Humanities desk
< March 6	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 7

Young adult novel where boy hears dead mom in fan?

Does anyone know the name of a young adult novel about a boy whose mother has died telling a girl that he hears the voice of his dead mother when he talks into an electric fan. --Gary123 (talk) 02:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

different "Wake Up America" poster

I'm trying to find a different "Wake Up America" poster. No, I'm not referring to the WWI and WWII versions by James Montgomery Flagg. I'm referring to a poster which depicts a bird singing and buildings appearing to be waking up. Where can I find such a copy?24.90.204.234 (talk) 05:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, a lengthy Google search failed miserably. I did find this image, which seems to fit in well with the discussion above about circumcision in the US ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 17:13, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No! How could you?! >:( 24.90.204.234 (talk) 14:27, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The two Universities shall kiss at Stamford

...a prophecy (to which you may find allusion in the fourth book of "The Faerie Queene" that both Universities [i.e. Cambridge and Oxford] would meet in the end, and kiss, at Stamford. Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, "On The Art of Writing". [1]

Can someone who knows more about Spenser than I do resolve the reference? And does anyone know of any other record of this prophecy? Marnanel (talk) 13:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The most famous "prophecies" in 16th-century England were probably those of Mother Shipton... AnonMoos (talk) 13:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find quite that in The Faerie Queene, but Book 4, Canto 11, stanza 35 has this:

And after him the fatall Welland went,
That if old sawes prove true (which God forbid)
Shall drowne all Holland with his excrement,
And shall see Stamford, though now homely hid,
Then shine in learning, more then ever did
Cambridge or Oxford, Englands goodly beames.

I think I can go some way toward explaining those lines. In 1261 a number of Cambridge students seceded from the University and tried to set up a rival university in Northampton. In 1333 many Oxford students and teachers made a similar attempt to set up a Northampton University, before moving on again to Stamford. Neither project lasted more than a few years, but they were remembered for much longer. In the 15th century the chronicler John Hardyng built the facts up into a claim that a University of Stamford had been founded by the mythical king Bladud, father of Lear, and had lasted until it was suppressed by Pope Gregory the Great. He also included in his chronicle an alleged prophecy of Merlin:

That studious throng which
Oxenford doth cherish
In time to come the Stoneyford
Shall nourish.

The historian Richard White (1539-1611) combined the two genuinely historical incidents into a move by students from both Oxford and Cambridge to Northampton, and then (1264) to Stamford. All the above is abstracted from Martin Smith Stamford Myths and Legends (1991). --Antiquary (talk) 19:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lieutenant Governor (question about the word)

After I have asked several persons I know I am going to ask it here.

Why is the Governor's deputy in U.S. States called Lieutenant Governor and not Vice Governor? The President's deputy is also called Vice President and not Lieutenant President. Does the word Vice Governor exist in American or not? I question this because in my native language (German) a Lieutenant Governor is called "Vizegouverneur" what means Vice Governor in English. Because the word Vice exists in Engish (such as in Vice-President or Vice-Admiral) I wonder why it is not used for a governor. Is there an explanation to that? Thanks in advance, Jerchel (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The term *vice governor is not in use in the United States. Instead, as you have said, the stand-in for a governor is called a lieutenant governor. See Lieutenant#Etymology, which explains that the word lieutenant means "someone who holds a position in the absence of his superior", which is exactly what a lieutenant governor does. Sorry that I don't know why this word was chosen for the governor's stand-in while vice was chosen for the president's stand-in. Vice is apparently a Latin word, while lieutenant is an originally French word with roughly the same meaning. English is like that; it often has more than one word from different sources with similar meanings. The use of one such word rather than another is generally a historical accident. Marco polo (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The USA got the term "governor" from Britain, and Commonwealth countries that have state or provincial governors (Australia, Canada, maybe some others) have "lieutenant-governors". The question is not so much why they're not called "vice-governor" in the USA, but why the Vice-President is not called "Lieutenant-President". Probably because it sounds too militaristic. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from its use in lieutenant governor, the term lieutenant is most often used for military ranks, such as lieutenant colonel or lieutenant general. Its use for the governor's stand-in in North America may date to the time before independence when (British) colonial governors, such as John Murray, 4th Earl of Dunmore or William Phips, also served as commanders of colonial militias. Marco polo (talk) 21:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See this previous question on the Language Desk. Alansplodge (talk) 21:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

EO indicates that "vice-" means "deputy", while "lieu(tenant-)" means "in place of". A paper-thin distinction, it would seem. But maybe connected with the level of the office. For example, "viceroy", a "deputy king". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UK Social Services

I heard on tv today about a chap who accidentally came across a site containing pornography. He was shocked and reported it to the police. They “borrowed” his computer and got the Social Services involved. They got an order from the court whereby he cannot see his daughter for nine months. Can anybody find a written source for this please? Kittybrewster ☎ 22:08, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[2], but it's four months not nine and of course we only have his word for it that he "accidentally" came across the images. --Viennese Waltz 23:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, he found the images on his computer – which he claimed were a result of accessing particular sites but may not have been, I don't know. Given the seriousness of child pronography offences, I'm sure the police are examining the possibilities thoroughly.

Secondly, he is allowed to see his daughter, just not on his own. "When his wife works late, as regularly happens, Mr Robinson's daughter goes to his mother-in-law's home." Generally, then, this is not nearly as much of a problem as a full ban. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 23:09, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

well I think he was a chump to have reported it. Kittybrewster ☎ 23:20, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering his suggested alternate solution was just throw the computer away, with no mention of wiping the HDD/s, it's perhaps fortunate for him that he did report it or he may very well be now completely banned from seeing his daughter. Nil Einne (talk) 07:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Money Market savings account vs. standard savings accounts

Why do banks usually give better rates for money market accounts than savings accounts? Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the first paragraph of money market accounts it's to do with minimum balances. If you have a savings account where you have to keep say $1,000 dollars in it at all times then that's a more stable account than one where money can be constantly coming and going. Usually every extra barrier to preventing you spending/withdrawing your savings will result in a little more interest being thrown your way. ny156uk (talk) 22:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[3], [4]: Money market accounts have higher minimal balances, and limit the number of transactions per month. This means that the bank has more freedom to use the funds in the account, so can afford to pay a bit higher (though typically still quite low) interest rate. Buddy431 (talk) 05:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the US, a bank savings account is protected by the FDIC (within limits), and requires the bank to hold a portion (8% or so) in reserves. Money market accounts do not have these same conditions, and may be re-invested in riskier asset classes such as bonds. DOR (HK) (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Money market accounts are insured by the FDIC too [5]. Money Market accounts are distinct from Money market mutual funds which, despite the name similarity, are really quite different. Money market mutual funds are not FDIC insured. Buddy431 (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flatulence as torture method?

Yes, yes, giggle. Now, I saw this on South Park as a parody of 24. It would be bloody unpleasant I'm sure, but has anyone ever done any serious research into this, in terms s of torture effectiveness? I'm thinking CIA type conditioning... Rixxin (talk) 22:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Torture for the recipient or torture for the producer? Bus stop (talk) 01:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

South Park! Next Ref Desk question please ( this one stinks).--Aspro (talk) 01:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me there are far more effective tortures, both in terms of unpleasantness and humiliation. The difficulty of needing to fart on cue is another problem. StuRat (talk) 07:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a job for Johnny Fartpants! Alansplodge (talk) 13:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the answer to the question is that no, nobody has ever seriously investigated it, but it may well have been done at some point in an impromptu or unauthorised way. Humiliation and sexual abuse are sometimes used as part of torture, and could involve many things. Another method (which has been used by the USA) is to restrain people until they piss and shit themselves. See Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse, Torture and the United States, and the rather poor article List of methods of torture. Abuse and humilation of prisoners takes many forms, but I'd be surprised if someone hasn't farted at a prisoner at some point. Pretending to shit on the Koran is reported in a number of cases (see previous links) and this may well have involved a little anal flatulence.

Offensive-smelling chemical compounds are sometimes used for crowd control - see Non-lethal weapon#Scent-based weapons - but I can't find any evidence of them being used as torture. Unpleasant odors (feces, urine, burning flesh) would be an incidental part of many forms of imprisonment and torture.

On the other hand, a Swedish convict was punished for farting at his guards.[6] --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]