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

I feel like Simon Cowell on the X Factor! My saying how hard it is was obviously like waving a red rag at a bull!

Right - Your first answer is very ingenious but it doesn't work in the end, because not all desks have quills on them. That must apply to the 19th century too. 'Sometimes' doesn't work. Pencils? Piles of books? Piles of rubbish? - even in the days when pens were quills.

Though you're right about the ravens - acc. to Wikipedia a quill is a writing instrument - implying it's not a quill when it's on the bird. My faithful book version of The Chambers Dictionary however says it's also part of a feather. So you were right on that point.

Your second answer is a pretty brilliant piece of lateral thinking, and I think it would have worked for me - except not all ravens are 'owned' by the Queen, and not all writing desks are, either. Mine isn't owned by the Queen! I thought it a was a correct answer at first, before I saw its faults. Sorry.

For the answer to work it must be universal, that is it must be a way that all ravens resemble all writing-desks, so it can apply to the unspecified ones in the riddle. Unless there's some 'mad' way round it, as in the article at A8134715.

Jabs

Lofty - to put the record straight - sorry, I didn't invent the concept of the negative answer to the riddle. It was Peter Heath in The Philosopher's Alice. I don't think it was noticed as much as when I took it up though (he says hurriedly in his defence). The book is quite a rare one.

Jabs

Jabs, I take issue with your interpretation of the indefinite article.

There is "a" raven strutting round the grounds of the Tower of London that is owned by the Queen. And there is "a" writing desk in Buckingham Palace where she sits and signs Acts of Parliament into law. Therefore there is "a" raven that is like "a" writing desk.

QED. Which my mother used to say when she was a girl, meant "quite easily done".

What you are suggesting is contrary to received usage, Infie. 'A' is the INdefinite article, number not definitely indicated, whereas you need the definite article to single out one. If there were only (and you'd need to establish this plain unlikelihood too) one raven at the tower, and only one writing-desk which the Queen owns, then correct usage demands 'the' not 'a'. If there is a raven at the tower and a writing-desk at Buckingham palace, you can't continue to use 'a' when comparing them. Usage demands that you ask why 'that' (variant of 'the') (Fowler) raven is like that writing desk. And the riddle clearly implies a search for what all ravens have in common with all writing desks, expressed in the 'singular universal', rather than the 'particular' (sorry).

If you retreat from correct usage, you end up talking unwitting nonsense (Wittgenstein).

Would you say 'a' Titanic sank in 1912, or 'the' Titanic sank in 1912?, preserving the same meaning? (I'll spare you the Latin because there's some coming).

QED - quod erat demonstrandum. Free translation - 'that which was to be demonstrated' (has been demonstrated). That's medieval Latin, not the real stuff, but it's the version generally used.

Jabs

Apologies - this explanation is a bit clotted. Probably because I'm a clot

Infie - I much prefer your mother's version of QED!

Jabs.

-- If you retreat from correct usage, you end up talking unwitting nonsense (Wittgenstein)--

Who said it was unwitting?

I have only one thing to say to you, Jabberwock

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.

Unwitting nonsense my *rse



Infie

Such l*nguage!

Jabs

I think (as in Douglas Adams' story) the problem is with the question rather than the answer.

If you rephrase the question as "WHERE is a raven like a writing-desk?" then the answer is simple: "On Crown lands".

well i dont know either way-not gonna get involved ; but: a stuffed raven would make a lovely pencilcase-as for your best writing things the desk has good space.

I'm beginning to see why you call yourself 'Infinite', Infie! You don't give up easily, even when your solutions get wild.



Very wise move, Lofts!

I'm beginning to take the view that it is indeed unanswerable in a serious way. The easier ones are too easy. Here are no less than 5 different types, each example here being my own, made up instantly, off the top of my head, they're so easy...

1. The silly, nonsense ones (Aldous Huxley etc) are the maddest and the most fun, I think -and they're more in the spirit of the book. e.g. because February is the shortest month in the year, or because there's an r in the month and in 'the dormouse' etc etc etc.

2, The negative ones are ridiculously easy and glib and so rule themselves out, though they're fun too. e.g. Because neither is the Eiffel Tower, etc etc. ad infinitum.

3. This infinity of answers also applies to the non-answers which make an exception of one or the other, like Paul's in the article, and e.g. because they both have beaks, except the desk. etc etc - Or because they're both married, except the desk and the raven. (That's a really wild, silly one, which I would put in 1 and 3).

4. There's also a simplistic kind of non-answer, e.g. Why not?

5, And the pseudo-deep, pseudo-philosophical ones, as to why e.g. WHY is a raven like a writing desk? Because everything's a matter of chance and that's the way it is (the existentialist) or God because made/planned it that way (religious),and so on.

Or, of course, you could take the view that these are all indeed answers, so the riddle's a ridiculously easy, solvable one.

In the end, it comes down to a matter of taste. I take the view that none of these answers are satisfactory, and the pursuit of a good answer is a fool's errand, so to speak. Look at how bad and inadequate Carroll's own answer was when it was dragged out of him!

Reminder: the riddle wasn't supposed to have an answer (Carroll himself said that) as it's set by the Mad Hatter in a mad world. This is my view too. The Mad Hatter asks Alice a riddle she can't possibly answer, because it doesn't have an answer, on purpose, thus satirising the difficult-on-purpose questions of some teachers and lecturers which students struggle to answer, (especially, I suspect, in Victorian times and at Oxford). The book's characters are all recognisable Oxford types.

I did warn you...

Jabs

I am only infinite as a tribute to Douglas Adams, Jabs.

The Infinite Imp(robability drive).

I was born in the year of the dog, though, and can be dogged. I have not done with this riddle.

Aha! I was sort of right! Look forward to more of your highly insightful doggedness.

Regards,

Jab

I think I may have cracked it, Jabs.

Why is a raven like a writing-desk? Because one is perfect when you're researching and writing a letter, an essay, an H2G2 entry or even a whole book in support of a just cause.

And the other just caws.

Too desperate, Infie. Very ingenious though, but you know it still doesn't make it. Too many sub-clauses have to be right, when they could so easily be wrong, such as a 'just' cause.

Do you mind if I don't keep answering you? It makes me feel too negative and pointless to keep on saying no, no, no, no, which I expect to do from my own perspective, and to a friend too. Sorry.

You could start your own thread - don't forget to tell Lofts. You could start it centrally, or with your journal, or on the page I made (but I doubt you'd get many that way).

Hope I haven't upset you. I wish you well. If anyone could do it, you've got a good chance, but I don't believe anyone can do it. Prove me wrong.

Jabs

.... they both support Real Madrid! ?

...they both DONT support Rael Madrid! ?

Hey, Jabs, .

I thought I was amusing you as well as teasing you.

The format I used was actually negative. It should more properly have read: What's the difference between a raven and a writing-desk? Because one is perfect when you're researching and writing a letter, an essay, an H2G2 entry or even a whole book in support of a just cause.

And the other just caws.

As I seem to be being a nuisance, I shall drift away to other places on the site.

Infie

P.S. I wasn't teasing about Obama, though. I find the euphoria troubling, though hopefully my fears are groundless.

No problem at all, Infie, sorry if by chance (not on purpose) I upset you. I wasn't annoyed or anything.

You could stay and play with Lofts though, if you wanted.


Jabs

Oh that would be good, what shall we play?

While you have a rummage in the writing desk, ( there are lots of games in thier i think-i will get the the cuddley ravan from his perch, and see how much jukebox money we have got

Sorry Lofts - what I said sounds sarcastic but it wasn't meant like that. I meant play with the riddle with you in the same way Infie said he had been playing with it with me. Not to forget you, in other words.

And I was suggesting it as an alternative to Infie leaving the thread and to my earlier suggestion of a new thread to discuss the issue.

Jabs