StevenH wrote:I would have prompted the "Barber of Seville" response, but not accepted it outright.
Ozymandias wrote:I suggest that Brian should not have been negged on the "Figaro" question. The clue referred to "this character's name" being repeated. Yes, the name is Figaro, but Figaro is the Barber of Seville, which is a correct alternate identification of the character. Yet again, the judges were surprised by a correct answer that wasn't what they had in mind, and, yet again, they fumbled it.
stevo4212 wrote:Beyond mere semantics. For those who've actually watched the opera, you probably know that the repeating of the name is not unrelated to being barber of seville.
In fact, Figaro sings the song, himself, to brag about his skill as a barber. He's practically calling himself the "Barber of Seville."
The first few words of the aria: "Largo al factotum della cita" - Make way for the factotum of the city.
I'd say recalling all of that on the J1 stage shows some higher-order thinking. The man deserves his 5000 points and then some.
Austin Powers wrote:Besides, he lost. He was going to lose anyway.
seaborgium wrote:I thought the FJ was unbelievably easy, but then I know who John Dryden is (I think I would have even gotten it right if the clue had been "John Dryden was the first to hold this position"). Even so, I'm surprised versificator didn't help the guys.
stevo4212 wrote:Austin Powers wrote:Besides, he lost. He was going to lose anyway.
I wouldn't say so, necessarily. Getting the 5,000 would have been a 10,000 dollar swing, not a 5,000 swing; he would have been in the lead. Maybe in that case, he would have had the peace of mind to recall who John Dryden was. Or, perhaps he could have tried an interesting betting strategy.
Maybe you're right, in this case, since Brian gave us his elocution. But, Brian could have thought like I suggested. I bet some people would have read the question literally, and thought, "This character's name," so you don't actually want the name, Figaro? Isn't this kind of like the old "Who are you?" question, alla Alice and Wonderland, or Anger Management? What are they looking for? (Q: Who are you? A: Steven Q: I don't want to know your name, I just want to know who you are. A: I'm an actuary with State Farm. Q. I don't want to know your profession, who are you? ) Lol.
Thanks for your advice, Brian, may you continue to find reasons to enjoy trivia, and perhaps stay friends with Ms. Hambon. Lol. is that a manufactured name? I think the trend these days, is, instead of taking the husband's name, the couple will legally change their names to something of their own design.
Also, in Brian's defense, I think your knowledge of La Donna et Mobile attests to your deep knowledge of opera.
Austin Powers wrote:But the betting situation being what it was, he loses anyway. Ok, sure, getting the answer gives you this surge of confidence, or something, but think what you are saying. Any time there is a borderline call, if you don't give it, you deprive said person of that confidence, meaning that in some alternate universe we didn't realize they would win... and no one would ever make the show again as a new contestant, as we'd be busy filling the slots with previous contestants with one grievance or another. I'm strongly inclined against such a position.
alietr wrote:Yeah, but grabbing it from where? Is his DVR hooked up to his PC or what? And how? Or is he using a TV card in his PC? Inquiring minds want to know.
trainman wrote:alietr wrote:Yeah, but grabbing it from where? Is his DVR hooked up to his PC or what? And how? Or is he using a TV card in his PC? Inquiring minds want to know.
The latter -- more accurately, it's a USB TV tuner device (one of these) hooked up to my Mac; I have its DVR software set to record J! every night. That's pretty much the only thing I use it for, since I have my actual TV connected to a DirecTV DVR (which I also use to record J!, among other shows), but I don't have that DVR set up to move its content anywhere else.
bgm wrote:Jeff, In reading this discussion and your reasoning, I totally agree with the conclusion that either could have been acceptable according to the wording of the question. The fact the judge's did not see it that way is no water off my back, though. In the heat of the moment, I dropped the ball. Wish I could have recalled who John Dryden was... THAT would have been a huge difference maker!
Interested to see how Liza does on Monday!
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 7 guests