XX Questions - Game XCVII

[han-shahanshah]

I'd considered Thing since pretty early on but disqualified due to the animated Addams Family films and the comic strip origin.

[Jamiet99uk]

I'd considered Thing since pretty early on but disqualified due to the animated Addams Family films and the comic strip origin.

Yeah the first "Thing" appearance was in a book / comic book. The Addams Family was a comic strip decades before it was a TV show.

[JECE]

Thing from the Addams Family.

(this is obviously wrong but it seems like no one can get anything so might as well end the game.)

No

[JECE]

Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, isn't it? Beautiful plumage!

[DougJoe]

Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, isn't it? Beautiful plumage!

The dead parrot from the dead parrot sketch?

[han-shahanshah]

Aaargh.. never would have thought of that. It does fill all the requirements, except the unclear about animation answer.

[JECE]

It does fill all the requirements, except the unclear about animation answer.

Monty Python has a very distinctive style of animation that is often paired with live action scenes. Personally I much prefer the acting over the animation, but the latter is still very prominent. In fact, animation immediately precedes the dead parrot sketch in the well-known film appearance from And Now for Something Completely Different.

[JECE]

I'll get the next game up and running tomorrow.

[Hamish]

I don't get it. Is there a Monty Python sketch with a parrot?

[damo666]

FOUL!

The parrot is consistently referred to as 'he' throughout the sketch.

E's gone to meet his maker for instance.


There is no ambiguity regarding gender.

[Octavious]

But parrots are warm blooded . Warm blooded refers to the creature's metabolic process (be it real or imaginary) and not the physical temperature of the blood at a certain moment in time. Otherwise you would call Robert the Bruce, and any dead person, cold blooded which is ridiculous.

Besides which the parrot wasn't even dead. He moved!

[Octavious]

Ahhh... I should have read the question rather than relying on Jamie's summary of it on the list

[Jamiet99uk]

Is this fictional creature a fictional representation of a real type of creature?

(For example, a pony is a real type of creature, but the characters from "My Little Pony" are not real).

I don't think that I can answer this question either without caveats.

FOUL.

You could have answered this question "yes".

It is a parrot.

Parrots are a real type of creature.

This response was VERY misleading and I don't think entirely fair.

[JECE]

FOUL!

The parrot is consistently referred to as 'he' throughout the sketch.

E's gone to meet his maker for instance.


There is no ambiguity regarding gender.

I actually went back and checked:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=vZw35VUBdzo
https://youtube.com/watch?v=93jx5MyL1Ww
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xoh8j

Only the obscure movie version uses "he". The others clearly use "it".

[Jamiet99uk]

I asked you "Does this fictional creature broadly represent a real type of creature (even if not an accurate representation of what that creature is really like)?"

You said you could not answer.

You absolutely could have answered and the only reasonable answer would be yes because it broadly represents a parrot, albeit a dead one, and a parrot is a real type of creature.

You misled us

[Octavious]

So, the first link clearly refers to the parrot as a he

"There, he moved"

"No he didn't...!

As does the second

"He's not dead, squire, he's resting" (around the 2m30s mark)

So clearly the parrot is referred to often as a "he" regardless of which version of the sketch it happens to be.

However, the parrot is also referred to as "Polly", which is a traditional girls name.

Now, you could argue that Polly is a pretty generic parrot name, but you could also argue that "he" in general usage can be used as an alternative to "it", especially to a creature that has only been owned for half an hour and (even if the parrot is considered to be alive) this is too short a time in which to form a more meaningful attachment.

I hate to say it, but I think JECE is justified in his comment regarding the parrot's gender.



It is, however, much harder to argue that the parrot is not a real type of creature

(This is fun )

[JECE]

Is this fictional creature a fictional representation of a real type of creature?

(For example, a pony is a real type of creature, but the characters from "My Little Pony" are not real).

I don't think that I can answer this question either without caveats.

FOUL.

You could have answered this question "yes".

It is a parrot.

Parrots are a real type of creature.

This response was VERY misleading and I don't think entirely fair.

So you wish to register a complaint? Sorry, we're closing for lunch.

Look, I didn't count that question because it was impossible to answer. Parrots are real creatures, but Norwegian Blues are entirely fictional. I also posted several times in this thread about how you were getting misled by my refusal to answer that question and I even clarified that I could correctly answer that question in both the affirmative and negative. Curiously, your initial reaction was that my non-response "rules out explicitly non-real types of creature such as the Flying Spaghetti Monster, centaurs, mermaids, dragons, manticores, etc", so you were on the right track.

[JECE]

So, the first link clearly refers to the parrot as a he

"There, he moved"

"No he didn't...!

Damn, you're right! But for the vast majority of the video the parrot is very clearly referred to as an 'it'.

[Jamiet99uk]

I don't think that I can answer this question either without caveats.

FOUL.

You could have answered this question "yes".

It is a parrot.

Parrots are a real type of creature.

This response was VERY misleading and I don't think entirely fair.

So you wish to register a complaint? Sorry, we're closing for lunch.

Look, I didn't count that question because it was impossible to answer. Parrots are real creatures, but Norwegian Blues are entirely fictional. I also posted several times in this thread about how you were getting misled by my refusal to answer that question and I even clarified that I could correctly answer that question in both the affirmative and negative. Curiously, your initial reaction was that my non-response "rules out explicitly non-real types of creature such as the Flying Spaghetti Monster, centaurs, mermaids, dragons, manticores, etc", so you were on the right track.

It wasn't impossible to answer because I went to great lengths to provide you with examples to assist your answer - Clifford the Big Red Dog (not a real type of dog, but dogs are real creatures); My Little Ponies (not a real pony, but ponies are real creatures).

I honestly feel that you could have, and should have, answered that question, and in the context of the examples I provided you with, the answer was very obviously "yes".

[JECE]

As far as I could tell, Clifford the Big Red Dog is not assigned a fictional breed. I actually tried to look that up before replying. My Little Ponies are obviously not of a fictional breed or species either. You went to great lengths to narrow it down but did not address the specific conundrum I faced. Somebody would have cried foul if I had said 'yes' since Norwegian Blues are not real. Somebody would have cried foul if I had said 'no' since parrots are real.