Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion Main / PublicDomainArtifact

Go To

You will be notified by PM when someone responds to your discussion
Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.
Bosco13 Since: Jun, 2010
Aug 12th 2018 at 6:14:56 AM •••

If Excalibur, Genie in a Bottle and Philosopher's Stone have their own pages then I don't see the point in listing examples on this one

jormis29 Since: Mar, 2012
Apr 3rd 2015 at 3:42:52 AM •••

Perseus deleted chunks from the this page which created scentences like "The ''Fra would not be able to open it and release the ills within."

Could this be reverted?

Edited by jormis29 Working on cleaning up List of Shows That Need Summary Hide / Show Replies
SeptimusHeap MOD (Edited uphill both ways)
Apr 3rd 2015 at 4:59:41 AM •••

Reverted it and will message them.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Candi Sorcerer in training Since: Aug, 2012
Sorcerer in training
Apr 16th 2013 at 10:50:12 PM •••

  • "Inverted in the second Nightside book by Simon R. Green with the MacGuffin being the Unholy Grail — the cup Judas drank from. Which... was the same cup.
    • No, it wasn't the same cup. It did stop being Unholy at the end of the novel, when it's used to perform a communion ceremony, but after that it's just a regular antique cup."

Both are right. Judas would have had his own cup, but the Grail legend involves the one that Jesus passed around: "Drink in memory of me." Judas isn't specified to have left at this time in any of the four gospels. (John's the only one that specifies that he left the dinner before the others, though Matthew and Mark mention Jesus' warning of and to Judas as a traitor to him.)

Edited by 69.172.221.8 Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving. -Terry Pratchett
Wardog Since: May, 2010
Nov 19th 2011 at 4:49:16 AM •••

Necronomicon: meta-example/defictionalization. I have a copy of the Necronomicon (actually just an anthology of Lovecraft stories, from Gollancz publishing, with a leather-effect binding and a rather creepy-looking image of what I presume to be Cthulhu on the front in gold). Would this be notable enough to mention, or is it too meta? (Also, I've just noticed that the copyright note in the front says "The right of Howard Phillips Lovecraft to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988" - which is interesting given that he died in 1937).

Top