mammal - Yes
Currently alive?
[Raak]Currently alive - No
Human animal?
[irach] Human animal - Yes
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord