h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Okay, fine, now that I'm in full *peer review* mode, and actually have enough time to give my feedback on this Entry now I'm not at school, then let me do so

As sprout has actually outlined most of what I meant, then I'll just add in my tuppence...

Did the notion of good fairies and the evil fey evolve from this? Was it just artistic license or could it be linked to such labelling of 'good thing. bad thing'? Just a little question there...

Could this also apply to trolls and dragons and other such creatures? I have a friend who stalwartly believes that some hills are actually sleeping dragons (she believes in fairies herself)... so would this also work for them?

Just some nitpicking with the usage of 'he' when talking about the human race

I'm a little unsure about the title... 'The Invention of Fairies' reminds me of the sounds of the telephone and the escalator, and though as the research suggests that they are all manmade, I don't feel that it is specific enough to the Entry, so maybe something like, 'Fairies - A Psychological Creation'... but even then I'm not sure... (sometimes writer's block can be even more arduous to overcome than understanding rocket science)

The line 'even God almighty of the monotheistic religion - look at Genesis, chapter 1 verse 27' makes me a little uncomfortable... perhaps a slight tweaking to 'even the almighty God of the monotheistic religions' (I know it's not much different, but I feel that it runs slightly better) and a footnote to the Bible reference, which could be shortened to Genesis 1:27<pedant alert

You talk about the research's references to fairies and how the termination will cover any legendary humanoid creature before moving on to the point of the Entry. I think that it would flow a little more if you put the next three paragraphs, 'But do these fairies really exist?' 'So, in case fairies don't exist...' 'The basic assumption...' in after the stereotyped description of fairies, so the terming of 'fairies' can act as a kind of disclaimer before moving on to the hard stuff.

And finally, a few typos:

it's basic appearance model - its basic appearance model
it's qualities - its qualities
realy - really
equaly unprovenable - equally unprovable
todays psychology - today's psychology
Frued - Freud
bee - be

Now, of course, these are merely my suggestions, and you do not have to put them in if you think they are irrelevant!

Or you could just ignore everything that I've said in this thread... I certainly regret my hastiness in GRing and my determination to rush off to my Art lesson with a folder that wasn't strong enough to contain my backup sketches which soon ended up floating serenely down to the bottom floor after being tripped up by an annoying Year 10...

Remember, these are mere suggestions!

Caper Plip

Is this one finished Fire Bat, or will you be working on it some more?

Is Firebat still around?


Mikey

Looks like Firebat's last posting was on Nov 7th.

Flea Market?

You know, if Firebat's left, then the entry can be considered complete, a Scout can reccommend it....
Firebat will get an e-mail message saying the entry has been reccommended, and who knows, might come back to h2g2!
Oberon2001

I'm not so sure -- both Sprout and Caper and some quite valid comments and concerns that haven't been acted on.

Mikey

Generaly, I'm still aroud, but now that I'm at school I don't have much time to do more corrections. I'll try and see what I can do next weekend when i'm home.

OK, i did the spelling changes, and added the entry from the Bible as a footnote. I added a capital A to God Almighty, because I meant to use "almighty" as not just a description, but as a part of the name.
About the title, what do you think of "The Psycological Inventions of Fairies"?
Concerning your question about the good/evil perception of fairies- I think this does not concern my research direcly, but you can see that people need things to do them good and thinks to be afraid from, so if they have these fairies, why not use them?

I'm a little confused by the line where you claim 'The god(s) usually look like human beings'. This isn't strictly true. The Hindu God Ganesh looked like an elephant, for example. What often happens is that some gods look like anthropomorphised versions of animals - Egyptian gods had animal heads but the bodies of humans, and some other religions had gods that were animals but on two legs. So, not so much looking like human beings as animals that stand upright like human beings.

You can see this anthropomorphising in the way the sun and moon are depicted with faces, seals being mistaken for mermaids or sirens, trees having a vaguely human form and so on.

It'd be nice to see a little on HG Wells and Cottingley, as suggested earlier. At the moment, this entry seems to revolve around one solitary piece of evidence.

I wonder if a title change to 'Animism and the Invention of Fairies' might be more explanatory of the content here?

Spot the deliberate mistake in my previous posting - Arthur Conan Doyle, not HG Wells

We're still keen to see this in the Guide, but until we get some more feedback on this, I'll release the Scout to make another pick and see what happens next time.

Cheers all,

Jims

Well, Firebat, any replies on this one?

If nothing's going to happen with this one, then it should be moved back to entry. Fire Bat's posted recently but not to this thread since the 18th of January.

Any seconder?


Share and Enjoy!

2nd

*sigh*

Mikey

Wouldn't the Flea Market be more appropriate?

Wouldn't the Flea Market be more appropriate?

You're right... it would be. I'll put it on my FM list.

Share and Enjoy!