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
[Projoy] A daub? NO.
[Darren] See previous comment to myself.
[Projoy] You must stop doing that, you know. First sign of madness.
[Projoy] Ooh. Look who's talking!
Connected with sculpture?
Is it a style?
[Raak] Sculpture? NO
[Quen] Style? NO
Is it an organisation of some sort?
Is it a work of art?
Is it a period of art history?
[Chalky] Organisation, NO
[Quen] A work of art, YES
[Darren] Period of art history, NO
Simon Patterson's 'The Great Bear'?
[Chalky] Simon and his amazing dancing tube map? NO.
Is it a work of fiction?
[Q] A work of fiction? YES (and it's therefore fictional in the sense its content is fictional, but also non-fictional in the sense that it exists (the opposite, one might say, of Causabon's Key to All Mythologies or the Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy.)
)
Written in the 20th century?
[Darren] C20th? Yes.
Author British?
[irach] Brit author? YES.
A comic strip?
[Ink] Comic strip, NO.
A humourous novel?
Has it won a major literary prize?
A C.S. Lewis work?
[Kim] humorous? NO
[Ink] Prizewinning? NO * a couple of lowbrow titters from the audience*
[irach] Lewis? NO * a couple of erudite titters from the audience*
First published since 1945?
Tolkien?
"Leaf by Niggle"
...?
A poem?
Made into a movie or TV series?
[INJ] published since 1945? NO
[Raak] Tolkien? Leaf by Niggle? NO
[Inkspot] Pome? NO
[irach] Made into a movie/TV series? YES and YES.
[INJ] PS. There is a sort-of case to be made for a YES answer to your question in addition to NO.
A series of books?
Are the vegetable and animal referred to in the title?
Was the author born before 1900?
In the genre of fantasy?
[Rosie] A series? NO *some chuckles from the audience at the thought of it*
[Raak] References in the title to the vegetable? NO. Or the animal? YES.
[Inkspot] Natally prior to first New York Electric Buses? YES
[Quen] Fantasy genre? *appreciative laughter and clapping from the audience* NO.
Science fiction?
Is the title the name of a major character?
SciFi? NO *a more contemplative mood steals over the audience, some smiling wryly but privately at this thought, others casting their eyes down and listening with a neutral expression*
[Darren] Title the name of a major character? *some of the audience look up. Two people bite their bottom lips.* NO.
(To be more useful...) Does the title contain the name of a major character?
First published before 1930?
Is the author male?
Was it written for children?
[Darren] Eponymity? YES
[Quen] Published before 1930, YES
[ir] Male author? YES
[Ink] Written for children? *much laughter from the audience* NO.
[Darren] Er, I meant broad eponymity, rather than narrow, YES.
Pornographic?
[Phil] Pr0nographic? YES *applause*
Lady Chatterley's Lover?
Quendalon must be right. I trust he/she has a pornograph.
Would you want your wife or servants...?
[Quendalon] Indeed, YES!. Lady C and John Thomas it is.
[Projoy] What was the vegetable connection? Is there a notorious scene set in the kitchen garden, involving provocatively-shaped parsnips?
[Raak] Lady Chatterley's Lover is a novel, thus printed on paper.
(well, until recent digital innovations)
Incidentally, I'd never noticed before that the prosecution's "wife or servants" remark, although it certainly was out of touch, is a rhetorical way of activating the jealousy of rich husbands. Don't put ideas in their heads, it suggests, or you too may be cuckolded. Had always assumed before now it was just a general appeal to protect the weak-minded from moral corruption.
[Projoy] I was going to guess LC'sL, but the wry smiles at the Sci-fi question put me off...
[Phil] They were just the more imaginative members of the audience picturing the whole thing done in foil suits on a flying saucer.
For your pleasure: ABSTRACT
All together now... A human construct?
[Projoy] Human construct? YES.
A philosophy?
[Projoy] I think I've seen that website ;-)
To do with science?
[Projoy] You know, there is such a thing as being too imaginative.
[Phil] A philosophy? NO.
[Darren] Related to science? NO.
Connected with emotion?
Related to the arts?
[Darren] Connected with emotion? YES. (laughter from the audience)
[ImNotJohn] Related to the arts? YES. (more laughter)
An emotion?
[Darren] It least it was foil not fur ;-)
[Phil] An emotion? NO.
A type of comedy?
[Raak] A type of comedy? NO.
An action?
[Inkspot] An action? NO.
Connected with positive emotions?
[Projoy] Connected with positive emotions? YES. (another giggle from the audience)
Connected with sex?
Going by the giggles and titters.
Hm. Human construct. Connected with fetishes?
[Darren] Connected with sex? NO. (The audience is giggling because the last three YES answers, while technically correct, are all somewhat misleading. It's not a nice audience.)
[Projoy] Connected with fetishes? In the supernatural (not sexual) sense, YES.
To do with religion?
Is this specific to a particular culture?
Worship of some unusual object or event?
[Raak] To do with religion? NO, not really.
[Irouléguy] Specific to a particular culture? In its original incarnation, YES; in its modern incarnation, NO.
[Rosie] Worship of some unusual object or event? NO.

To clarify things a bit: the ABSTRACT in question experienced a shift in use and meaning over time. The connection with emotion and the supernatural apply only to the original version, not the current one.

(Next time I choose an object for AVMA, it'll be something simple like a tomato.)
Feng Shui?
[Chalky] Feng Shui? NO.
To do with language?
[Projoy] To do with language? YES. (the audience cheers)
To do with magic?
Swearing?
[Projoy] To do with magic? Originally, sometimes. Now, no.
[Rosie] Swearing? No.
A particular form of words?
Any medical connection?
[Projoy] Words? NO. [Rosie] Medical connection? NO.
Anything to do with casting out devils?
[Rosie] Casting out devils? NO.

I suspect that I have put people on the wrong track, so if anyone would like a hint, let me know.
Something ceremonial?
Far too early for a hint, yet.
Is the culture that this was originally specific to an Asian one?
[Darren] Ceremonial? NO.
[Irouléguy] From an Asian culture? NO.
An inscription?
[Rosie] Inscription? Sometimes, though not so often in the modern day.
To do with death?
An obituary?
An epitaph?
[Darren] To do with death? NO.
[ImNotJohn] An obituary? NO.
[Rosie] An epitaph? NO.
To do with war or the military?
scepticism?
[Quendalon] Rather than a hint - please can you do a summary. It may help us realign ourselves :-)
[Irouléguy] To do with war or the military? NO.
[Chalky] Skepticism? NO.
And now to summarize! I’ll also correct a couple of my own answers where I think I may have misread or misinterpreted your questions. So:

This abstract is a human construct. It was once specific to a particular culture, though not an Asian culture. It has to do with language, but it is not a particular form of words.

It is not an emotion, a philosophy, a type of comedy, an action, an epitaph or obituary, or Feng Shui.

It is not inherently connected to science, to swearing, to sex, to religion, to the worship of some unusual object or event, to medicine, to casting out devils, to death, to war or the military, or to skepticism.

Notably, the subject has experienced a shift in use over time. Originally, it had a connection with positive emotion, was often inscribed (in the sense of being etched into a solid surface), and was sometimes connected with magic. These all still apply when the subject is put to its original use. In its modern use, it has no connection with positive emotion or magic, and is still inscribed in the sense of being written down, though rarely (if ever) in the sense of being etched into a solid surface.
Is it writing?
A swastika?
Wait, not Asian. Nevermind.
Is it a symbol of some kind?
Is it Aboriginal?
[Darren] We've already established that it is something that is written; if you're asking if the subject is the overall concept of 'writing', then NO.
[Projoy] Is it a symbol of some kind? YES. (cheers from the audience)
[Dazed5] Is it Aboriginal... assuming you're talking about Australian aborigines here, then NO.
Might I find it on my keyboard somewhere?
A Greek letter?
[Projoy] I can't speak for your keyboard, but it's not on mine.
[Rosie] A Greek letter? NO.
Is it a rune?
Might I find it on the ASCII character map for a regular Western font?
Does it have a Unicode definition?
A trademark?
A hieroglyph ?
[Kim] Is it a rune? YES.
[Projoy] On the ASCII character map for a regular Western font? Uncertain, but I've checked several common fonts and haven't been able to find it.
[Raak] Does it have a Unicode definition? YES.
[Chalky] A trademark? NO.
[Inkspot] A hieroglyph? NO.
The Star of David?
[Raak] Star of David? NO.
Is it any sort of star shape?
[Raak] Not a star shape, no.
Does it have any completely enclosed areas in its shape (ie. any loops or closed polygonal components)?
[Darren] Does it have any completely enclosed areas in its shape? YES.
Triangle?
[irach] Is it a triangle? NO.
An ankh?
A cross of any sort?
Does it turn up in the regular Wingdings font?
Did it originate in the middle east?
[ImNotJohn] An ankh? NO.
[Raak] A cross of some sort? NO.
[Projoy] In Wingdings? I don't believe so.
[Inkspot] Did it originate in the Middle East? NO.

(You guys are drifting off the track; I suspect you're misreading one of the recent answers. Would you like me to provide clarification?)
From the Futhark?
Runic letter Sowilo?
[Projoy] Originally from the Futhark? Elder Futhark, YES. Younger Futhark, NO.
[Inkspot] Sowilo? NO.
(which I think is called odal or othalan)
<>< ?
(oooops)
From the Freyr/Freyja's Aett?
As opposed to the Heimdall's Aett or Tyr's Aett
[CdM] Odal/Othalan? NO.
[Inkspot] Freyr/Freyja's Aett? YES.
Thorn?
[Raak] Thorn? NO.
Kenaz (the leading light)?
Wunjo?
[irach] Kenaz? NO.
[Inkspot] Wunjo/Wynn? YES. (cheers from the crowd)

Over to you, Inkspot...
... and I haven't the foggiest what all that was about. :) heyho
Yes, that was painfully obscure. My apologies! All I can say is that it seemed like a good idea at the time. :-p
[Inkspot] If I were you, I'd select a steam engine.
*is an unapologetic obscurist*
from the home of Steam
A win there with a little help from others, and learnt a little about runes in the process.

So a Abstract with Animal and Vegetable connections

Anything to do with cookery?
Is the animal connection human?
The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe?
[Raak]- no
[Chalky] - yes
[Kim] - no
out of practice
[Raak] - Anything to do with cookery? NO
[Chalky] - Is the animal connection human?YES
[Kim] - The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe? NO
To do with the arts?
just not a morning person
There is a Mineral connection so...
The clue should have read Abstract with Animal, Mineral and Vegetable connections

ImNotJohn - To do with the arts? NO
To do with sports?
[Raak] - To do with sports? NO
Is the animal connection a fictional human or humans?
[Irouléguy] - Is the animal connection a fictional human?YES ripple of applause from the audience
Does the fictional aspect account for the "abstract" part of the clue?
[Phil] - Does the fictional aspect account for the "abstract" part of the clue? YES A whispering murmur from the audience
Is the fictional aspect from a novel?
[Irouléguy] Is the fictional aspect from a novel? YES several members of the audience about to go to the bar for a shandy return to their seats
Was the novel written more recently than 1900?
Written since 1950?
Written by a British writer?
Are the vegetable and mineral bits mentioned in the title - or are they the paper and ink part of the novel?
[Quendalon] - Was the novel written more recently than 1900? YES
[Projoy] - Written since 1950? YES
[ImNotJohn] - Written by a British writer?NO
[Chalky] - Are the vegetable and mineral bits mentioned in the title - or are they the paper and ink part of the novel?
NO and YES to in the title and paper as the vegetable YES (had not considered the ink when setting the clue but yes it is printed with ink but was not part of the clue)
Written since 1980?
[Inkspot] Just to clarify: the VEGETABLE component is the paper, and the MINERAL component is part of the title?
[Quendalon] Written since 1980? Yes and NO wry smiles litter the audience

clarification:VEGETABLE component is the paper, and the MINERAL component is part of the title? YES
Is this a series of stories?
[Chalky] Is this a series of stories? YES loud applause from the audience
Spider Robinson's 'Callahan's bar' stories?
Just managed to track down the one-volume compendium - well pleased.
[Irouléguy]Spider Robinson's 'Callahan's bar' stories?NO an exited Oooooooooooh from the audience
Is the mineral stone?
[Raak]Is the mineral stone? NO
Is the mineral metal?
[Chalky]Is the mineral metal? YES cheers from the audience
Is the mineral gold?
Lord of the Rings?
The Book of Lost Tales?
Fits the 1980 thing better.
[Kim] Is the mineral gold?No
[Raak] Lord of the Rings?No
[Raak ] The Book of Lost Tales?No
the audience sit back back into their seats
Is it science fiction/fantasy?
[Raak] Is it science fiction/fantasy?YES the bell rings in the bar the audience quickly pile back into their seats
Is the fictional human that forms the "animal" component also part of the title?
[Quendalon]Is the fictional human that forms the "animal" component also part of the title? YES some argy-bargy in the audience as some laughing pedants are calling out NO
Just one human?
[Projoy] Just one human? YES the audience rise from their slumber
Is it a trilogy?
[Quendalon] Is it a trilogy? NO
Has it been made into a film?
Harry Harrison's 'Stainless steel rat' series?
Inspired by the answer to Quendalon's penultimate question.
[Raak] Has it been made into a film?NO

Irouléguy raucous cheers and foot stomping from the audience YES It is the Stainless Steel Rat from the series written by Harry Harrison. Over to you.
A series I've always meant to look at, and never got round to. Good game, good game! Our next is ABSTRACT, with ANIMAL connections.
Fictional?
Is the "animal" human?
Raak] Fictional? No
Quendalon] Is the "animal" human? Yes
Is this some class of people?
Connected with emotion?
Anarcho-syndicalism?
One day I'm going to be right
A lion's share?
Raak] Is this some class of people? No
Darren] Connected with emotion? Connected with, no; provoking, possibly...
ImNotJohn] Anarcho-syndicalism? There's a great day a-comin' - but not today
irach] A lion's share? See the answer to Quendalon
An event?
Is there more than one of it?
(Incidentally, feel free to answer "meaningless" to that if such an answer would be.)
Is the "animal" a specific human?
Does this involve an association of people?
Is it an office that a person can hold?
Inkspot] An event? *applause YES
Darren] Is there more than one of it? Yes, though there can only be one at a time.
Quendalon] Is the "animal" a specific human? Yes, but not necessarily the same one.
Rosie] Does this involve an association of people? *more applause* An association of people is a necessary but not sufficent condition for this.
Raak] Is it an office that a person can hold? *some quickly stifled giggles* No.
A ceremonial event?
A sporting event?
Is it connected to a date on the calender?
Is it an event with which people are generally pleased to be associated?
Raak] A ceremonial event? No
Chalky] A sporting event? No
Inkspot] Is it connected to a date on the calender? No
Darren] Is it an event with which people are generally pleased to be associated? Yes
Does it involve some common interest of the participants?
Raak] Does it involve some common interest of the participants? Sorry, I simmed. I'm going to answer 'no', as that's the most useful answer, I think.
A party?
Rosie] A party? No (neither sense)
Is it planned in advance?
A birth?
A birthday?
Darren] Is it planned in advance? Er...yes and no
ImNotJohn] A birth? No
Quendalon - A birthday? No
Connected with employment?
Connected with money?
Quendalon] Connected with employment? No
Darren] Connected with money? No
A school reunion?
Raak] A school reunion? No
Is it astronomical?
Inkspot] Is it astronomical? Startlingly, no
To do with the Internet?
Have most people experienced this at some point?
Raak] To do with the Internet? *applause* In practice, yes (though this could in theory happen offline as well).
Darren] Have most people experienced this at some point? No
A chatroom?
Associated with a particular website?
Rosie] A chatroom? No
Darren] Associated with a particular website? My experience of it is on one particular website, but I don't know if it originated there
Associated with a particular culture(s)?
To do with playing games on the Internet?
To do with MC websites?
A blind date?
Quendalon] Associated with a particular culture(s)? Broadly, yes
Raak - To do with playing games on the Internet? *applause YES
Darren - To do with MC websites? *louder applause, whistling and cheers* YES
Chalky - A blind date? No
mc5?
AVMA?
The game of Mornington Crescent?
I hope this doesn't blow a fuse, so to speak.
Raak - mc5? *stamping of feet, cries of 'bravo'* Yes
Darren] AVMA? *stunned silence from the audience, distracted by a replay of Paul Robinson's error on the giant screens above the stage* YES!
Rosie] The game of Mornington Crescent? *deflated sighs* No
The Morniverse?
Assuming that none of the preceding was the winning move.
Raak] The Morniverse? No.

Sorry, I was reading the preceding moves as prefaced by 'To do with...'. To clarify the over-enthusiastic audience response, the answer is to do with this site, specifically AVMA (it doesn't occur in any other current game on this site), though it almost certainly occurs on other websites, and could in theory occur in the realiverse.
An audience?
Raak] An audience? No
A correct guess?
Darren] A correct guess? *the audience holds its breath* Almost - the answer is a particular sort of correct guess.
A correct guess on the first move?
The answer to this question?
In danger of disappearing up its own logical fundament.
Darren - A correct guess on the first move? *older members of the audience are turning purple waiting to exhale* No
ImnotJohn - The answer to this question? It could be
An accidental correct guess?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord