Indeed.

It is good we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

Kind of like the Brits who criticize our use of the word elevator instead of the UK-approved lift. . . despite the fact that the elevator was invented and named in the US!

We only do that because we like to use a few syllables as possible ;-)

But then why do you insist on mispelling words by adding an extra 'u' everywhere?
'England and America are two countries divided by a common language' - 1 Loonie pt.
It's Amino world without Chemists

The "u" isn't a separate syllable.

You might have more effectively referred to the US/UK differences when it comes to LAB-ra-tor-ee and la-BOR-a-tor-ee, and a-LOOM-in-um and a-loo-MIN-ee-um.

And, my dear Par, yo people are the ones misspelling things when yo leave ot all the Us in "honour" and "neighbour".

*g*

said my great quote, Madame Librarian?
And dinna be knocking how we prononuce the elements. There sure aint no 'Britium' or Canadium element, but there is a 'Berkelium', a Californium and an Americium. (All discovered, as were all the other elements above 92, at UC Berkeley). Harrrummpphh!!!
It's Amino world without Chemists

George Bernard Shaw.

I was hardly knocking your pronunciation, as the Canadian pronunciation is the same as the American - I was merely pointing out that the Brits have another syllable in laboratory and alumin(i)um. (In fact, if I remember correctly, the extra i and syllable were added by British scientists who wanted aluminum to be consistent with the other elements, which all seemingly had -ium endings.)

Feeling better now?
*g*

Glad you knew the quote (figured you would). I was joking with the elements thing. And actually, eh, there is, eh, a Canadian accent, Eh. I'm fairly good at accents, being able (often subconsciously and annoyingly) to mimic the accent of to whom I'm speaking. Of course, y'all, can't really get the effect in text, can ya?
And a fun little fact about Aluminum, though it's the most prevalent element in the Earth's crust, it used to be more valuable (as a pure metal) than Gold (Au)! And a historical/personal fact is that my father's first 'professional' job was analyzing bauxite ore (from which Al comes) as a chemist. I'm sure y'all care deeply about that.
It's Amino world without Chemists

The Alumin(i)um is a weird one: the idea was that it should be consistent with the other elements, so we changed it. Fair enough, but we don't have platinium, do we.

Only possible conclusion is that we're weird.

Yeah, what's up with most of the ale you people drink? Is there something wrong with British taste buds that makes them think Boddington's (for instance) is a delicious and refreshing beverage, pleasing to the nose as well as the palette?

I will not start a beer rant I will not start a beer rant I will not start a beer rant...

Stone Brewery's "Arrogant Bastard Ale", perhaps? I've had the stuff several times, and have consistently found it to be very unpleasant stuff. Liberty's "Anchor Steam" is equally bitter and unpalatable. And IPA is generally too full of hops and has a sour, bitter taste to it.

Newcastle is pretty decent, and Sam Smith's "Nut Brown Ale" is consistently good. Belhaven is Scottish, but it too is quite excellent. And there are quite a few other English ales that I have found to be great.

My personal favorites are the Belgian ales, of course- Chimay and Duvel are around the top of my list. Xingu from Brasil is also wonderful, as is "Old Rasputin Russian Imperial Stout", and quite a few of the ones from Unibroue. Of course, on a hot summer day I prefer something like Redhook's "Sunrye" or even Corona...

English beers are much like our own- they vary greatly in quality. I mean, does anyone really like Genesee Cream Ale?

It is good we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

I like Stone brewery's beers. The Arrogant Bastard is damn good. And their barleywine is phenomenal!

And I too like Chimay.

Paul, you make me sad. I totally agree with you about IPAs, but you'd willingly drink Corona? Have you no understanding of what happens when a lagered, bottom-fermented beer has its yeast autolyzed, then is poured into clear glass bottles, and then is shipped hundreds (or, in your case, thousands) of miles from its source?

Seriously, and with little exaggeration, it's nearly equivalent to cooking up a steak that has maggots on it.

And I've had Arrogant Bastard, both mere days into the bottle and several months, the stuff only gets more heavenly. The "wee beasties" continue their work, the alcohol increases, the complexity of the body increases slightly... and I'm gushing again. Verging on a rant, even.

Newcastle in a bottle (again, clear) is some of the worst piss-poison I've ever had. On tap, however, it's close to heavenly. And it's pretty obvious why. I've had two great Scottish ales: Fraosch heather ale (supposedly the first ale made in Europe: no hops needed) and Skullsplitter. Opposite ends of the beer scale, but fine in their own rights.

I've not had a "decent" beer from Samuel Smith yet. The Nut Brown lacks body and complexity, the Imperial Stout lacks body and bite, and the oatmeal stout lacks body and flavor. The Taddy Porter's pretty good, though.

Actually, the brewery is called Anchor Brewing Company and they make their famous Steam beer (which I find delicously smooth and even-bodied, though I get it less than 10 miles from the brewery), Liberty Ale, Porter, Old Foghorn barleywine, Christmas Ale, et cetera.

But $8.30 a 6-pack is too much to charge for *any* domestic beer, even if it is Anchor.

In the name of concilliation, I had a great Scotch de Silly last week, and a fine Orval the month before that. And a fine aged Corsendonk Christmas Ale the month before that.

on a hot summer day, Corona is really pretty good. I wouldn't want something as heavy as even a Sam Adams. Hell, in fact on a really hot day Miller Genuine Draft is pretty good. Cheap beer has its place. But I do draw the line at Bud and Miller Lite.

My tastes in beer tend to depend on several variables: the weather at the time, what food I'm eating, and how much of a particular kind of beer I've had recently. If I've been drinking a lot of lighter beers for a while, I like to switch off to something a bit dark for a while until I get tired of that, at which point I'll go back to lighter beers. Things like Orval and Corsendonk I buy only rarely, as I usually can't justify the expense. Same goes for Chimay, although at about $8/bottle it's a little more reasonable. Unfortunately I've introduced my girlfriend to Chimay, so now I have to share. *grin*

Incidentally, my old standby is still Saranac. Not because it comes from my old home town, but because it's pretty consistently good, especially at $4.69/pack. I usually have that in the fridge.

On a tangentially related note: you know that useless drawer in the bottom of the fridge where people throw their veggies and then forget about them until they've gone bad? I've found a much better use for it- that's where I keep my beer. I can fit three six-packs in there comfortably, and it keeps them out of the way. Then I have the rest of the fridge for food, and it's easier to keep track of what you have that way...


It's well we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

Why not a beer rant? We've never discussed beer before...
It's Amino world without Chemists

are unaware of European and world history. And how many of you Aussies or Limeys can name the only other President (besides Clinton) who was impeached? Or recite the Gettysburg Address? Or know who the Sons of Liberty were? Huh?, huh? So there!!!
It's Amino world without Chemists

to America for having such a good standing knowledge of their history. As much as I love being Australian (despite the government), and how we excel in quite a few areas, awareness of our history is not a real strong point. Most Aussies can't even name the first Prime Minister, and he was in power only a hundred years ago. I think it was Edmund Barton, but I can't be bothered looking it up! Most of us can probably name more US presidents than our own Prime Ministers.

stitch_grover's comment reminded me of my little daughter reciting all the Presidents, sort of as a song. I think she learned that in 3rd grade or so. I bet she could still do it, but she's too cool to do so now. *** Sigh ***
It's Amino world without Chemists

The Animaniacs did the song better, anyway. Well, the Warner Brothers and the Warner Sister, really. And I'm sure someone out there will link to an MP3 of it.

Which is why I refered to the audience of In Passing not being the likely target of such title changes. (And yes, I should have known better and done more homework before being ambitious enough to post here! I'll claim that it was late at night or early morning or something or perhaps a lack of sleep from small screaming children ...)

And I have, as a point of note, met enough Americans to realise that there is a significant portion of the population that is a little above the level which is projected to the world through the various media.

At least it stirred some discussion ;o)

"Million to one chances happen nine times out of ten"

One of the things that has pissed me off for years is the way that the lousiest parts of American TV have been exported throughout the world. I mean, "Baywatch"? "Knight Rider"? "Perfect Strangers"? Come on! It's no wonder we're hated around the world, if our ambassadors are David Hasselhoff and Regis Philbin.

And yes, we the American public truly hate being talked down to, but that is all that Hollywood seems to be able to do these days. Once in a while a truly original show comes along, something with wit and intelligence, and it lasts maybe half a season before it's pulled for being too risky or something like that...

Feh. I started to rant anyway. Screw it, I'm gonna go get some coffee.

I work the night shift. What the hell am I doing awake at this hour anyway?!?

Hmm, at this hour the best you can hope for is - it seems - the company of Europeans to whom this is early in the afternoon.

And not all exported American TV is as bad as the examples mentioned. And don't diss David Hasselhoff, he is, or was, immensely popular in Germany, where he also had quite a career as a pop singer; including a No.1 hit, "I've been looking for freedom". People did raise an eyebrow though, when he complained about not being included in a recently opened museum on the Berlin wall, as he felt his performance of his aforementioned No.1 hit in Berlin back in '89 had contributed significantly to bringing down the Berlin wall. How should we object to your "exporting" that kind of people? We Europeans would have done just the same. *g*

...but some days I still feel like the worst of American culture is beshat across the globe by TV.

The popularity of Hasselhoff in Germany is one of those inexplicable things, like the French fascination with Jerry Lewis. For the love of god, why? *shudder*

It is good we cannot hear the screams
we make in other peoples' dreams.
--Edward Gorey

I still think of Hasselhoff as a TV genius. He came up with the concept of Baywatch, then when the networks turned down his idea, he financed it himself and made a big pot of money.
Kind of like Mel Gibson and his "Passion of Christ" - Hollywood had no idea that there were so many people interested in Jesus Christ (imagine that!). So I think he's made about half a billion dollars from it.
And that's the American way (especially in entertainment). If you're right, the public will follow you. And, of course, if you're wrong, we never hear from you. Ya pays yur money and ya takes yer chances.
It's Amino world without Chemists

is how many Americans could correctly answer those questions. (Andrew Johnson; find a copy of the Address on your own - google's out there; and (not the greatest description here) an underground group prior to the American Revolution who pressed for American liberty from England and possibly/probably/certainly participated in the Boston Tea Party.)

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

I'll give the Loonie pt (a combo cool pt/history nerd pt) to umrguy, though they really weren't too hard questions.
And I freely admit I can't name any Australian Prime Minister (though I'd do OK with the UK), as any 'right' Amuricun (that's American with a Kentucky accent) can tell you - we only know a few Aussies - Olivia Newton John (am I old or what?), Elle MacPherson, and Crocodile Dundee and, of course, Engineer Dave of the Australian Railroad. Right Engineer Dave?
It's Amino world without Chemists

Correct, Par U and something that most Australians wouldn't know (and something I only learned through being in the industry) is that you can learn many of the names of past Australian Prime Ministers simply by running the across the nullabor on the train, where many of the crossing loops are named after them!

Barton, Bates, Fisher, Denman, Blamey, Chifley, Watson, Hughes, Deakin, Reid, Forrest, Lyons ...

and if you're from the UK, you get to know a whole different set of our exports through our soaps .. Neighbours and Home and Away, Kylie the singing budgie probably being the most notable other than Rolf Harris (though he preceeded the soaps significantly)!



"Million to one chances happen nine times out of ten"

And silly me, I at first thought by "soaps" you meant that which can be applied to the body in conjunction with water to remove dirt.

Speaking of which, how could you forget Natalie Imbruglia? The soap star who "crossed over" into pop music.

I was gonna try to use the phrase "fair dinkum" in this sentence, but I gave up.

Yes, Natalie crossed over, but Kylie was the first (of many) to do so, Delta Goodrem probably being the most recent. Sometimes, its better to export these people than keep them at home any way. Fair dinkum.



"Million to one chances happen nine times out of ten"

Let's not forget Nicole Kidman!

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

Well, of course not. Plus she was just on David Letterman last night. But my point was that we generally know Aussies for their celebreties, and every 4 yrs for their swimmers (Olympics).
Plus, of course, for their extremely competant military that went into East Timor, (a situation probably worse than Iraq) and handled things in a quick fashion, helping to restore that 'new' country to democracy. Bet you Aussies thought we didn't know about that, did you? -- Oops - slipped into geopolitical nerd role again.
It's Amino world without Chemists

Ha, if you slip into your geopolitical nerd role again I cannot help slipping into the complimentary behavioural pattern. Because as bad as the situation was in East Timor (or with Indonesia in general, during Suharto's rule), for about 25 years nobody intervened. After all East Timor was invaded by Indonesia in 1975(!), there was a UN resolution (as with Iraq and Kuwait), but unlike Iraq Indonesia received both good-will and the weapons necessary to maintain their occupation of East Timor. The prime suppliers of such were - the UK and Australia. Only around 1999 UN peacekeepers were brought in. Handled in a quick fashion, eh ?
I remember reading about an Australian soldier who was sent to East Timor as part of a UN peacekeeping force and who remarked on the irony of the fact that "first they (i.e. Australia) had helped him (i.e. Suharto) get there (i.e. East Timor), now they came back to kick him out". Just goes to show that there is still a lot of decency to be found with common people and very little with those (politicians) who are supposed to represent them.

And let's not forget that East Timor has always been nothing more than an arbitrarily-defined region, set up as a chunk of land for the oppressed (persecuted?) Christian minority of Indonesia to be separate from the Muslims.

The borders of East Timor are not arbitrarily defined, they are no more arbitrary than e.g. the border between the US and Canada. East Timor was originally a Portuguese colony, i.e. Portuguese Timor. The rest of the island Timor was part of the Dutch colonies. East Timor decleared themselves independent from Portugal in 1975 and was invaded by Indonesia 9 days later. Indonesia had declared itself independent of the Dutch in 1945.

For more details on East Timor see e.g. this page on East Timor at wikipedia.

So as long as we're on the subject - I'll give 2 Loonie pts to the first person who can tell me why Portugal's 'colonies' were in Asia and Africa (and Brazil) and Spain's were in the Western Hemisphere. But why did England have them all over both hemispheres? And a bonus cool pt if you can name the Portugese colony in China. No Googling!
And I agree with peegee, all borders are 'arbitrarily defined' and only 'straight' (as in the Middle East) when a colonial power uses a map to draw the 'line'. Or curved as in the aforementioned case of Canada and the US. Side Loonie pts - which state (besides Alaska) has the northernmost pt in the US? And which state is the southernmost pt?
It's Amino world without Chemists

Maine in the north and Hawaii in the south.


I'm pretty sure.

Minnesota. There's this little point along its northern border that just edges Maine out, I think.

Because Portugal and Spain were the major Catholic powers, and the Pope gave each one hemisphere to colonize. The English, not being Catholic, didn't give a rat's tail what the Pope thought belonged to others, and took what they could.

This was worth points? Sheesh. You must not think much of the modern education system.

A Loonie pt and the cool pt - but she still didn't explain why Brazil speaks Portugese...She was sooooo close.....
And a good note on the English too.
And the bonus pt to hypoxic for knowing Macao...Hong Kong's lessor known cousin...
And of course I don't think much of the public education system, I had two kids go through it! (Neither of whom probably knew the answers to those questions, I learned them in a senior level college history course). So well done Saint!
It's Amino world without Chemists

I don't remember specifically why Portugal got Brazil, either, but I think I can be forgiven for that, since I learned about this stuff in 7th grade.

I guess since my dad is a teacher, I have slightly more respect for public education than the average person. Around here, your public education was what you could make of it. If you wanted to learn, you had the opportunity. Our classes only had about 30 students each, and some considerably less (independent-study creative writing in high school had maybe six of us, AP American history had eight), and our teachers were available after class if you needed help (my dad retired last year, and he still occasionally gets a home phone call from a former student, or the child of a former student, who needs math help). *shrug* I guess there are advantages to a rural education that I never suspected. (You want to know how rural? When my dad stopped teaching in a coat and tie, there was an article about it in the paper.)

The fact that you remember anything from 7th grade, probably should earn you 2 cool pts, especially as history ain't usually the most interesting subject. (Course I remember it from 1975, so that was awhile ago too!).
So, the answer: Look at a globe. 45 degrees Longitude is where the Pope 'drew' the line and Brazil juts out past that, thus ensuring that Protugal could 'colonize' it. It wasn't by 'hemisphere', it was division by Longitude.
What always fascinates me about the 'colonization' era was the 'great countries' assertions that they owned certain tracks of land. I mean the Louisiana Purchase was a huge chunk of land, as was 'Seward's Folly' (Hi Kris the Girl!) but the US bought them from France and Russia and totally ignored the fact that there were people already there! So how come France (and Spain and England and a very few other countries) could own land, but nobody else could?
It's Amino world without Chemists

But I don't remember the *why* of why the line was drawn so as to include Brazil (other than possibly/probably the fact that the Portugese were already there).

On the plus side, knowing that Brazil was originally a Portugese colony led me to infer that part of the grammar problems I was having recently reading a technical paper are likely due to the fact that the two authors most likely speak Portugese and not English as their first language, since that's where they're from...

-There's someone in my head, but it's not me.-

was the portugese colony in China.

Sad how much that sounds like the assistance given to one Saddam fellow isn't it?

Today's politics can well become tomorrow's woes.

"Million to one chances happen nine times out of ten"

If you replace "UK and Australia" with "France, Russia and Germany", why yes, it does sounds familiar. If you also replace "food assistance" with "UN scam to get millions of barrels of oil", it sounds even more familiar.

Exactly ... no one is innocent. And I think you omitted the US in your substitution for assistance to Saddam.

"Million to one chances happen nine times out of ten"

It was actually George III in the movie. And not to be picky, but how could there have been 5 movies previous to King George IV when that is the 4th. Remember - Rocky II plus Rocky V equals Rocky VII (Adrienne's Revenge).
The first Harry Potter movie was also dumbed down for Americans - you guys had "The Sorcerer's Stone", while the rest of the world had "The Philosopher's Stone", because it was believed that American's wouldn't know what a philosopher was.

Fairly concise afterthough, which I moved up to the front:

My main point is that I don't think titles matter that much. Many successful books and movies have titles that only obliquely relate to the content or theme of the book or movie, and only become apparent afterwards, anyway. "Silence of the Lambs," for example. "The Sun Also Rises." "The Crying Game," which maybe SHOULD have been more specific, damn. And so on.

OK, here's the original, rambling post, which you can skip if you want:

"The Madness of King George," the movie, was always titled as such, so sayeth this site. It was the same for everybody, everywhere. Even if the producers thought the "III" would have been confusing to Americans, they could have spelled it out, literally, as in "The Madness of George the Third," as per the original quote.

Anyway, it's a moot point. We're being misunderestimated, and we hate that. It's American tastes that are the problem here, not our collective intelligence. Knowing exactly what the movie was about would only ensure that most Americans would avoid it like it was some kind of subtly humorous, finely nuanced socio-political British class-conscious historical drama. And occurring after all the fighting with us was over, anyway. Monarch goes daffy, monarch gets better. No car chases, no explosions, no catch phrases ("We the people, declare you...TERMINATED!" *BANG!*).

Anyone who would go see this kind of movie probably already knows who George III was, and the inverse is likely true.

Regarding the Harry Potter thing, the French title of the first book was "Harry Potter at the Sorcerer's School," or something very similar. I don't know if the movie followed suit. Many things are titled differently in different parts of the world for cultural reasons and because some concepts don't translate well.

I think Americans would know what a philosopher is; I don't think we're familiar enough with archaic alchemical concepts enough to know what a philosopher's stone is. It doesn't have anything to do with philosophy as such, but that might be why they changed the title, because we'd think it DID. Thinking we'd have to stumble through Descartes AGAIN. Or Hume. No thanks. On the other hand, I don't think a lot of kids or even adults 'round the world know a lot about the philosopher's stone either, or else they'd know it's not just an actual magic rock like it is in the movie. In the primary hermetic texts it's not even a literal stone, it's represented as a tincture (liquid) or a powdery substance. And simply possessing it doesn't give you the power to shoot flames and lightning out your nostrils and ass, and rule the world and so on, with the evil laughter and whatnot. I'd say the movie comes pre dumbed down as it is, in that respect, regardless of the title. However, I understand it's fiction, not a documentary, so never mind all the above criticism.