Page 38 of 75

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Wed 29 Nov 2017, 01:39
by elemtilas
sangi39 wrote:
Tue 28 Nov 2017, 23:12
Actually, does anyone know the payment process for royal weddings here in the UK? I seem to recall that the various members of the Royal Family have an income set for them by Parliament, and that they also take in money from their various estates and businesses, but where does the money for a royal wedding actually come from? Presumably it can't be included in the government's budget before the event actually happens, so is it taken into account during the creation of the next budget? Or does the government's budget set aside a certain amount for various other royal expenditures in advance? In other words, does a royal wedding (or any expenditure on the royal family) change budgets in any way or do they have a target/limit on expenditure like other services that are taken into account by the government's budgets?
As I understand it, family members pay for the wedding itself, but security, extra police and public services come from public money.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Wed 29 Nov 2017, 16:52
by Frislander
So I finally got round to signing onto Pottermore and completing the sorting hat quiz to determine my house and I was surprised to find I was sorted into Gryffindor and not as I had predicted Ravenclaw. Honestly it rather confirms my suspicions about these kinds of online "find your X" quizzes, and I'm wondering what kind of questions would have skewed the results this way (liking forests over rivers? Choosing to proceed with caution rather than retreat in the face of a possible magical threat? Choosing to save a potential cure for dragonpox and 1000 years of student history over a book of runes?). Still at least Gryffindor would have been my next choice and I've not been lumped with one of the other two. Perhaps the Pottermore algorithm is midly telepathic and knows that I'm at Selwyn?

Also apparently my patronus is an aardvark. Yeah I've no idea why either.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Wed 29 Nov 2017, 23:40
by Ànradh
I'm not exactly Ms. Rowling's greatest fan, but you made me curious...
Slytherin, Pukwudgie (I've only read the main series of books, so I don't know the significance of this), 13" hard vine-wood with dragon heart string core, and a buzzard. I guess I'm partly justified in using hydras etc. as personal symbols then.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Wed 29 Nov 2017, 23:56
by Egerius
Frislander wrote:
Wed 29 Nov 2017, 16:52
So I finally got round to signing onto Pottermore and completing the sorting hat quiz to determine my house and I was surprised to find I was sorted into Gryffindor and not as I had predicted Ravenclaw.
Well, I am a Ravenclaw. [:D]
The wand is made out of Elder wood with a Unicorn hair core, 10" in length and has hard flexibility. And there is no patronus, since I am unable to produce one (which is a long story...).
Ànradh wrote:
Wed 29 Nov 2017, 23:40
Slytherin, Pukwudgie (I've only read the main series of books, so I don't know the significance of this)
Pukwudgie (one of the Ilvermorny houses) is for everyone in America since the Fantastic Beasts movies are set there.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 00:19
by Reyzadren
I once tried the website which sorted me into Slytherin...which is the exact opposite of what I thought I would be: Hufflepuff.

Meh, I still consider myself to be with Hufflepuff regardless of what that website said though. *a la Divergence*

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 01:30
by Creyeditor
I just looked through my old conlang sketches, there seemed to have been a phase where I had a thing for /p c k/ inventories. I completely forgot about that.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 01:33
by elemtilas
Egerius wrote:
Wed 29 Nov 2017, 23:56
Frislander wrote:
Wed 29 Nov 2017, 16:52
So I finally got round to signing onto Pottermore and completing the sorting hat quiz to determine my house and I was surprised to find I was sorted into Gryffindor and not as I had predicted Ravenclaw.
Well, I am a Ravenclaw. [:D]
The wand is made out of Elder wood with a Unicorn hair core, 10" in length and has hard flexibility. And there is no patronus, since I am unable to produce one (which is a long story...).
An interesting experience indeed. Not as much of a typical quiz as I was anticipating. Anyroad, Ravenclaw with 13" dragonheart wand, wonderfully flexible and a mongrelhound for a patronus. Couldn't ask for much better there!

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 03:16
by DesEsseintes
So everyone’s comparing wand sizes now? :roll:

Egerius, what was I again? You made me take the test once over on the IRC.

I've seen one Harry Potter film. Hated it.

*runs away before being lynched*

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 03:38
by elemtilas
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 03:16
So everyone’s comparing wand sizes now? :roll:

Egerius, what was I again? You made me take the test once over on the IRC.

I've seen one Harry Potter film. Hated it.

*runs away before being lynched*
Nah, no lynchings here!

You might, however, be turned into a newt.

Sorry, wrong movie!

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 03:55
by Znex
I have found that I'm a Hufflepuff. Plus I've got a Newfoundland as a Patronus! [:3]

As for my wand...apparently it's a 10" maple with a unicorn hair core. "Surprisingly Swishy". :wat:

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 04:01
by shimobaatar
I loved Harry Potter as a kid, but I'm not really much of a fan anymore. I'll still watch the movies when they come on TV if nothing better is on, but that's pretty much it.

I don't have a Pottermore account, but I've taken a version of the sorting test they use on a website you don't have to sign up for. I expected Ravenclaw, but I got Hufflepuff, which I'm actually totally OK with.
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 03:16
I've seen one Harry Potter film. Hated it.
I actually find this very interesting. I'm not trying to change your mind or anything (like I said, I'm not really into the series anymore), but it's a pretty popular franchise, with a theme park and everything, so I've never encountered anyone saying they hated it before. I've seen lots of people say they're indifferent to it, or it's just not their thing, but I've never seen anyone say they hated it. Might I ask why? Which movie did you see?

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 04:54
by Thrice Xandvii
I'm a Ravenclaw with a badger patronus whose wand is dogwood and dragon heartstring.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:07
by Frislander
Well part of the thing with Harry Potter in general is that it is very British, to the extent that much of it would probably not make that much sense outside of that context (case in point; Hogwarts is quite clearly modelled off of our ancient public schools, to the extent that the books kind of represent a spiritual successor to novels like Tom Brown's School days), so I can definitely accept people who don't like it if fantasy's not really your thing and you don't get much of the social commentary (of a sort).

Which film was it btw do you know?

[Side note: my wand is 14 1/2 inches, Red Oak and Phoenix Feather, with quite bendy flexibility. Also I got sorted to Puckwudgie when I tried out the Ilvermorny one, maybe that's the conlanger's house...?]

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:50
by DesEsseintes
I must reiterate that I only saw one film and never read any of the books. I believe the film I saw was the first one, but frankly I don’t really remember. As for why I disliked it: I found the setting, the characters, and the portrayal of magic clichéd and unimaginative. If anything, the Britishness of it all annoyed me out of overfamiliarity; somewhat Charles Dickens, yet contemporary-ish and sprinkled with fairy dust. Ugh. However, I saw the film around ten or twelve years ago, and I was in my teens and therefore not very receptive to these kinds of things, so yeah.

I won’t give the films another try though.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:57
by Egerius
Frislander wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:07
[Side note: my wand is 14 1/2 inches [...] ]
14,5 inches?! Oh dear, you must be very confident.
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 03:16
So everyone’s comparing wand sizes now? :roll:

Egerius, what was I again? You made me take the test once over on the IRC.
You took the test on October 29, 2016; the result was Slytherin. But since you declare yourself a muggle, it doesn't matter. [:P]

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 14:04
by Frislander
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:50
I must reiterate that I only saw one film and never read any of the books. I believe the film I saw was the first one, but frankly I don’t really remember. As for why I disliked it: I found the setting, the characters, and the portrayal of magic clichéd and unimaginative. If anything, the Britishness of it all annoyed me out of overfamiliarity; somewhat Charles Dickens, yet contemporary-ish and sprinkled with fairy dust. Ugh. However, I saw the film around ten or twelve years ago, and I was in my teens and therefore not very receptive to these kinds of things, so yeah.

I won’t give the films another try though.
I can understand that, though if you asked me I'd say that really in many ways the magic is kind of secondary to the real meat of the story which is the characters and their interactions, but yeah if the setting really doesn't gel with you then there's no harm not watching them; at the end of the day nobody really should be forcing anybody to watch any film, not even if it's something everyone else loves you still have the right to not watch it.
Egerius wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:57
Frislander wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:07
[Side note: my wand is 14 1/2 inches [...] ]
14,5 inches?! Oh dear, you must be very confident.
Actually I only just read the wand-length article and apparently that's quite an unusual length.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 14:17
by shimobaatar
Frislander wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:07
Well part of the thing with Harry Potter in general is that it is very British, to the extent that much of it would probably not make that much sense outside of that context (case in point; Hogwarts is quite clearly modelled off of our ancient public schools, to the extent that the books kind of represent a spiritual successor to novels like Tom Brown's School days), so I can definitely accept people who don't like it if fantasy's not really your thing and you don't get much of the social commentary (of a sort).
I don't know about other non-British people, but even as a kid, I didn't have much difficulty figuring out what a lot of the unfamiliar, UK-specific things meant, and when I did, I could just ask someone or look it up.
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:50
I must reiterate that I only saw one film and never read any of the books. I believe the film I saw was the first one, but frankly I don’t really remember. As for why I disliked it: I found the setting, the characters, and the portrayal of magic clichéd and unimaginative. If anything, the Britishness of it all annoyed me out of overfamiliarity; somewhat Charles Dickens, yet contemporary-ish and sprinkled with fairy dust. Ugh. However, I saw the film around ten or twelve years ago, and I was in my teens and therefore not very receptive to these kinds of things, so yeah.
Hmm, interesting. Thanks.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Thu 30 Nov 2017, 17:39
by KaiTheHomoSapien
As a very young kid, I'm fairly certain that I imagined England as being more of a fantasy kingdom than a modern country, so I was ripe for Harry Potter with its magical setting. Although it's been a while since I read the books and I've read so many fantasy series since (can't wait to read "The Book of Dust" by Philip Pullman), Harry Potter remains one of my favorites. [:D]

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Fri 01 Dec 2017, 02:42
by Xonen
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:50
I was in my teens
That would explain the hate, yes. [:P] Seriously, though, the films, from what I've seen, seem to be mainly visualizations of selected scenes from the books; the idea that the movie might need to present the plot in a way that someone previously unfamiliar with it can understand seems not to have occurred to the people making them. The first few books are pretty good, though, as long as you can adjust to the fact that the primary target audience is tweens.

Re: The Quintessential 5th Conversation Thread

Posted: Fri 01 Dec 2017, 03:47
by elemtilas
Xonen wrote:
Fri 01 Dec 2017, 02:42
DesEsseintes wrote:
Thu 30 Nov 2017, 13:50
I was in my teens
That would explain the hate, yes. [:P] Seriously, though, the films, from what I've seen, seem to be mainly visualizations of selected scenes from the books; the idea that the movie might need to present the plot in a way that someone previously unfamiliar with it can understand seems not to have occurred to the people making them. The first few books are pretty good, though, as long as you can adjust to the fact that the primary target audience is tweens.
Ya, I agree. The target audience (and all the stereotypical expectations and assumptions that roll along with) is a key point.

Both the books and the films came along well after my own tweenagedom. Even so, I enjoyed the books well enough, given the, er, shall we say "lowered" style compared to what I was used to at that age. The movies I enjoyed for the same reason I enjoyed Peter Jackson's adaptations: spectacular eye candy! I think I can honestly say that I'll probably never read the HP novels again, but I'd happily watch the movies over again. With Tolkien, I'd happily watch the movies over and over; but also read the stories again and again.