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
(Phil) No, there isn't eny. :-)
(Projoy) Not a freeway, (or a bridge). *audience murmurings indicate some panel members may be showing detectable atomic motion.*
Should I pay much heed to the audience's laughter earlier?
Is it something vehicles can use?
(Phil) YES. Shurely one always should. They aren't a collection of wannabe Machiavellis as far as I know. (Projoy) Used by vehicles? YES (in some cases), a literal but unhelpful truth.
Is water involved?
Does this 'thing' enclose or partly enclose an open space?
(Phil) Water involved? Very much so, Des. (© M Lawrenson.)*audience now hyperventilating*
(Dujon) Enclose an open space? YES, in a sense, but beware.
Is ice involved?
(Projoy) Ice? You're getting colder.
Is steam involved?
(Phil) Nothing to do with steam, believe it or not.:-)
A levee?
A LEVEE it is! Well done, Phil. I'm afraid that makes it your shout.
Wow! That was a bit of a shot in the dark, but it was also the result of considered deduction of all previous answers. To be honest, I'm quite chuffed with getting that. I very nearly put "dam", but that would not be popularly associated with N America.

Right, your next AVMA is

ANIMAL or ABSTRACT

Yankee?
[irach] Yankee? NO
Is it art?
[IS,P!] is it art? Hmmmm....the Animal sense is not, the abstract sense is. *a little applause and a few whispers in the audience*
[sounds like porn...] Is it deceased (e.g. pickled)
Is it something as straight-forward as a picture of an animal...?
Depiction of a human?
[IS,P!] Nothing is deceased (and filth is not involved).
[UK] Picture of an animal? NO *a couple of audience members briefly sait forward part-way through the question*
[Rosie] Depiction of a human? "NO" & "Sort of" are the two unhelpful answers
A clarification: The words on the card can be construed in two different ways. One is animal, the other is abstract.
Is the abstract meaning a figurative reference to some quality of an animal or human?
[Rosie] figurative reference to some quality? NO
Is the animal human?
Back to basics.
[Rosie] The animal from which I have elicited an "Animal" sense of the answer is indeed human. *a little cautious applause*
A specific human?
[Irouléguy] A specific human? YES - specific, but not fixed.
A position or title (e.g., Queen of Melanesia)?
[CdM] Position/title? NO
Is this person the same person for everyone?
I.e. not "my mother-in-law".
[Rosie] Is this person the same person for everyone? NO *considerable applause*
One's "better half"?
[Rosie] Better half? NO *a little chuckling*
Is the person some kind of inspiration?
Breathe in.
[Rosie] An inspiration? For the animal sense of the answer, NO. For the abstract sense, YES *appreciative applause*
A fairy godmother?
[Rosie] FG? NO
Always of one sex?
[CdM] Always one sex? NO
A little summarisation and clarification
There are two different senses or potential meanings arising from the words on the card. My answers have been very carefully worded, but I think an incorrect assumption may have been made. In particular, be careful what you infer from: The animal from which I have elicited an "Animal" sense of the answer is indeed human. See also my answer to IS,P!'s first question as well. I think that may have been overlooked.
Is the "art" that of drawing or painting?
[Rosie] Drawing or painting? NO, but there is a connection to painting that might be misleading.
An artist's model, perhaps?
Artist's model? No.
A muse?
A Muse? No.
I suspect you're all heading in the wrong direction, based on an incorrect assumption of what my careful use of the word "Animal" means.
The Hand of God?
Hand of God? NO
Does the Animal refer to a part of the human body?
{Rosie] A part of the human body? YES *the last remaining audience member fetches the rest from the bar, and they all applaud excitedly*
The heart?
Mm, only because they're all pissed.
[Rosie] Heart? NO
Is the body part involved in perception?
It seems to be just you and me. Where is everybody? Do they know something?
[Rosie] Involved in perception? NO (unless you include the sense of touch).
I think they're all too busy testing their nerdiness on MCiOS ;-)
A limb?
[Phil] I'm madbusy atm.
Does the animal part of this puzzle refer to name of a person?
Sorry if that sounds odd, but I'm trying to work out the logic of some of the earlier questions and answers.
Hang on, hang on. Don't answer that one, Phil, if you don't mind. Rephrasing my query - does the card include the name of a person?
[Projoy] Limb? NO *sharp intake of breath, and some applause*
[Dujon] A person's name on the card? NO
In that case, a guess: a hot head (or a hothead if you prefer)?
[Dujon] hothead? NO
Rosie's question of 30th August is worth paying attention to.
Is the answer a phrase or
Is the answer a phrase or saying?
Hit the wrong key earlier.
Is it an appendage?
[Rosie] A phrase or saying? NO, not really.
[Projoy] Appendage? According the dictionaries I've consulted, that's the same as a limb, in biological terms, so: NO
Your father's moustache?
Not yours but ones.
[ROsie] "Your father's moustache"? NO, but getting towards the right lines. *some applause*
A joint?
I haven't been ignoring this game; I've just been woefully short of inspiration.
[CdM] Joint? NO, not in any sense of the word.
the moving finger?
[CdM] The moving finger? NO
Is the art representational art?
[Irouléguy] Representational art? Ummmm....not really relevant as far as I can tell, as it's not drawing or painting.
Do "the words on the card" include a relative?
[Rosie] A relative? NO
Anyone for a summary?
The words on the card, which are not a phrase or saying, and do not include a relative or the name of a person, can be taken in two ways:
The first is "Animal" in its nature, and is a part of the human body, although the human is not the same person for everyone, or even the same sex. The body part is not a limb, appendage or joint. It is reasonable to assume from the audience's lack of reaction that it is not a moustache, finger or hand.
The second is "Abstract" in nature, is art, is not painting or drawing. As such it is not "representational art", but could be said to be inspirational. There is, however, a connection to painting or drawing that is not implicitly mentioned on the card.
cont.
The body part is also not a heart, and not involved in perception, other than the fact that it has nerve ending, and therefore has the sense of touch. There are also plenty of incorrect guesses that I've brushed over in order to concentrate on what's important.
Bugger
I meant "explicitly", not "implicitly".
Is music involved?
[INJ] Music involved? NO
Does this involve the dermis (corium)?
Does a smile come into it?
[Dujon] Dermis? Only in that the body part is coated in it
[Rosie] A smile? NO
Does the art involve dance?
My Left Foot?
Although I'm not sure that it's neither a limb nor an appendage.
[Irouléguy] Dance? NO
Oops
[INJ] "My Left Foot" are indeed the words on the card! Congrats, and thank God someone got it in the end. I looked up appendage and limb and, in biological terms, they are both attached directly to the body; so, reluctantly, I had to say no.
Somewhat easier I hope
Try this one: Mineral and Vegetable
[INJ] Salt and pepper?
[Raak] Crueties - NO
Edible?
[Rosie] Edible? - I think I could justify both YES and PARTLY
A drink?
See - I said this would be easier
[Inks] Drinkie-poos? - YES (applause - there would be more, but many of the audience have not yet retaken their seats after the last marathon and those that have are still arguing about 'appendage')
An alcoholic drink?
Hidden textAppedage, n. Biology. A part or organ, such as an arm, leg, tail, or fin, that is joined to the axis or trunk of a body
[Phil] The devil's brew? - YES
It depends on your dictionary - but you did make it clear when you rejected it that you'd taken it as a synonym for 'limb', so that's fair enough.
A cocktail?
[Kim] Cocktail? - YES
A Mojito?
[Iroul] Get your mojito working? - NO
Main ingredient vodka?
[Inkspot] Vodka-based? - NO
Rum based?
Tequila sunrise?
Would it be informative to pursue the "mineral" component, or is it something ordinary like "ice"?
[Inks] A rum do? - NO
[CdM] Tequila Mockingbird? - NO
[CdM] NO and YES (It's not a Margarita)
Long Island Tea?
Getting quite thirsty now
[Iroul] Long Island Tea - NO (and as a bonus, it's also not a Hairy Navel)
Is it fizzy?
Does it contain more than three ingredients, not including ice?
Does it contain more than one spirit?
Homing in
[Phil] plink-plink fizz? - YES
[CdM] more than three ingredients? - NO
[Iroul] more than one spirit? - NO
Gin and tonic?
Now to be pedantic
[Inks] Jinnan Tonnyx? - YES, those words are on the card. However there are in fact 9 words on the card including the indefinite article, so I want a little more - though I won't insist on the exact wording. (catcalls from the audience)
Gordon's Gin and Schweppes tonic with ice and lemon?
No point in being silly about it
[Phil] Well the actual answer (containing the indefinite article, remember) was A large gin and tonic with ice and lemon - It was just what was in my mind at the time!
I'll let you and Inkspot fight over who deserves that one.
Oh God No! I'm still drained rfom the last one....
I have a surfeit of both gin and tonic at my disposal, so I'll stand back and let Inkspot pick up the baton.
Gingerly picks up the baton
Thank you Phil for your generosity in giving up the chair, very kind of you sir.

Itsa MINERAL and ABSTRACT

A geographical feature?
Is the mineral metal?
[Irouléguy] A geographical feature - No
[ImNotJohn] - mineral metal - No
Is the mineral stone?
[ImNotJohn] - Is the mineral stone? No
Is the abstract bit a human concept/construction/invention..?
Is the mineral water?
An object with a figurative significance?
(Phil) Is the mineral water what? Er, sorry.
[Irouléguy] Is the abstract bit a human concept/construction/invention - Yes
[Phil] Is the mineral water - No
[Rosie]An object with a figurative significance - Sorry about this but I don't know, could you give me and example of what one is. I would prefer to hold up my hands and admit to being a idiot, rather than mislead you
(Inkspot) Yes, it is a bit elliptical. What I meant was an object used as a metaphor, eg target, ball-park, field-marshal's baton, roadmap, hurdle, dustbin, crown etc.
(Rosie)After all that - No
A manufactured object?
[Rosie] A manufactured object - YES
A latter-day gadget, i.e. not around in 1950?
Any jokes about my age will be used as landfill.
Is it made of plastic?
Rosie - A latter-day gadget, i.e. not around in 1950 - No (which means it was around in the 1950s)
CdM - Is it made of plastic - YES
Anything to do with communication?
Not much plastic around in the '50's. Bakelite maybe.
[Rosie] Anything to do with communication - No
A household object?
[Rosie] A household object......No mmmmmmm but found in the house - Yes
Anything to do with electricity?
[Rosie] Anything to do with electricity - No audience slump back into their seats
A utensil?
[Rosie] If you use bakelite does the cake have fewer calories?
A container?
(ISP) Nice, that. But bakelite, alas, is three syllables.
[I Say, Porter!] A utensil - No [Rosie] A container - No
The whatever was made originally in the very, very, very late 40s in plastic by a descriptive name, but later it adopted its present plastic formulation and present whatjamacallit.
To do with music?
[Phil] - To do with music - No
An object small enough to be carried around?
Bakelite
[Rosie] Ah! Bakelite must refer to Colin as opposed to Tom
[Rosie] An object small enough to be carried around - YES, so light a child can [I Say, Porter!]- Bakelite - No
A frisbee?
A hula-hoop?
[CdM] A frisbee? No [Rosie] A hula-hoop? No
the children in the audience start paying attention
A toy?
This include mobile phones.
[Rosie] A toy - Found in a toy shop YES
Lego?
We have a WINNER, well done Phil Lego it is, and special thanks to Rosie.
A google for "invented in 1949" and "toy" revealed the solution (although it was interesting to see what else was invented that year).
Next, I'll go for Vegetable
Wood?
[Raak] Wood? NO
Edible?
[Raak] Edible? Hmmmm.....after some checking, YES.
The fruit of some tree or plant?
Or its root, stem or flower?
[Rosie] fruit ? NO
[Kim] Root, stem or flower? The most commonly consumed part of the plant falls into one of those categories.
Related to medicine?
Leaves?
Having eaten and shot, of course.
[Dujon] Medicinal? A correct answer is YES, but that's not what the answer is known for.
[Rosie] Leaves? NO
Is this used for something other than eating and medicine?
Is it easy to grow this vegetable in this country?
[Raak] Used for something other than eating and medicine? YES *some applause*
[Rosie] grown in this country? YES *a little more applause*
Is it used for textiles?
[Raak] textiles? NO
Is this an extract of the root/stem/flower rather than the item itself (if that makes sense)?
[Dujon] Yes, it makes sense, but NO, the root/stem/flower itself is used (sometimes dried and slightly processed), not an extract.
Ah well, in that case I'll nominate a liquorice stick - not the black extract one, the real chew-a-root variety. Yum.
Vanilla?
[Dujon] Liquorice? NO
[Raak] Vanilla? NO
Used as a flavouring?
[Raak] Flavouring? YES, but not exclusively.
Hops?
popeor
Beer
[Raak] Hops? Oh yes, Lordy, YES! A matter close to my heart :-) and hearty congrats, sir.
The next is MINERAL.
Is it a mass produced item?
[Inkspot] Yes, mass-produced.
Does it occur naturally?
[Ki] Does not occur naturally. If it did, it wouldn't have to be mass produced.
Money?
[I] Not money.
Mineral mostly (or entirely) metal?
[Rosie] Yes, mostly metal.
Bigger than a telephone box?
I can think of things that occur naturally and are also mass produced. Diamonds, for example.
A tool or implement?
Does it run on electric power?
[CdM] I would say that Rakk answered the question on 'mass produced' correctly, as it means the production of large numbers or quantities standardised items, I do not see how this could apply to diamonds.
[CdM] Not bigger that a telephone box.
[Rosie] Tool? Only very broadly speaking.
[Inkspot] Can be electric.
Bigger than a toaster?
Perhaps "mass-processed" would have been more accurate. Metals occur naturally but most have to be processed in order to have any use.
[Kim] Smaller than a toaster.
Would it normally be used inside the home?
Kikm I agree that minerals can individually be processed, however telephones, fridges, cars etc are not mass processed they are mass produced.
[Inkspot] Normally used in the home.
Would most players of this game own one?
[Inkspot] I'd say that this company and this company are pretty clearly mass-producing diamonds.
[CdM] I expect most players would own one (or more).
Those companies aren't digging them out of the ground.
A toothbrush?
[Raak] No. They are producing them. En masse. Which is my point. If the answer on the card was "Diamonds", then the correct response to both "Occurring naturally?" and "Mass-produced?" would be "Yes".

How about chicken eggs as another example? Unless you take a very narrow view of mass-production, I think they would qualify. Or what about fresh water from a desalination plant?
A knife?
I read Raak's answer as meaning that this particular thing doesn't occur naturally, rather than arguing that the two categories are mutually exclusive.
Whisk?
still wondering at CdM's "mostly metal" toothbrush...
A razor?
[IS,P] Good point. I was actually meaning to ask razor before, but then somehow talked myself into toothbrush, along the way forgetting why I had dismissed that idea earlier.
A watch or clock?
[CdM] Ok.
[I] Not a knife.
[ISP] Not a whisk.
]CdM] Not a razor.
[Rosie] *riotous applause* Yes, a watch or clock.
BTW, I have not checked to see whether this is a repetition of an earlier object. If so, perhaps the time has come...
A wrist-watch?
An alarm-clock
though mine seems to be mostly plastic.
The time has come...? Noooooooooo!
[Rosie] A wrist-watch could serve as one, but...
[Irouléguy] An alarm-clock it is.
And I see that not only has that been set before, but it was set by me before. Hm...
[Raak] Set before? Hmmm, wonder why it didn't go off. Better buy a new one.
Mine didn't go off this morning, either - though that was because I didn't set it :)
Okay, our next is ABSTRACT WITH ANIMAL connections.
The Labour Party?
Totally topical.
A fictional cgaracter?
doh! fat fingers!
g/h
Rosie] Brown is the new blue? Wholly wrong (also not the answer)
Inkers] Cgarlie in the Cgocolate Factory? No
A creative activity?
Rosie] Making something? No, but this could lead to a creative activity.
Are the animal connections human?
CdM - Person to person? Yes, essentially (other animals could be involved, and it could be argued that other animals do this, but this wouldn't be a useful line to explore.)
To do with communication?
ImNotJohn - To do with communication? In a broad sense, yes, but that's not how most people would classify this.
I Say, Porter! - Mime? *shakes head, frowns*
Is this an organisation of creative people?
Rosie - Is this an organisation of creative people? No
Is it a communicative medium?
Does it involve a specific subset of people?
Kim - Is it a communicative medium? Not entirely sure what you mean by that (and a quick Google doesn't help me). I think the answer is the same as to INJ's previous question.
ImNotJohn - Does it involve a specific subset of people? A specific instance of this would involve a specific subset of people, but in general, no.

Being completely pedantic, this can also be done with/to an inanimate object, so the definition should strictly be ABSTRACT with ANIMAL and possibly VEGETABLE and/or MINERAL connections, but this is another red herring.
Anything to do with sex?
Nudge, nudge.
Rosie - Anything to do with sex? *applause* Yes (though the answer (and the thing itself) are quite SFW).
Mostly to do with sex?
Phil - Mostly to do with sex? I don't see how you could quantify it, but there are a lot of sexual connotations, yes.
A dance?
I don't recognise "SFW". *shrugs* So f------ what.
[Rosie] Suitable for work
Flirting?
(Phil) Ah! Thanks. Now, what is this thing called work?.
Would a specific instance typically involve just two people?
[Rosie] Do you do a lot of flirting with inanimate objects, then? :-) (Excluding the trombone, of course.)
(CdM) Yes - the sax section. Woo! subversive.
Rosie - A dance, or flirting? No to both (though you might well do this while engaged in either).
Sorry about the jargon - I've seen people use 'NSFW' in Another Place, so I thought it would be understood (though I used it as 'Safe for Work')
CdM - Would a specific instance typically involve just two people? *applause* Yes
Eye contact?
Rosie - 'Oo you lookin' at? No
Does this involve physical contact?
'E 'it I, so I 'it 'e.
Rosie] A touching enquiry? *loud applause* Yes
A massage?
Phil - A massage? No
Hugging?
Rosie - Hugging? Closer, but no
Kissing?
Phil] Kissing? YES - X marks the spot! Over to Phil
In that case, your next problem to solve is ABSTRACT with ANIMAL connections
Shagging?
Worth a squirt.
[Rosie] I presume you mean chasing and catching fly balls in baseball practice? Anyway, whatever you meant: Shagging? NO!
Is the animal connection human?
An action?
(Phil) Of course. Precisely that. :-)
[INJ] Human? YES
[Rosie] An action? NO
Culturally specific?
[INJ] Relating to a certain group of people? YES
Only found in a particular part of the world?
[Irouléguy] One part of the world? NO
Is the group of people related by profession?
[INJ] related by profession? NO
Is there a religious connection?
Any artistic connection?
[Irouléguy] Religious connection? YES *tumultuous applause*
[INJ] Artistic? NO
Is the answer a religion/religious group/sect?
[CdM] Religion/religious group/sect? YES *more applause*
Is it gender specific?
[Inkspot] Gender specific? NO
Scientology?
[CdM] Scientology? NO
Christian?
[Rosie] Christian? YES, but not quite the word on the card *deafening applause, followed by a few disdainful grumbles*
Christianity?
[CdM] Christianity is the word on the card - congrats!
Wot, me again?
I think that the disdainful grumblers have a point, but in any case I'll accept the baton (which was manufactured from actual genuine pieces of the crown of thorns), and offer something

ABSTRACT and MINERAL/VEGETABLE (I think), with ANIMAL and VEGETABLE connections.
Something to do with the environment?
Not grumbling, for once.
Environmental? No. Not hereditary either.
Something to do with food?
Foody? The vegetable connection has something to do with food.
Begins with P?
A method of cooking?
Is it art?
Begins with P? It does, as a matter of fact, although I hadn't noticed until you asked.
Method of cooking? No.
Art? *audience laughter* Well, it depends on how broadly you define 'art', but I think the best answer is No.
Is the "p" followed by another consonant?
This is getting out of hand
Is the P followed by another consonant? Yes, several.


Oh, you mean immediately. No.
Is it a one word answer?
In a word? No.
Is the mineral/vegetable plastic?
Is the mineral/vegetable manufactured?
Plastic? In part (I think).
Manufactured? Yes.
(The "I think" is not any kind of trick answer; it simply reflects that I am having to take an educated guess at one aspect of the answer.)
Is it a two word answer?
Two words? No. I'll tell you for free (because I think it will be no help at all :-) ) that I vacillated between two different ways of expressing the thing on the card, one of which is six words long and does not begin with P, and on of which is shorter and does. I went for the latter.
All right, I'll be generous
It is three words including the definite article.
Passing the buck?
The deer don't stop here? No. *a scrap of applause that quickly dies away, followed by laughter, scattered applause, and much chattering*
Are both the Abstract and the Mineral/Vegetable descriptions of the same thing ?
Feeling a bit thick. Shut up at the back there.
Abstract and Mineral/Vegetable descriptions of the same thing? Yes. (Good question.)
Is the abstract meaning figurative? (E.g. the cat's whiskers)
Figurative? No. *more scattered applause, though*
Game-related?
Game related? No. *amused discussion in the audience*
Part of an animal?
Part of an animal? No.
Is this specific to a particular culture or country?
Culturally and geographically specific? Yes. I would associate it primarily (and perhaps exclusively) with one country.
Is that country the UK?
UK-based? Yes.
A dish (i.e an edible preparation)
Edible preparation? No.
Is the animal human?
This one's a bugger, innit?
Human? No.
Is the animal one particular species?
Animal = one particular species? Yes.
Is the animal emblematic?
Does this date from before 1500?
Emblematic? No. *some audience laughter*
Pre 1500? No.

A summary: This is ABSTRACT and MINERAL/VEGETABLE, with ANIMAL and VEGETABLE connections. The answer is three words, including a definite article, and begins with P immediately followed by a vowel. The abstract and mineral/vegetable are different descriptions of the same thing. The mineral/vegetable description is in part plastic (I think) and is manufactured. The abstract meaning is not figurative. The animal connection refers to one particular non-human species, and is not emblematic. The vegetable connection is connected to food but neither it, nor the overall answer, is a dish.

The answer is primarily or perhaps exclusively associated with the UK and dates from sometime after 1500. It is not art (except under a very broad definition), nor a method of cooking. It is not environmental, nor is it game-related.

Three questions provoked odd reactions from the audience, viz: "Passing the buck?", "Is it game-related?", and "Is the abstract meaning figurative? (E.g. the cat's whiskers)". The suggestions that it was art and that it was emblematic also provoked amusement.
The Pink Panther?
Pink Panther? No *considerable audience applause, nonetheless*
A fictional beast?
Going from the particular to the general.
Fictional beast? Yes. *applause*
Originally from a novel?
Once a novelty? No.
Twentieth century?
Twentieth Century? Yes.
A fearsome creature?
Originally from TV?
A fearsome creature? *audience laughter* No, not fearsome.
Once a novelTV? Yes. *applause*
Is the first word a name
Is there a question mark missing?
Parsley the Lion?
Parsley the Lion? Yes! *hands over garnished baton*
[CdM] Was your first thought "A very friendly lion called Parsley"?
[CdM] Oh well done, didn't see that coming.
Well, that was a surprisingly successfull de-lurk. Here's a plain old ABSTRACT
42?
The letter P?
Human construct?
[Raak] 42? NO
[Tuj] The letter P? NOPE (nor does it begin therewith)
[Rosie] A human construct? YES
Does it have to do with language?
[Raak] Hot tongue action? NO (except inasmuch as all answers in this game do)
Is it a philosophy?
Science-related?
[IS,P] That was indeed what I first planned to put on the card! I was amused by Irouléguy's early guess of "Passing the buck" because, even though it was completely wrong, it had the right opening syllable (at least in some accents), the right structure, and an animal as the last word.
Anything to do with sport?
CdM] Completely wrong but structurally similar - story of my life, really...
To do with the emotions?
[Phil] Osophy? NO is the best answer. * some applause *
[CdM] Sciencey-ness? NO, not really...
[Ig] Sport? NO
[Raak] Emotions? I GUESS SO.
Something to do with mental health?
Stoicism?
[Rosie] Mental health? NO, not specifically
[Raak] Stoicism? NO * scattered but uncertain applause *
In retrospect, maybe the is-it-a-philosophy guess should have had * sustained and enthusiastic applause*
Connected to a belief system?
[CdM] A belief system? YES is the least misleading answer *applause*
It isn't anarcho-syndicalism, is it?
Is this an attitude?
By that I mean such things as homophobia, racism, nationalism, patriotism and their like.
[Tuj] Anarcho-whatsit? NO *a few Anarcho-syndicalists in the audience take audible issue with this statement*
[Dujon] An attitude? NOT PER SE, but *some applause*
Is this specific to a culture or country?
[Ig] culture or country specific? There are defensible YES and NO answers. I think NO is probably more helpful.
Is there a specific person associated with it?
[Raak] Specific person associated? YES *applause*
Is it a one word answer?
Is this an -ism?
[Tuj] One word? NO
[Chalky] ism? NO
A cult of some kind?
[CdM] Reaching for one's Cult .44? NO
Is it a named law?
Is there a person's name in the answer?
[Raak] A named law? NO
[Phil] Nominated? NO
A religion?
[Phil] Religion? NO
Is it a theory of something?
[Raak] A theory? NOT AS SUCH, but for free I will mention it is theoretical. *applause*
An ideal?
[Phil] An ideal? YES! *some laughter and applause*
Is the associated person still alive?
"Slow food"?
[Phil] living person? NO - (it's actually associated with two people)
[Ig] Slow food? NO
Marx & Engels?
Are they Gilbert and Sullivan?
[Ig] Commies? NO
[Indian Pooh-Bah] GODDAMIT NO, I hate G&S.
Svengali and Trilby?
Has this anything to do with gay rights?
[Raak] Hypnotist and Hat? NO
[Chalky] Gay rights related? NO is the most helpful answer (altho it could have to do with it - but so could many other things).
Are the two people fictional?
[Phil] Fictional people? YES and NO
A fictional character, and the creator of that character?
[Raak] Fictional character? YES. Creator? NO.
To do with education?
Doest
Does the fictional character origina
Does the fictional character originate from the last century?
Sorry - work keeps getting in the way
[Phil] Education? TANGENTIALLY, but the most helpful answer is NO.
[Ig] C20th character? NO
RECAP
This thing is an ABSTRACT human construct. It is connected to philosophy but is not a philsophy per se. It is theoretical, but not a theory per se. It is connected with an attitude but is not an attitude per se. It is connected to a belief system, but is not a belief system per se. It is associated with two people, one of whom is fictional. The fictional character does not originate in the C20th. I originally said flatly that it was not connected to Science or Religion, but on further research, I find it is connected to both, tho not in a particularly famous way. Although it might be connected to many things (anarcho-syndicalists, for instance, might consider it connected to anarcho-syndicalism and gay rights campaigners might consider it connected to gay rights), it is not especially connected to mental health, sport or cults, is not an -ism, named after anyone or a law.
Oh, and it is an ideal.
Ooh, you've all gone quiet.
Does that mean I win? I'm off to Rome on Saturday, so hopefully someone will ask a breakthru question before then.
A field of study?
[Ig] Field of study? NO
To do with "rights", as opposed to specifics, such as "gay rights"?
[Phil] Rights? NOT IN PARTICULAR
Is the fictional character British?
[Phil] British? NO
Is the fictional character European?
Is the real person an actor? Playing the part of the non-fictional person?
[Ig] Character European? YES! *applause*
[Phil] Actor? NO (but think about it the other way around...)
I'm thinking, but nothing's happening :-(
Hamlet's soliloquy?
[Phil] Happiness is...? NO, but you're getting warmer.
Is the fictional person acfually mentioned in a work of fiction (as opposed to just being an imaginary person)?
Is the fictional character from Shakespeare?
[Phil] Person from a work of fiction? YES! *applause*
[Tuj] Bardish? NO
So, to clarify what I think I understand: the two associated people are (i) the author of a fictional work and (ii) a character in that work. However, the answer itself is neither the author, nor the character. Is that correct?
[CdM] The author? NO! *audience gasps*. A character? YES. The answer is neither? CORRECT.
I suppose you could associate it with the author, come to think of it, but I'm not sure that many people do. But I may be wrong in that, so if it helps you to consider that it's associated with three people, then plz do so...
Fiction from pre 1000AD/CE?
[Phil] Pre-1000CE? NO
Man and Superman
[INJ] Clark Kent and alter ego? NO
Pre 20th century fictional character?
[Phil] Pre-C20th, YES *applause*
Is anyone ready for a clue?
I think I'm about ready, as my train of thought seems to be stuck for eternity at Clapham.
a clue
By far the most significant fact about The Answer so far revealed is that it is "an ideal".
Oh drat - that's the fact that's confusing all my other thoughts. Better sleep on this one then.
Brave New World?
[CdM] Miranda Huxley? NO
PS. [Phil] Bear in mind that there is more than one meaning for the word "ideal"...
A Platonic ideal?
[Raak] Perfectly Plato? NO
Hmm....Is/was the real person a writer?
My Greek O-level already reminded me of that :-)
OOPS!!! That was me, not Projoy, sorry!
[Projoy, er Phil] A writer? YES
Is it associated with a psychological condition?
doo-de-doo, third week of this clue
[INJ] Psychological condition? NO

Another recap: This ABSTRACT - which could be called "an ideal" - is associated with two people: a European (non-British) fictional character from the period 1000-1900CE and a real person (from the same period), who was a writer. It could also be associated with the author (also from the same period) who created the fictional character, who is not the same person as the real-person-writer, and is not Shakespeare, Gilbert, Sullivan, Marx nor Engels. There is a strong philosophy connection, altho it is not "a philosophy" per se, nor "an attitude" nor "a belief system", but is connected to these ideas. There are also science and religion connections. It is not a law, stoicism, eponymous, a platonic ideal, to do with sport, anarcho-syndicalism, a psychological condition, a cult, a method of cooking, a field of study, Man and Superman, "Brave New World" nor to do with education. It could be argued that it is country/culture specific, but also that it isn't (I think no is the most helpful answer).

Anarcho-syndicalists would associate The Answer with Anarcho-syndicalism. Gay rights campaigners would associate it with gay rights.
Man and Superman?
[Chalky] M&S? NO, see my reply to INJ. Not Nietzsche, Shaw or Siegel and Shuster.
Anything to do with utopia?
[Raak] Utopia? VERY NEARLY!! *tumultuous applause*
The Lost World?
[INJ] Lost world? NO *some applause*
Nirvana?
[Phil] Nirvana? NO *audience muttering about Europe*
Communism?
Bit of a wild stab in the dark, this one.
[nights] Communism? NO, though a Communist would disagree.
Is this anything to do with fascism or ethnic purity?
Is the answer the title /author of a book?
sorry if this has already been askeded
Eutopia?
Were the ideas of this author reflected in the work of Bunyon's Pilgrim's Progress, though the latter was far more 'religious'?
[Chalky] Fascism/Ethnic Purity? NO (altho Fascists and ethnic puritans would disagree)
[Chalky] Title/author? NO
[Phil] Eutopia? NO, but that is arguably a closer guess than "Utopia" *a huge oooooh of approval from the audience*
[Dujon] Were the ideas...? I haven't read/studied Bunyan, but going by Wikipedia's description of PP, I would be inclined to say NO.
"The best of all possible worlds"?
Metaphysico-theologico-cosmolonigology?
Is the fiction 19th century?
[Phil] C19th, NO
[Raak] All that jazz? NO, for
[Irouléguy] YES!!. The very words on the card. I must admit I didn't read the Wikipedia entry on Leibniz before setting the clue, so didn't realise in time that the idea had such a close relationship with science and theology in its initial incarnation, having first heard of it via Voltaire's Dr Pangloss.
Congrats, Irouléguy. I'd never have got that, as I'd never heard of it, alas, and my web-trawling didn't lead me anywhere near it :-(
Thanks, Phil - and well done Projoy - that must be a record! I can't claim any great web-trawling skills, it just came to me. I think I did the play in French A level *cough* years ago, but I didn't know of the connections with Leibniz.

Well, our next should be a short one, so here goes - it's ABSTRACT, VEGETABLE and MINERAL with ANIMAL connections.
Is it fictional?
[Ig] Not sure what took so long on that one, altho there did seem to be a bit of a lack of deductive questions in the middle stages. [Phil] Well, there you go, and I was convinced, Candide aside, that it was an everyday expression...
Is the animal connection human?
[Projoy] At least I've learn a new word ('theodicy'). Tangentially; I'm a bit concerned about where the "all" comes from in a translation of the French "le meilleur des mondes possibles", but I don't think it changes the meaning enough for me to lose sleep over, and I'm sure it's been discussed to death over the last 293 years already. That was a criticism of whoever translated it, not you, btw.
The seed that fell on stony ground?
Projoy - Is it fictional? No
I thought it was an everyday expression too, but I just twigged it from your answer to 'Utopia' and the European connection.

Phil - Is the animal connection human? Yes
I thought 'theodicy' was Homer's follow-up...

Raak - The seed that fell on stony ground? No
Raak] If that was a prediction rather than a guess, then you may be right.
Is the vegetable wood?
Projoy - Is the vegetable wood? Yes, but there are other vegetables/vegetable products also involved.
Is any of it edible?
Raak - Filling your face? What it's made of isn't edible, but there are edibles in it.
Is paper involved?
Raak - Is paper involved? There's paper in it.
Is it a place?
Chalky - Is it a place? *the audience awakes cheering* Yes.
Fictional?
[Raak] Fictional? NO. See Ig's answer to me, above. :)
Is it larger than a town?
The Natural History Museum?
Projoy - Is it larger than a town? *applause* Than some towns, yes...
Team-hosting - I like it!
I Say, Porter! - The Natural History Museum? No
An island?
Is it a country?
Is it man-made?
Apologies for my long absence - back at the keyboard now.
Projoy - An island? No
Tuj - Is it a country? No
Raak - Is it man-made? Yes
A building?
Does it still exist?
Projoy - A building? No
Raak - Does it still exist? Yes
A defined municipal area?
Projoy - A defined municipal area? *collective "oooh" from the audience, mixed with the occasional muttered "cleverclogs" A most precise definition of the class of things to which this particular belongs.
In England?
A green belt?
Projoy - In England? No
Raak - A green belt? No

Coincidentally
In the UK?
Does it begin with P?
Projoy - In the UK? Yes
Tuj - Does it begin with P? No
A single specific named area?
ImNotJohn - A single specific named area? Yes

In case it wasn't clear, the answer to Projoy's "defined municipal area" was an emphatic "yes".
Is it a place where things are sold?
Scotland?
Raak - Is it a place where things are sold? Things are sold in this place.
Projoy - Scotland? OCH AYE
The Gorbals?
ImNotJohn - The Gorbals? No
The Toy Parliament?
A current administrative division?
+ <i>
Raak - Wholly rude about Holyrood? No
Projoy - A current administrative division? Yes
+ </i>
Does it incorporate any islands?
Does it incorporate any mainland?
Does it fall entirely within another defined municipal area?
Projoy - Does it incorporate any islands? No
CdM - Does it incorporate any mainland? ;) It's on the mainland of Scotland
ImNotJohn - Does it fall entirely within another defined municipal area? No
Is "shire" anywhere in the name of it?
Does it have historical significance?
Projoy - Tolkein connections? No
CdM - Does it have historical significance? *applause* Yes
Culloden?
CdM - Culled? No
Stirling?
Does it have the word "and" anywhere in its name?
Phil - On the money? No
Projoy - Does it have the word "and" anywhere in its name? *applause* Yes
The Highlands?
(Couldn't resist)
Dumfries and Galloway?
CdM - The Highlands? *applause* No
(Couldn't resist) That's a little harsh - 1314, 1715, 1745?
Projoy - Dumfries and Galloway? No

CdM is both conceptually and geographically closer
Perth and Kinross?
Ross and Cromarty?
(Although that does contain a few islands)
But and Ben?
[Raak] Flobble obble obble! Weeeeed!
I take it that's a nobbleobble.
Projoy - Perth and Kinross? No
ImNotJohn - Ross and Cromarty? No
Raak - But and Ben? No
I Say, Porter! - [Raak] Flobble obble obble! Weeeeed! Thank you, but I've given up

People should look again at the various meanings of 'municipal', and at CdM's last question.
Callander?
Aye Janet.
So is this thing not "a settlement which has the status and powers of a unit of local government." (Wikipedia)?
ImNotJohn - Callander? Nae, Doctor
Projoy - So is this thing not "a settlement which has the status and powers of a unit of local government." (Wikipedia)? Yes, it is - most of the previous answers didn't fit that definition, hence my reminder.
Is it uninhabited?
Yes, it is not, or yes, it actually is? :-)
If it is a municipal area, and it is a current municipal area, and if it is not incorporated wholly in any other municipal area, is it, in fact a unitary authority of Scotland?
Raak - Is it uninhabited? No
Projoy - Yes, it is not, or yes, it actually is? :-) Yes, it actually is

*deep breath* It is a current municipal area, not incorporated wholly in any other municipal area, but it is not a unitary authority.
Is it a parliamentary constituency (for either parliament)?
Is it a London Borough?
Projoy] Is it a parliamentary constituency (for either parliament)? No - though I'll throw in as a clue that the names of the two constituencies (one in each parliament) that this is located in consist of the same three words, but not in the same order.
nights] Is it a London Borough? Barking & Dagenham up the wrong tree - it's in Scotland

And so to bed.
Presumably this thing also crosses a unitary authority boundary?
Projoy - Presumably this thing also crosses a unitary authority boundary? No

Time for a recap? This is a place in Scotland, a defined municipal area, wholly on the Scottish mainland, not falling within another defined municipal area, which is a current administrative division. It is larger than some towns (a question which reaped applause). It has historical significance, and the word 'and' in its name. It could also be defined as "a settlement which has the status and powers of a unit of local government." It is not a constituency (for either parliament), nor is it a unitary authority, and it falls wholly within a unitary authority. Most of the specific wrong guesses have been neither settlements nor municipal areas (though the Highlands got applause despite being neither). It is not Callander, Culloden or Stirling.

Are we working on different definitions of 'municipal'? My dictionary gives "of or pertaining to a town, city or burgh", and I'm using it as a synonym for 'urban' here. Apologies if different definitions have caused confusion.
The Balmoral Estate?
I feel that "falling wholly within a unitary authority" contradicts "not falling within another defined municipal area" (taking "municipal" to refer very specifically to local government, as per Wikipedia), but the clarification helps!
Aberdeen?
PS. I'm not sure what else in Scotland has "the status and powers of a unit of local government" other than unitary authorities (except the very small community councils), but I guess we can argue about it after the answer is revealed. :)
St Andrews?
Projoy - The Balmoral Estate? No
I feel that "falling wholly within a unitary authority" contradicts "not falling within another defined municipal area" (taking "municipal" to refer very specifically to local government, as per Wikipedia), but the clarification helps!
Sorry for the confusion- the dictionary I was using equated municipal with urban, but looking around Wikipedia that seems to be less than universal (though Wikipedia also has contradictory definitions of what exactly this place's status is).

Projoy - Aberdeen? No (but *applause* for part of your PS) On further inspection, the answer to "a settlement which has the status and powers of a unit of local government" should have been "settlement" YES "status" UMM "powers" NOT REALLY, NO, UNLESS YOU COUNT ORGANISING BANDSTAND CONCERTS AND A FLORAL COMPETITION.

CdM] St Andrews Yes - a hole in one! Well lurked, sir. Let me hand over this mashie-shaped baton while I prepare to debate the precise nature of Scottish local government after the 1973 settlement.
Heh. Well, I guess it does have a Community Council (According to Wikipedia and the BBC, tho, the two parliamentary constituencies are exactly identically named - however, the two sources disagree about the exact syntax of the name!). Ah well...
Who are you calling a lurker? I asked five questions, until I got stuck on (a) the same problem that confused Projoy and (b) the differing constituency names. My guess of the Highlands was intended as a joke; at that time I was just assuming the answer was of the A and B variety. Anyway
This is Mainly Mineral and Vegetable.
A geographical feature?
Is it unique?
Geographical feature? No is the best answer.
Unique? Yes.
(You could also make a case that this is ABSTRACT, by the way, but I think that is less helpful.)
Is it a piece of countryside?
Is it man-made?
Does it begin with P?
Countryside? No.
Man-made? Yes.
Begins with P? The answer to that question begins with N.
One or more buildings?
One or more buildings? Yes, the mainly mineral part refers to one or more buildings. *applause*
(More precisely, the mainly mineral part mainly refers to one or more buildings. Mainly.)
Does it (physically) exist?
Physical existence? Yes.
The vegetable component - is that the building's contents?
Projoy] Sorry about the constituency names - I got that from the Wiki page on St Andrews itself. The parliaments' official pages do have the same name. I really should know better than to trust Wiki...
CdM] Good questions they were too - sorry about the lurker crack. The applause for the Highlands was meant to acknowledge that your joke was on target.
Was it established in the last 100 years?
I think this one will fall fast
Vegetable component = building's or buildings' contents? Yes. *applause*
Established in last 100 years? No.
Is this edifice and contents a museum?
Is it a university?
Spitalfields market?
Kew Gardens?
In the UK?
Museum? No. * a smattering of applause, none the less*
A university? No.
Spitalfields? No.
Q? No, 007.
Inuk? No.
Open to the general public? (with or without a fee)
Houses of Parliament?
It its purpose to display the vegetable matter?
s/It/Is
Is it in Europe?
Open to Public? Yes.
HoP? No.
Purposeful veggie display? No. *some applause accompanied by some whispered debate*
In Europe? No.
Is the vegetable matter inside it by design?
Vegetable matter by design? Yes.
Is it in the U.S.A?
Does your definition of 'Europe' exclude the U.K.?
Inus? Yes.
Does my definition of 'Europe' exclude the U.K.? Of course it doesn't! Does your definition of 'Australasia' exclude Australia? :-)
A park or public garden?
Park or Public Garden? No. This may be a time to, as INJ often exhorts, examine your assumptions.
Do the buildings have roofs?
Is the vegetable matter alive?
Do the buildings have roofs? Yes. *laughter*
Living vegetables? No.
A church or other religious building?
Godhouse? No. *some chattering and laughter in the audience from people who know Néa*
Is it Botanical gardens?
In North America?
Is this a group of buildings mainly with a single purpose?
(I suppose that's really two questions)
Hershey's Chocolate Factory?
Nobody listens to CdM
Botanical gardens? No. (See non-living vegetable matter)
North America? Yes. (See in the USA, above)
Group of buildings mainly with simple purpose? Yes. *applause*
Willy Wonka? No.
Is the answer the name of a distinct metropolitan area?
Is the vegetable mostly wood?
Is the vegetable matter intended to be consumed in some form?
Wall Street?
The White House?
Metropolis? No.
Mostly wood? Yes. *applause with that subtle timbre that indicates relief*
Vegetable intended for consumption? No, at least for the standard narrow meaning of 'consumption' (see 'wood', above)
Wall Street? No.
The White House? No. *tiny smattering of applause*
A government building?
The Bridges of Madison County?
Government building? Yes.
Bridges of Madison County? No.
The Supreme Court?
Supreme Court? No.
Is it in New York?
In New York? No.
In DC?
Did you know you'd changed INJ's "single purpose" to "simple purpose" in your answer?
In DC? Yes.
Was I aware of my typo? No. The group of buildings mainly has a single purpose, and I suppose you could say that purpose is pretty simple as well.
Camp david?
The Library of Congress?
Camp David? No.
Library of Congress? YES! One baton duly recorded and put into storage. Projoy can have this stick instead.
OK. VEGETABLE (+ some MINERAL), or ABSTRACT
The Woodentops?
I feel thick after not knowing anything about 2 of the last 3 answers :-(
Vegetable in its natural state, eg a forest, meadow etc?
[Phil] The most stupid, boring programme ever made? NO
[Rosie] Natural state? NO
Is it unique?
Printed paper conveying ideas?
[Quendalon] Unique? The best answer from my research is NO.
[Raak] Printed paper conveying ideas? YES
An Abstract?
A book?
Does it have a single author?
[Rosie] An abstract? NO, not in that sense.
[Raak] A book? YES! *applause*
[Quen] One author? YES.
(NB. just for simplicity, I'm going to take my facts for this round from Wikipedia)
Fiction?
[Raak] Fiction? NO (some laughter)
Is this a biography of some kind?
A reference book?
[Duj] Biography? NO
[Phil] Reference? I would say YEEES.
Magna Carta?
A record of the proceedings of some body?
[Rosie] Poor Hungarian Peasant Girl? NO
[Raak] Proceedings of a body? NO *much audience laughter*
Encyclopaedia Morningtonia?
Available on Amazon?
Originally written in English?
Religious in nature?
[Kim] E.M.? N.O.
[Raak] Amazonian? YES
[INJ] English orginally? NO
[Q] Religious? YES
Originally written in a south Asian language?
To do with Islam?
Christian?
[Ig] South Asian? YES
[irach] Mecca-noid? NO
[Phil] Crucials? NO
The Mahabharata?
What a great Channel 4 series that was.
The Lotus Sutra?
[Phil] Mahabarata? NO *applause*
[Raak] Lotus Sutra? NO *sustained applause*
Does the answer have the form "The [X] Sutra"?
The Kama Sutra?
Lurking shamelessly
He who lurketh laugheth lenthily
[Ig] A hole in one! As it were. It is The Kama Sutra. * hands over slightly suggestive-looking baton*
Stolen from under Raak's nose, for which apologies. Our next is ABSTRACT with MINERAL and ANIMAL connections.
Shagging?
Going with the flow. Not too sure about the connections, though.
Rosie - Shagging? *sardonic laughter* No

The KS does illustrate most possible permutations of connections...
Is it a human construct?
Standard opening.
Does it begin with a 'T'?
A recording?
[Projoy] I'd just like to say how much I'm enjoying re-reading your "YEEES" answer to my "reference book" question.
Anything to do with death?
Kim - Is it a human construct? Yes
Chalky - Quick cuppa? No
Phil - A recording? No
Projoy - Anything to do with death? *applause* Yes, though not directly.
A religious idea?
arrow_circle_down
Want to play? Online Crescenteering lives on at Discord