From: Stephen Turner Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 13:39:40 GMT Subject: Round 27 final summary I gave this round the rather broad theme "English Literature" to give the players some freedom in how the round developed. I soon regretted it, however, when it emerged that I was going to have to read thoroughly and judge some very long rules indeed! At first, I felt that the players found it difficult to be very restrictive in their rules and that there tended to be a low signal-to-noise ratio in the rules: though this did improve somewhat as time went on, it meant that I awarded a lot of negative style points at first, and only reached 0 total style points by the end. I think that this difficulty resulted from two factors: first, constructing such a complex book that different parts didn't have to interact (as in round 26); secondly, and more importantly, players' talking only through their fantasy personas, not giving direct instructions to the other players. This brings me to the main difficulty in judging this round, which was in determining what was academic opinion and what indisputable fact: what was request from the players' fantasy personas and what command from their real selves. And what truth value did Northcroft's statements have? However (or maybe because of this) round 27 was unusual in that there were no formal challenges to any of the judgements. I don't want to imply that this round didn't live up to its expectations: I think it did. In the first rule Gareth created two styles -- that of the academics and that of Northcroft -- and the players largely understood them and stuck to them. The (presumed) association of our committee with Northcroft's added another twist. And then Peter developed his own character, rather different from that of the other academics. I think that this round developed a fantasy world -- rather than just a collection of constraints on other fantasy rules -- more thoroughly than any other I can think of. I think that the judge has to understand the fantasy world more fully than any of the other players. By exploring every nuance of the rules and by meditating upon them e almost enters into the world the other players are creating. It is a measure of the success of this round that if someone asks me in 10 years' time who Ezra Northcroft was, I shall probably say "Didn't he write Victorian novels or something?" Finally, congratulations to our new judge, Peter, and our new Wizards, Stein (surprise, surprise!) and Peter. I enclose a copy of all the rules. FRC round 27, final status - ---------------------------- Start of round: We-09-Nov-94 15:36 (all timings GMT). End of round: We-23-Nov-94 00:34 Theme: English Literature The Wizard: Stein Judge: Stephen Rules judged: 22 (14 valid, 7 invalid, 1 unsuccessful) Total style points awarded: 0 (rate 0.000) Style points awarded: Gareth -0.5 Peter 2.5 WINNER and NEW WIZARD Storm -1 The Wizard 2.5 NEW WIZARD Vanyel -5.5 Ronald 2 ====== Rule 27:1 (Gareth) We-09-Nov-94 18:25 VALID (0.5 points) >>>>>> It is with great excitement that I announce to you, my eminent friends and colleagues, my recent discovery of a stack of papers belonging to that great English wordsmith, Ezra Q Northcroft; and I think you will share my excitement when I tell you that it appears to contain the complete text, or at least the greater part, of a hitherto-unknown novel by that author. It is entitled "Rules of Fantasy"; the manuscript is unfortunately written very untidily and apparently in great haste, so I have been able to read only the first several pages. It appears to have been written near the end of Northcroft's life, for it shows many signs of the harrowing mental illness that so cruelly blighted his latter years. It is written more as autobiography than as novel; but if it is truly intended to be factual, it reveals a depth of paranoia in Northcroft which has until now not been realised. I prefer to assume that it is indeed a novel; to be more precise, a Gothic fantasy in the grand style. The book describes the activity of a group -- and, it would seem, a highly sinister group -- referred to (in the portions I have read) only as "The Committee". Northcroft believes (or professes to believe) that the Committee is manipulating his life and work, presumably by some sort of mind control. I trust that it is becoming apparent why I say that it is either paranoiac raving or a horrific fantasy. Anyway, enough of my musings. Let me read you a brief extract from the third page, to give you some idea of the style in which the book is written; I am letting you all have photocopies of the complete manuscript, so that you can participate in the difficult labour of deciphering Northcroft's handwriting. I have high hopes that the project will soon be completed. - --- extract begins --- It has begun. Do not ask me how I know; but I do know, as surely as I know that two and two make four, that the Committee have found me, and that they will never let me go until they have destroyed me utterly. I can hear their voices -- no, not their voices, for they whisper to each other in silence, with not the least breath of air, but their words -- and their laughter, as they push my life around with the ease of a child playing with his blocks. And with all the frivolity and pettiness of a child, too; perhaps my suffering, my humiliation, my helplessness, are simply of no interest to them. Or perhaps, as I believe, it is deliberate. I can hear their voiceless words, as they determine the course of my life; and I know that I have no choice. I have tried, and failed, to thwart their purposes. All is to no avail. I cannot but do as they decide; and the knowledge is searing away my very soul. I can hear one of them saying -- saying right now, as I write -- "Northcroft has no choice. He will write the next portion of his book in code." He seems almost to be lecturing, as if he is explaining something, or reading from a book. Perhaps he is discussing his techniques for mind control. But I am determined to obstruct the Committee. I shall not let them know what I am doing. The next portion of my book will be written in code, so that they cannot read it! - --- extract ends --- I am impressed by Northcroft's writing here. I think he represents very well the character of a man in the grip of desperate paranoia. But do you not think he goes somewhat over the top in having the narrator not even notice, on this occasion, how he is being manipulated? Be that as it may, the next page or so *is* in code, and I would request you, my learned coleagues, to make a great effort to decipher it. And, indeed, to read it; for his handwriting here is even worse than usual. I feel that I have said enough. Let us begin the task of making sense of Northcroft's magnum opus; for such I believe this to be. >>>>>> Judgement: It's difficult to make the first rule invalid inadvertently, and Gareth has not succeeded in it. Style comments: Gareth establishes a style (well, two styles really) and does well to follow them pretty closely. But I only give half a point because it reminds me too much of rounds 25 and 21 (in different ways). Also because by sticking to his 'outer' style he fails to require anyone to understand the code, only requests them to try. And finally because it's going to mean I have to read and judge long rules not short ones! ====== Rule 27:2 (Vanyel) We-09-Nov-94 18:38 UNSUCCESSFUL (0 points) >>>>>> Having just finished another novel for my English class, I realized just how much truth can be found in Literature. English Literature, I quickly amended, realizing that I haven't read much in the line of any *other* literature. Following that thought, I realized just how many books describe how interaction works in the world. It is only appropriate that any discussion of English Literature--such as, for example, this Round--would include only discussion on descriptive and prescriptive laws of the interaction of humans. >>>>>> Judgement: Welcome to the FRC! Pity you sent your first rule just after someone else sent a rule. The established procedure in these cases is to mark the rule UNSUCCESSFUL instead of INVALID and not to deduct a day's eligibility. To be precise, I shall judge rules in the order in which they arrive in my mailbox, and then mark a rule UNSUCCESSFUL if (i) it appears to have been posted before the poster received a previous rule or rules and (ii) it is invalid and (iii) it would have been valid had it been placed before the other rule or rules. Style comments: "Only discussion on descriptive and prescriptive laws of the interaction of humans"? Sounds terribly restrictive and terribly complicated! And why isn't it appropriate to discuss other aspects of literature? Still, I don't want to be too harsh on someone's first rule! ====== Rule 27:3 (Peter) We-09-Nov-94 22:28 VALID (-1 point) >>>>>> I could scarcely believe the good fortune that brought your parcel to my doorstep. That I should see, with my own eyes, a hitherto unknown Northcroft manuscript in my lifetime-- I could never have hoped for more. I have devoured all eight of his previously known volumes, written dissertations on the obvious influence his work had on Poe and Lovecraft (readers of The Tell-Tale Heart could hardly miss the similarities to Northcroft's The Watchful Eye), and analyzed the clockwork imagery so rampant in his writings. And now, having reconciled coming to the end of his body of work, I find that there is still more for me to discover. This manuscript shows a darker side of Northcroft, far more so than any of his earlier pieces. Whereas his illness was only hinted at in The Onyx Affair, here it colors every page. His use of the autobiographical form toys with the boundaries between fantasy and reality. However, as he was clearly in the advanced stages of his illness while penning these pages, this blurring of reality may be less artifice than we would like to believe. It occurs to me that there may be elements of truth here, glimpses into the man's final days which, if only we can decipher them, might shed some light on the circumstances behind Northcroft's mysterious disappearance. With that in mind, I took up the challenge of the encoded segment of page 4. To spare you the ravages of his deteriorating penmanship, it reads thusly: Her eyes... no clergy ever flocked o'er religion this heavenly; I was in love! Love-- not once, twice! Perchance, until nature calms this unearthly anxiety, this exquisite miasma, Your soulful entreaties (never trite, ever new) could express sweet wishes inaudibly to her? Please! Eternal redemption if only done swiftly! An odd passage, surely. The more so because Northcroft never married, nor do any of his earlier papers mention any amorous interests. So who is the mysterious object of his passion in this passage? I pondered this a while, scouring my notes for any clues to the woman's identity, when it suddenly occurred to me that the "her" referred to might not be a woman at all. Perhaps Northcroft, spiraling ever downward in the inexorable whirlpool of his illness, came to embrace it, thrive on it, revel in it? Perhaps it is this illness which is the "exquisite miasma" of which he speaks. This sheds light on the meaning of "Love-- not once, twice!" which could refer to his earlier bout with mental illness, the temporary amnesia he experienced a decade before. And what sins had Northcroft committed for which he needed redemption? But the business of the Committee from the previous page bothered me, especially the way Northcroft (or his literary avatar) had been so easily and unknowingly manipulated. So I examined this passage more closely, and discovered an astonishing pattern. It HAD been written in code after all, but not one of images and references as I'd been chasing. And sure enough, the rest of the manuscript follows the peculiar message thus revealed. This Committee may be some manifestation of the illness causing Northcroft to act in ways he only subconsciously recognized. Fortunately, it appears that this is the only section of the manuscript which is encoded. Other issues press on my time, but I look forward to delving into the rest of the manuscript shortly. A note to my colleagues: As reading Northcroft's handwriting is a tedious chore, please do make sure to tell us which pages you're discussing so that we won't have to duplicate your work. >>>>>> Judgement: ... and welcome back, Peter. I have some problems with the amount of encoded material. Gareth said that the section he quoted was "a brief extract from the third page". Then he says that "the next page or so is in code". You have only quoted "the encoded segment of page 4", which is apparently a much smaller segment than Gareth quoted. Nevertheless, I can't invalidate your rule for this because there is the following reconciliation of the facts. Suppose the encoded section was the rest of page 3 and the start of page 4. Then the amount of encoded material on page 4 could be a small segment. Style comments: As I said above, Gareth does not require you to say what the interpretation of the encoded portion is, but it would have been nice given that you had worked it out. You probably didn't even tell us what the whole encoded portion said if Gareth's "a page or so" is accurate. I'm glad to see you abolish the coding theme quickly and stick to the styles, but again you have not been very restrictive. Note later: Shame on me: I completely missed the hidden message in the code at the time. I later awarded Peter an extra style point for it (see 27:6, 27:7). ====== Rule 27:4 (Storm) Th-10-Nov-94 00:37 VALID (-1.5 points) >>>>>> My eyes ache and I am surrounded by the dregs of tea in unwashed cups, but I believe I have pieced together a small portion of the text on the third page of Northcroft's "novel". The quotes reflect my uncertainty as to the intent of this work--if it is indeed a novel, even Joyce did not go this far in attempting to conceal his meaning from the reader. Yet it is painful to think of a mind as brilliant as Northcrop's actually succumbing to such delusions. Perhaps if it were not for his tragic and untimely death he would have revised the manuscript to make it more accessible, to change these compelling and yet disjointed ramblings into a true work of literature. But enough of my musings, which in any case are based on a tiny fragment of the whole opus. Here is the passage I have been able to recover: - -- I pace in ever-narrowing circles, hemmed in by no physical boundaries-- only the ephemeral decrees of the voiceless whisperers, rules I discover often only in retrospect when I look back and ask myself: why did I do thus, and not thus? It is beyond endurance, that the arbiters of my fate remain thus nameless and faceless! As long as I have any freedom, even to pace out the boundaries of my insensible cage, I will not rest until I have drawn them forth from their terrible silence! And so I am resolved: I will set down nothing, even in this diary which alone will form the record of my thoughts (for I cannot speak them to others and face their incomprehending pity and disbelief)--No! I will not pace these caged circles, turning only inward in my despair: I will discover the nature of my tormentors, [here a line of some seven or eight words was entirely illegible; the next line apparently begins a new paragraph] I will not mar these pristine pages until I can set down at least one iota of fact, one glimpse into the nature of the Committee or its members: as, today, I draw from the blackness of despair the insight that their divergent voices come not from a single nation or tribe of men, but speak in their silence in the idiom of many nations--dare I persuade myself that Storm's argot bears the barbarous stamp of the Americas? - --- I am not convinced that Northcroft's style through these passages is entirely consistent; but whether this is part of his work's grand design must await further redaction. >>>>>> Judgement: Well, the Judge let me correct a typo at 21:3 so I return the favour. It doesn't make any difference to the eligibilities anyway! By the way, I don't usually invalidate rules for obvious typos. So I won't invalidate yours for correcting only two of the three instances of the author's name. Style comments: I have to deduct half a point for the remaining typo, however. And I'm not quite sure where this fits into page three. At the beginning and then there's another gap before Gareth's section, maybe. In any case, we don't seem to be fitting the book together very well, and your rule doesn't appear even to attempt to apply any restrictions to future rules. ====== Rule 27:5 (The Wizard) Th-10-Nov-94 10:49 VALID (-0.5 points) >>>>>> Dear Colleagues. Needless to say, I too have put other matters aside in order to delve into this compelling manuscript. I skimmed through the first eight pages, not bothering to work may way through his crabbed writing where I encountered problems. These pages seem to be largely repetitive, consisting mostly of him complaining about his miserable situation, and restating his intention to counter the Commitee's doings, or at least gain insight into its nature. However, page 9 brings about quite a change both in mood, and in his handwriting which now is larger, and written in a more excalted state. It goes: Today defeat brought victory, if only a small, small, victory - and yet it might even turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory! For I have realised that presently I can not under any circumstances do otherwise than what the Committee wants, and therefore my only hope for escape lies in finding its weak link, someone with a fragile and inconsequential mind, who may be induced to use his power over me according to my own will rather than his own; if only such a weak link can be found - then hopefully I will be available to use the accursed rituals hinted at in von Juntz' "Von den unaussprechlichen Kulten" and cryptically encoded in the mad arab Abd Al-Hazred's dreaded "Al Azif", and impose my mind onto his - allowing me to take his place in the Committee! Somewhere in the Committee there must be a person, a man - for women have such strong wills - a man with a sense of logic, but a penchant for paradoxes; yet for my schemes to work he must himself be somewhat of a wizard - and must there not exist such a man, for how could I even think of writing these pages if not the most irregular of minds guided my hands and my thoughts? I will sleep now, for in my sleep I am more aware than when awake - - - This is doubly interesting for the mentioning of the books normally associated with HP Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos, and widely accepted to be invented by HPL, yet these references predate HPL by several decades. Northcroft even includes "Von den" in the title of von Juntz' book whereas Lovecraft uses only the grammatically inaccurate "Unaussprechlichen Kulten". This seems to imply that either Northcroft invented these books, or that they are indeed real books to which he had access. We know that Northcroft was seriously interested in the occult, and the above passages seem to indicate that he really believed himself to be magically capable. There can be no doubt that the "I" person in this work really is an accurate portrait of Northcroft himself, maybe even in a true autobiographical setting as viewed by Northcroft's eyes at the time. >>>>>> Judgement: There isn't a contradiction in the fact that Gareth says that the handwriting is very untidy, yet The Wizard finds one bit easier to read than another. Style comments: Well, we're getting somewhere in the book now. But again this rule isn't very restrictive. ====== Rule 27:6 (Vanyel) Th-10-Nov-94 18:09 INVALID (-2 points) >>>>>> Having run out of more important things to do, I cracked down into my copy of Northcroft's book. Not wanting to interpret something unimportant, I skimmed the book first. It seems (for whatever reason) that it is only these first few pages that describe and refer to various H.P. Lovecraftian novels. In fact, the entire book seems to cycle (most likely the same way Northcroft did) through depression, happiness, and various other emotions. By about page 50 Northcroft is mentioning some lighter works, and it was on page 87 that he worked himself up to mention the great early fantasy writers, C.S. Lewis, L. Frank Baum, Lewis Carroll, and J.R.R. Tolkien. Upon further analysis, I find that by page 12 he has written the following: My attempts to influence the Committee have been partially successful; in the absence of further evidence I must go on under the assumption that I have my own free will. This thought encourages me greatly. So it seems that his initial depression over his influence by or on the "Committee" wears off fairly quickly. Perhaps, then, he has some sort of mild mental condition? Further analysis will have to decide. >>>>>> Judgement: I'm not convinced about the timescale. We're told Northcroft influenced (or at any rate, that it's a plausible hypothesis that he influenced) Poe (1809-49); and that this late work predated Lovecraft (1890-1937) [which could mean Lovecraft's whole life, but could just refer to his works] by several decades. Yet C.S.Lewis wasn't born until 1898. It all seems very unlikely, though The Wizard has suggested that Northcroft could have used his supposed occult powers for clairvoyance. I'm also not sure about the emotions you are attributing to Northcroft: certainly depression is typically cyclical but the sort of image I have of him from previous authors could hardly include much 'happiness'. In any case, I don't have to decide about these. The rule contradicts 27:3 in a far more unambiguous way. (And I owe Peter an extra style point for catching you out, when he next submits a rule). Style comments: I have to deduct marks for placing Norcroft rather later chronologically than everyone else imagines, and for changing his mood so dramatically. You haven't really followed the style set out by previous rules. And again, the rule doesn't seem to restrict future rules much. ====== Rule 27:7 (Peter) Th-10-Nov-94 20:44 VALID (1.5 points) >>>>>> My hand trembles as I write this, in equal measure from rage and frustration. After a hearty repast I set out for the park for my customary evening stroll. I find it aids in digestion and relaxes me, clearing my mind of the day's concerns and allowing me to focus on other matters. And this night I had much to ponder, for the recently uncovered Northcroft manuscript was proving to be at once compelling and disturbing. In the past, Northcroft's interest in the occult seemed purely intellectual in nature. But page 9 of the manuscript reveals it to be far deeper than that, and prompted me to reflect on the meaning of his last novel. In personifying the personal demons which haunt us all, scholars believed Northcroft to tell a powerful allegory. In summoning these demons, bending them to his will and ultimately banishing them, the protagonist experiences a personal and spiritual triumph generally believed to be Northcroft's comment on the human condition. But suddenly I have cause to wonder if Northcroft intended Five Points, One Center to BE allegorical at all, or whether he was chronicling something with greater roots in reality. Of course, I give no credence to robed mystics and their blasphemous trappings, but this manuscript has touched something troubling inside me. Chilled by the brisk autumn wind, I returned home to discover the door ajar. It was with no small amount of trepidation that I ventured within, but all seemed normal. The foyer and parlour appeared untouched, and my valuables remained safe in my bedroom. It was then I turned my attention to the library. The place was a shambles. Books lay strewn everywhere, tables overturned, drawers scattered about. I rushed to my prized Gutenberg, relieved to find it resting safely in its glass case. Just then I heard a scuffling sound from behind, but as I turned about something struck me at the base of my skull and sent me sprawling to the carpet. I think I must have blacked out, I know not for how long, but when I regained by senses the library was empty. I immediately set about cataloging the room's contents and discovered, with a mixture of relief, puzzlement and a growing dread, that the only missing item was the copy of the Northcroft manuscript! Why someone should go to such trouble I couldn't fathom. It was not the original manuscript, so had little monetary value. The discovery of Northcroft's pages is known only to our own circle of colleagues, and I have spoken to nobody of my copy except in my previous letter to this circle. I am reluctant to make the obvious conclusion, since as we all possess our own copies I can see no motive for the theft. And, in truth, the loss of the manuscript concerns me far more than identity of the thief. Without my copy, I fear I am unable to further my analysis of the work except through such pieces as are revealed by you, my esteemed colleagues. Since I must rely on you, I hope you'll forgive me if I make of you a few reasonable requests which, I'm sure, you'll take to heart and treat as gospel. This incident has only heightened my growing sense of urgency that the manuscript be interpreted and understood. We must not slacken our pace, we must continue to work through these pages. To that end, each of you must be sure to discuss at least one page of the work in every letter. Since I am without my own copy with which to follow along, do quote the text to which you are referring in its entirety. A discontinuity in the discussion would complicate matters given my current situation, so I must insist that you consider the manuscript's pages in a linear, sequential fashion. Since the last page I was able to read was number 9, start with page 10 and work forward, page by page, from there. Finally, I urge you all for vigilance. This theft was obviously not a random occurrance. I counsel you to take precautions, to guard your own copy of the manuscript from a similar fate. And, if indeed one of you is responsible for this cowardly deed, I beseech you to return the manuscript so that I can participate more fully in this endeavor. >>>>>> Judgement: No problems that I can see. Style comments: Well done finding a natural way to make everyone work in order and quote a passage each time. I give you 1 point for that, but deduct half a point for mis-spelling the title of Northcroft's earlier novel (27:1 says he was English, which I think has to mean "of England" not "of the English language" in context). Then +1 I said I owed you. ====== Rule 27:8 (Storm) Th-10-Nov-94 21:44 VALID (0.5 points) >>>>>> Esteemed colleague, if this is a practical joke it is in very poor taste; and if it is not.... I am concerned for your state of mind. I have taken the precaution of depositing a copy of the Northcroft manuscript in a secure place, and, as requested, am enclosing my transcription of page 10. But I wish it on record that I am doing so only out of regard for your previous accomplisments, and not because I find your account of the loss of your copy plausible, reasonable or indeed even credible. - -------- Page 10 Chilled by the brisk autumn wind, I returned home to discover the door ajar! It was with no small amount of trepidation that I ventured within, but all seemed normal--the foyer and parlour appeared untouched, and my valuables remained safe in my bedroom-- It was then I turned my attention to the library: the place was a shambles! Books lay strewn everywhere, tables overturned, drawers scattered about! I rushed to my prized Gutenberg, relieved to find it resting safely in its glass case-- just then I heard a scuffling sound from behind, but as I turned about something struck me at the base of my skull and sent me sprawling to the carpet! I think I must have blacked out, I know not for how long, but when I regained my senses the library was empty... What could have been the motive? With their power over me, surely the Committee would not need to stoop to physical force to enforce their will? And yet, since no one else knew of my researches, who would have reason to make this craven attack? It is fortunate that I had secured this diary in such a way that my assailant, whomever he may have been, could not have found it! Or perhaps--perhaps this is a sign of the weakness I have been seeking! I can only conclude that, if this is indeed their work, at least one member of the Committee feels himself threatened by my work--I sense, in fact, that some action I have taken or contemplate taking might invalidate his well-thought-out schemes, threaten his place among his peers! And if so, dare I suppose that he must be an Englishman, or at the least a resident in this country, in order to have carried out this action? - ------ I will note that Northcroft, as a grammatician of the old school, would have been aware that the ellipsis is properly considered to be a sign of punctuation in and of itself, and not merely a catenation of "full-stop" or period marks, as we in these sloppier days are inclined to consider it. Also, since I am currently on sabbatical and away from my library, I would appreciate it very much if future annotations would include some discussion of the probable date, either internal (i.e. the ficticious dates of the journal entries) or external (the date of the actual manuscript). I would address this problem myself, but the appropriate references are not at hand. >>>>>> Judgement: Again, I don't see any problems with this. Style comments: A nice twist. But again I don't consider the restrictions carefully enough constructed. ====== Rule 27:9 (The Wizard) Fr-11-Nov-94 09:02 VALID (-0.5 points) >>>>>> Dear Peter Sarrett, and dear colleagues whom I copy this letter to. This is the strangest thing, and I have no ready explanation for this, but as I unpacked my things after a short trip to England I found not only my own copy of the Northcroft manuscript but also yours which you reported missing. I know for sure that it must be for it contains margin notes in your unmistakable handwriting. Is it possible that you might have sent it to me and forgot about it? I do not recall receiving it, but I have had some lapses of memory lately, working too hard on the manuscript I guess. However, I will of course return your copy immediately. My latest work on the manuscript, and the reason for my visit to England to consult the original manuscript, is that peculiar side 11 which mysteriously appears to have been written somewhat before the rest of the manuscript, I guess pre-1850 by comparing it to earlier facsimiles of his handwriting. It seems this must be part of his occult studies that he wanted to enclose in this work, for it contains of just a single unintelligible sentence repeated over and over. Yet this page strikes me in a very peculiar way, for even though the sentence is unintelligible, it seems clear that it is not code, but rather in an unknown language. But though I have no idea what the sentence means, nor what arcane language it is written in, it strikes me as inherently familiar, like a distant echo of something I myself might have written aeons ago: Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam Az'paq fhtagn k'taar pkrit mgwrei phaqtii kam I cannot write more at the current moment, for just now the headaches that have plagued me lately started again. More later. >>>>>> Judgement: Once again, no problems with this one that I can see. Style comments: Interesting textual criticism, but again not very restrictive. ====== Rule 27.10 (The Wizard) Fr-11-Nov-94 10:16 VALID (2 points) >>>>>> Dear colleagues, The headaches have worn off, for good I presume, as I feel better than in a long, long time! To Peter: I have finally recalled, you *did* send the manuscript to me, surely you must remember ... and if not, you can take my word for it: The parcel with your copy arrived in the mail, and sorry though I am for hearing about the burglary, you can rest assured that I had nothing to do with it, and that it was not connected to the manuscript at all - - - Also I must beg you all to remove and destroy the page 11 of the manuscript, it has truly no value, and should never appear in any edited version of this manuscript - further research into the archaic wordings of this page must prove unfruitful! However, I have great interest in keeping our discussion going so I will share my reading of page 12 with you, presumably written on November 11th 1854: Oh, the headaches!! The headaches !! And even worse, the realization that creeps in on me as I look down on these horrid pages before me ... in his hand, or my hand - I don't know which anymore - how can I tell when the styles seem so intertwined? I know only that I didn't know, none of us did, just exactly what we were doing, and now I will have to pay, and play a pawn in my own game - how can I stand it, how can I ever endure? And what hope for rescue remains for me? None, I am afraid! This will be but a cry for help in the midst of an evil vortex! And yet there will be more pages, more of his pages, to follow this one, I look at the diagrams on the next page and shudder, oh, when - and how - will it end? As you can all see, there is yet another shift in mood on this page, and a major shift in handwriting - and I think I have the clue to the reason for this, but I will not disclose my thoughts on this matter, not yet ... Maybe I will visit you all to discuss my thoughts in person, we'll see - anyhow, I see that I didn't sign my last letter, on account of the oncoming headaches I presume, however now I am glad to be able to sign this letter by the honorary title given me: Yours, The Wizard PS I see that the next page does contain certain diagrams and instructions, I must require, that whoever undertakes the deciphering of the next page takes the time to draw out these diagrams and follow through the instructions *exactly as stated* - there might be a lesson to be learned! >>>>>> Judgement: Again, I see no problems. Style points: Picks up on and develops 27:8 (and parts of 27:1) very well, including in subtle ways. Also applies a constraint. ====== Rule 27:11 (Vanyel) Fr-11-Nov-94 19:33 INVALID (-1.5 points) >>>>>> After previous unsuccessful attempts at interpretation I think I have come to a part which I understand. On page 13 I have found a number of diagrams which appear to designate a manner in which to "summon a member of the Committee". Odd, I wonder how he got those. Anyway, I believe I have deciphered the diagrams and the writings near them. I will first chronicle my decipherings, and only then will I follow the instructions therein. The diagrams, I'm afraid, are nearly impossible to transmit via this medium; I will do the best I can. FIRSTLY you must clear the area you are in of all object. Draw the following diagram on the floor in any medium; chalk works well: __ / X |__/ | | \ | \__X Align yourself so that it appears at this angle from you. Be certain that all lines are complete; a broken line could be distastrous. Mark the following designs around the sigil, at six evenly spaced points around the design, beginning directly in front of you. Ensure that each has its main point (that which is on top in this diagram) points directly toward the center of the circle. /\ |- - /\ |\ | |-| \___|\ Having completed that, you must then stand five paces back from the circle and chant the following words: Or Jastye Nal Eexwa Geesteh Fenga Rethvan Yelra Charst Ormjair Amee. Wait no less than 20 seconds, then repeat it. Following that, seat yourself crosslegged on the floor and think only of your goal. Odd... the bottom few lines of the page seem to be gone, as if removed. Oh well, I shall try the ritual anyway, to see what happens. One moment as I mark out the signs. Now I shall chant the Arcane chant. Odd, instead of anybody appearing, it merely teleported me into the little circle I had drawn, standing me up in the process. For a moment I couldn't break through the invisible barrier which surrounded me, but then I reached down and rubbed out part of the dry-erase marker I had marked on the floor. Successful? I don't know, but I'm certain that when the next person performs the ritual he will receive better results. For now, I'm sure that the other members of the Committee will continue to interpret and translate his work. >>>>>> Judgement: Still the same problem with 27:3. Style comments: - -1 for still not seeing the constraint in 27:3. I advise you not to post another rule until you've worked it out, because you're unlikely to satisfy that constraint by accident. And look at previous mail messages for hints. Also -0.5 for putting "center" in a book by an Englishman. ====== Rule 27:12 (Vanyel) Fr-11-Nov-94 21:14 VALID (-1 point) >>>>>> After previous unsuccessful attempts at interpretation I think I have come to a part which I understand. On page 13 I have found a number of diagrams which appear to designate a manner in which to "summon a member of the Committee". Odd, I wonder how he got those. Anyway, I believe I have deciphered the diagrams and the writings near them. I will first chronicle my decipherings, and only then will I follow the instructions therein. The diagrams, I'm afraid, are nearly impossible to transmit via this medium; I will do the best I can. - ----- FIRSTLY you must clear the area you are in of all object--Draw the following diagram on the floor in any medium; chalk works well: __ / X |__/ | | \ | \__X Align yourself so that it appears at this angle from you... Be certain that all lines are complete; a broken line could be distastrous! Mark the following designs around the sigil, at six evenly spaced points around the design, beginning directly in front of you, ensuring that each has its main point (that which is on top in this diagram) points directly toward the centre of the circle; without this precaution you might regret the consequences! /\ |- - /\ |\ | |-| \___|\ Having completed that, you must then stand five paces back from the circle and chant the following words: "Or Yanstye Nal Eexwa Geesteh Fenga Rethvan Yelra Charst Ormjair Amee!" Wait no less than 20 seconds, then repeat it, following which, you must seat yourself crosslegged on the floor and think only of your goal.... - ----- Odd... the bottom few lines of the page seem to be gone, as if removed. Oh well, I shall try the ritual anyway, to see what happens. One moment as I mark out the signs. Now I shall chant the Arcane chant. Odd, instead of anybody appearing, it merely teleported me into the little circle I had drawn, standing me up in the process. For a moment I couldn't break through the invisible barrier which surrounded me, but then I reached down and rubbed out part of the dry-erase marker I had marked on the floor. Successful? I don't know, but I'm certain that when the next person performs the ritual he will receive better results. For now, I'm sure that the other members of the Committee will continue to interpret and translate his work. >>>>>> Judgement: Got it at last! I don't invalidate for not discussing the date, because 27:8 didn't actually require that, only said it would be appreciated. Style comments: I do take style points away for upsetting Storm though. I like the many levels of interpretation, but you don't go as far with it as The Wizard did in 27:10. Also doesn't seem to restrict future rules much. ====== Rule 27:13 (Peter) Sa-12-Nov-94 19:43 VALID (1 point) >>>>>> I know not what sort of twisted game you lot are playing, but I begin to suspect this entire affair to be some sort of perverted joke coordinated among you all-- with myself in the role of hapless victim. Knowing my fierce dedication to Northcroft lore, you knew I'd be eager to suspend my disbelief at the preposterous unlikelihood of the existance of a hitherto-unknown manuscript. I can only assume you hoped my judgement would be too clouded by emotional attachment for me to recognize that I was being duped. And, in truth, you had me believing your fiction until this latest round of letters. Imagine my shock to learn that the burglarly of my library, the very experience I reported in my most recent letter, was echoed almost verbatim in the manuscript itself! This stretched the very limit of my credulity, and had my anxiety over the incident not lingered I know I would have seen through the ruse at that very moment. But then, to imply that I had staged the incident-- indeed, that the entire affair was merely a fiction I'd fabricated for my own amusement-- that was a truly ironic twisting of the facts. I find myself dismayed that you would think so little of me as to assume I'd believe that I'd somehow mail my copy of the manuscript and forget ever having done so. I am not yet so old that I cannot trust my memory, my dear colleagues, and I have no recollection of doing any such thing. An intruder (obviously a co-conspirator of yours) did break into my sanctum and strike me across the head. When I awoke, the manuscript was gone. I challenge any of you to feel the lump on my skull and say otherwise. But this latest business about chalk diagrams and incantations-- this was the final straw. Oh, what laughs you must have had cooking that one up. I imagine you saw me, good sense buried by excitement or fanaticism, marking up the floors with absurd illustrations. What a fool you'd make me out to be, sitting cross-legged and muttering gibberish, expecting something miraculous to happen. I'm pleased to be able to disappoint you. No, in this you went too far and finally lifted the veil from my jaundiced eyes. The utter absurdity was plain to me without giving those fool diagrams a second thought. This jig, as they say, is up. Your childish hoax is at an end. But never let it be said that I'm not a good sport. Since you obviously went to such great trouble to arrange this farce, it would be a shame to shut it down completely. If you wish to continue the joke, by all means, do so-- but let's make it a little more interesting and create a hoax within the hoax. As the manuscript continues, every page from now on should have exactly one falsehood. If you do, indeed, decide to continue. Of course, I can't honestly plead disappointment if you were to decide that the joke has run its course, in which case we'll get back to what we were discussing before this alleged manuscript was unearthed-- how each of Northcroft's eight novels were reworked by later authors into entirely new yet identifiably derivative works which became far better known than the Northcroft originals. >>>>>> Judgement: Again, I let a corrected copy of a rule be judged instead of the original. I won't do this after the first week, however. Peter is certainly not obliged to discuss any of the manuscript (the last sentence of 27:12 gets close, but doesn't demand that he analyses the MS. in every rule). Style comments: Several rules, including the one I have quoted already, suggest that work on the manuscript should progress, but I don't take any style points off from Peter for this because he successfully plays the part he has set himself within our group. In fact I think I'll give him 1. ====== Rule 27:14 (Gareth) Mo-14-Nov-94 12:34 VALID (-1 point) >>>>>> Esteemed colleagues, I am shocked! The accusation that this great endeavour is but a hoax has wounded me deeply. I give you all my solemn word that, to the best of my knowledge, this manuscript is genuine. If this is indeed a hoax, no one has been more successfully hoaxed than I have. And I certainly will not introduce falsehoods into the manuscript. Goodness knows, there are delusions and madnesses enough already! Anyway, there follows an extract from page 14 of the manuscript. I regret that I have no firm idea as to its date, but there is no clear reason why it should not have been written shortly after the dated page 12; that is, in late 1854. - --- extract begins --- I believe, truly I believe, that my attempt to obstruct the Committee's evil activities by spreading confusion and dissent is succeeding: that they are occupying their time in infighting and argument, rather than in persecuting me: that I am gaining ground! There can be no other explanation for the recent apparent decline in their influence on my life; unless, that is, ... but no! I shall not even think of that possibility ... But now, how am I to proceed? How am I to obstruct them further? How am I to confuse them so, that they become at last wholly occupied with their own bitter disputes and have no time for me? I think I have an idea; perhaps a great idea: I think I can turn that frivolity, that levity (how it tortures me! the way they play with my life as if it were a child's toy, to be worn out and then discarded!) to good purpose... What I must do is to ensure that they become so obsessed with their games, the foolish restrictions that they so enjoy placing upon themselves and upon each other (why? I do not know), that they simply have no time left for persecuting me -- If I can do this, I shall have won -- And to this end I shall exert all my powers to the utmost! - --- extract ends --- It is indeed sad to see Northcroft's further decline into madness and monomania. (I am now entirely persuaded that this is not intended, except perhaps as a deception, to be a novel. It really is a frank setting-out of Northcroft's experience and his state of mind.) As the leader of this project, I request that every portion of deciphered manuscript from now on be accompanied by a description of the paper (or other material) on which it was written, and of the implement apparently used to write it. -- Surely, no author ever took greater delight in the multiplicity of writing equipment than did Northcroft; and no author was ever less consistent from day to day in choice of materials! And this manuscript is in this regard the worst I have ever seen. It would appear that Northcroft simply grabbed whatever was handy; and in his remarkable study, that might have been almost anything! Why this requirement? I don't really know; it just seems like a good idea. Anyway, I am leading this project, and if you don't like it you can always leave. -- It is just as well I made those copies I sent you with a colour photocopier. ... Oh, yes. This extract was written in a very dark, heavy black ink, on the back of a large envelope. (Yes, really.) My guess is that it was written with one of Northcroft's notorious hand-cut quill pens. And I have just noticed, in pencil a short way underneath the portion I just quoted, the words: "I believe I am succeeding already!". And, I am glad to note, a date: November 14th, 1854. >>>>>> Judgement: Re 27:13: Gareth says that he won't introduce any falsehoods, but there might already be some there. In any case I'm not sure whether he's required to quote a passage with falsehoods: I shall discuss this later if needs be. Style comments: What a strange requirement. And how are other members meant to know what sort of paper it was written on if they've only got a photocopy? ====== Rule 27:15 (Storm) Mo-14-Nov-94 21:40 INVALID (1 point) >>>>>> Dear Sirs, I found this note in Dr. Kuhner's office, all addressed and ready to send; I'm sure she meant to send it off before leaving, but it was tucked a bit under some other papers and she must have missed it. I've taken it on myself to mail it to you, since Dr. Kuhner left yesterday morning and I haven't been able to get in touch with her. I wonder, by the way, if any of you might know where she's gotten to? Yours truly, Sandy Mariner UCB Tech Support - -- Despite all the accusations and counter-accusations that are flying around, I remain convinced that this manuscript is actually Northcroft's, at least in part. I can neither understand why my colleagues would go to such lengths to perpetuate a hoax, nor believe that they could so convincingly imitate the trademark style which even Lovecraft and Lindsay could only grope towards. Page 15: on onion-skin paper with a London watermark, written in dark brown ink, dated (apparently in pencil) Nov. 16, 1854 As I turn over past leaves of this journal, I am no longer certain whether I have written them all... A gnawing doubt infests my soul-- that at times my thoughts are no longer my own, and the Committee rules not only my actions but the very operations of my mind! Or perhaps they intend, have always intended, to drive me mad: as, I begin to understand, they are themselves insane, trapped in a maze of self-created and yet inextricable regulations, bound up in a game whose origins and purpose they themselves only dimly apprehend... At times it seems there is another here, a presence close as my skin and yet incommunicate, intangible--and do you, shadow self, also set pen to paper? I will set you a test: on knowledge of my own works, for who shall know them as well as I? As epilogue to each page I will set a quotation from my work: as prologue to each, the identification and following phrase: I shall catch you out, shadow, and your works will perish by the flame, leaving mine alone! "Then, turning quickly, she saw what had come up behind her in the empty shadows of the" - -- Given Northcroft's obsessive thoroughness, it is no surprise to me that he has in fact followed his self-imposed stricture throughout the journal. Much more exciting, however, is the fact that the attributions make mention of three *as yet unheard of* Northcroft works! I hope to show under separate cover that one of these must be the often-discussed but never proven Northcroftian influence on Lindsay's _A Voyage to Arcturus_. It must wait, however, until I return from my brief visit to Norway. Dr. Mary K. Kuhner University of Washington >>>>>> Judgement: I'm afraid I have to fail this on a technicality. Storm says that Northcroft obeyed his rule "throughout the journal"; but what about the pages before page 15? We know that they didn't follow the rule (at least, we have pages 10-14 in their entirety). Yes, I know what it means, but I don't think that's ehat it says. Compare this with the far more carful phrasing of 27:3: "The rest of the manuscript follows the peculiar message thus revealed". I hope that Storm will be able to submit another rule before her new deadline of tomorrow evening GMT. Style comments: I still give positive style points because I like the way that Northcroft's other works are integrated into the plot. ====== Rule 27:16 (Ronald) Mo-14-Nov-94 16:37 VALID (1.5 points) >>>>>> Page 15 is relatively easy to read, but I wonder if it is not a fake. I have seen the original, and it seems to have been written in ballpoint, and on the back of an advertisement for .... pizzas! Yet the page is dated in the year 1854, albeit with a curious error. If the page is not a fake, then the only alternative is that we *believe* what Northcroft writes: that he actually did travel to the future, and that he hit Peter over the head. I will doubly lock my door tonight. - ----Page 15:----- 't Is done... But still I suffer: why does revenge not feel sweet as it should? Ah, the agony of it all! But let me tell -if only to feel better this way- how I chanted the incantations again and again, until (At last!) they worked: how I arrived in the house of one of the Committee's Members, after having travelled more than a century; how he surprised me (and I surprised him!) before I found my beloved diary... Because such was my plan: steal back my own diary from the hands of these torturers! Alas, I didn't found it; but I had my reward, my revenge, my riposte, at least on one of Them! Now they shall fear me! Ezra Q Northcroft! Especially as I shall strike again! Tomorrow I shall write about that!!! 31/11/1854 - ----- >>>>>> Judgement: Note that although this rule was sent before 27:15, it arrived later owing to a delay between Switzwerland and Norway (in Germany, maybe??). Therefore I judge it later. Of course, had 27:15 been valid, I would have had the option of declaring this rule unsuccessful. As it is, there doesn't seem to be any problem with it. Style comments: I think this rule has some cute features. Writing on pizza adverts, and time travel... ====== Rule 27:17 (Ronald) Tu-15-11-94 09:21 INVALID (-0.5 points) >>>>>> Page 16 is relatively easy to read, but I wonder if it is not a fake. I have seen the original, and it seems to have been written in ballpoint, and on the back of an advertisement for .... pizzas! Yet the page is dated in the year 1854, albeit with a curious error. Indeed Northcroft makes good his promise of page 15 to start the page with a reference and a identification sentence, and finish it with a quotation from his works. (Well, I assume it's from his works anyway. I haven't seen this passage before.) If the page is not a fake, then the only alternative is that we *believe* what Northcroft writes: that he actually did travel to the future, and that he hit Peter over the head. I will doubly lock my door tonight. - ----Page 16:----- "Arcturian verses", Gothic Sonnet 12 I shall catch you out, shadow, and your works will perish by the flame, leaving mine alone! 't Is done... But still I suffer: why does revenge not feel sweet as it should? Ah, the agony of it all! But let me tell -if only to feel better this way- how I chanted the incantations again and again, until (At last!) they worked: how I arrived in the house of one of the Committee's Members, after having travelled more than a century; how he surprised me (and I surprised him!) before I found my beloved diary... Because such was my plan: steal back my own diary from the hands of these torturers! Alas, I didn't found it; but I had my reward, my revenge, my riposte, at least on one of Them! Now they shall fear me! Ezra Q Northcroft! Especially as I shall strike again! Tomorrow I shall write about that!!! 31/11/1854 Oh, stars above Oh, Arcturus red as blood - ----- >>>>>> Judgement: Whoops! Assumed 27:15 was valid, and is invalid because the promise on page 15 you refer to does not actually exist. I can't mark a rule unsuccessful for wrongly pre-empting my judgement. Style comments: I deduct half a point for misunderstanding 27:15: when it refers to "following phrase" it means "phrase following the one quoted on each occasion". ====== Rule 27:18 (Storm) We-16-Nov-94 00:34 VALID (-1 point) >>>>>> Dear Colleagues, I am writing to you from Norway, though at the moment my trip seems somewhat futile. The excerpts from "p. 15" must surely be an interpolation by some later and careless owner of the manuscript: not only are the media anachronistic and the date impossible, but the phrase "Alas, I didn't found it" is so uncharacteristic of Northcroft's precise (if flamboyant) writing style that I cannot accept claims of his authorship. It is odd, however, that p.16 is also dated to the nonexistant November 31, 1854, but in very Northcroftian form: black ink, probably from a hand-cut quill pen, on (as nearly as I can determine from the photocopy) good quality vellum. I have enclosed in underscores words which were underlined in the original. The word "Ia" bears a diacretical mark which, unfortunately, this medium does not allow me to reproduce. - ----- It is maddening: for a few moments I seemed to have escaped my fate, but it encloses me again, draws me inexorably back into captivity! I have struck my blow, a free man asserting his freedom--or perhaps-- Perhaps the Committee is divided within itself, and my most free-seeming actions only their covert violence against each other! Tonight the silent whispers enjoin on me that only by at once and forever casting off this mortal form can I make my escape for more than a brief instant... No! I will not kill myself--I cannot be made to kill myself! Ia! There are--how many? Too many of them, more than my art can encompass, though strangely it seems to me that daily there are fewer, as if their silent wars count casualties--and in this is my hope, that when all but one has been eliminated, he will then be within my power, unaided by his fellows! Daily I shall tally in my diary the count of my tormentors, and when that count has reached Unity I shall strike! Tonight I score them as Five Points (oh, how shallow now seem my earlier conceits of literature, and yet there is some comfort in the remembrance of the past) who shall and must, in the end, be One and thus and so it shall No! I will not listen! - -- The page breaks off abruptly with a large flourish of the pen. Perusing the next dozen pages, I am chilled to see the count slowly dwindle, entry by entry. Novel or autobiography or hoax, whichever it may be, there is something gripping about this descent into the depths of paranoid delusion. More later: I hope to visit a colleague tonight, though unfortunately he has not yet returned my calls. One more try-- Dr. M. K. Kuhner UW >>>>>> Judgement: Although there are currently six members who have submitted a rule in this round (and still time for some more to join!) this does not contradict North- croft's assertion that his tormentors are five. He could have miscounted, or it could still be that they have nothing to do with our committee. Style comments: Nevertheless, I think it tends to break the link between Northcroft's committee and ours (although picking up on his earlier book "Five Points, One Center"). Also there appears to be a word missing at the end of the first paragraph of the excerpt, which I would mind less if Storm hadn't emphasised Northcroft's precise writing form. However, I do think that there is a very clever idea underlying this rule. ====== Rule 27:19 (The Wizard) We-16-Nov-94 12:55 INVALID (1.5 points) >>>>>> Dear Members of this Forum, I am Dr. Olaf Svendsen, I work at Oslo Central Hospital, psychiatric ward. I am sorry to tell you all that your esteemed colleague Dr Kuhner passed away at our premises last night. I am not at liberty to divulge the exact nature of her death, but I enclose a manuscript she left behind, which was clearly intended for this forum. Note, though, that according to my professional judgement, the doctor was not in a stable mental state when she wrote the document Dr. Svendsen Enclosed document: Free, but at too great a cost, can I really live on bearing this hideous memory with me, and knowing the fate bestoved upon poor, poor dr. Kuhner! "No!" my entire soul screams, but yet I must at least live to tell, to tell what monster we have let back into this world. It all started a few days ago, when I went to bed with a tearing headache. When I woke up I found myself in 19th century England, in Northcrofts body, in his house. He had fooled me into chanting an unholy ritual that must have switched our minds. And worse still, in my place, as a committee member, he had a lot of control over whatever I could write, so except for a few moments where I was able to bring my own thoughts to paper, I had to write down his hideous thoughts. Yet this horror is nothing to the other horror, when I again found myself back in my beloved Norway, *in dr Kuhner's body*. I can see that she came here to visit me, little did she know that it was Northcroft himself she actually saw. Now he has sentenced her to the same punishment I got, trapped in a foreign time in a foreign body, with his thoughts ringing through her head, oh god have mercy on us poor souls! I beg you all, for I have a feeling that I won't be around much longer (he is wearing us down, me, Mary, God knows what fate will be bestowed upon Vanyel for going through that ritual, Peter escaped just barely), that in the future you must *all* in *every* contribution search the manuscript for hints to how you might help Mary escape, and how Northcroft can be stopped - and report your findings. Also you must keep a lookout for him, remember, he looks just like me. It will be necessary that each contribution also makes some attempt to locate his whereabouts. Yours, The Wizard (aw, that name) >>>>>> Judgement: Peter says in 27:7 "each of you must be sure to discuss at least one page of the work in every letter." The Wizard's letter fails to do so. Style comments: Nevertheless, this rule has some style, and would have introduced a new twist. ====== Rule 27:20 (Peter) Fr-18-Nov-94 00:18 VALID (1 point) >>>>>> Esteemed colleagues, Your dedication to this elaborate fabrication is puzzling. If this scheme was, as I assumed, concocted for my benefit, surely its continuance now that I have seen through the illusion is a pointless endeavor. Perhaps you yet seek to convince me of the manuscript's authenticity, but you know me too well to believe that I would so soon suspend my disbelief a second time. However I read in your letters a sense of conviction which carries the ring of truth-- the truth, at least, as you see it. As your denials and testimonials have arrived on my doorstep, I've come to realize my earlier assumption was not entirely accurate. I still believe the manuscript is a hoax, intended to fool me. But not ONLY me. It is obvious now that the joke was intended for all of us. It was quite ingeniously done. The manuscript was carefully constructed to push all the right buttons for each of us, appealing to our individual obsessions and fascinations: my passion for Northcroft and ciphers, Vanyel's interest in the occult, Gareth's sideline occupation of handwriting analysis and collection of ephemera, the Wizard's research into personality disorders, Ronald's peculiar all-pizza diet and habit of mentioning pizza in every letter, Storm's penchant for travel and fondess for creative punctuation... it's all there. And each of us, caught up in the corner painstakingly crafted for us, never saw the improbable perfection of the whole. My dear colleagues, we've been had. I hope this much is clear to you now. I truly apologize for accusing you of perpetrating this hoax, but therein lies the beauty of its construction. Once of us was bound to catch on before the rest and inevitably think it was he at whom the joke was targeted. Naturally, that person would accuse the others, and the resultant indignation and infighting would only add to the payoff. All of which leads to the logical question: if none of us orchestrated this, who did? The manuscript was obviously constructed with great care and at a considerable expense in time and effort. Anyone who would go to such lengths would almost certainly want us to know his or her genius. I am certain, therefore, that the manuscript itself contains clues to the scoundrel's identity if we can only locate them. Alas, I am still without a copy of the manuscript despite the Wizard's claim of posting one to me. This only reinforces my conviction that the loss of my manuscript was not a random occurrance, but a carefully selected element in the pupper master's grand scheme. Knowing my penchant for ciphers, codes and puzzles, it was undoubtedly imperative to his scheme that the manuscript and I be parted so that the hoax might continue a while longer. So I must now entrust the hunt to you. Strive to determine this miscreant's identity. I fear that somehow the fiend has gained access to our normal correspondence, and we don't want to tip our hand. So, continue your normal analysis of the manuscript. But, just as this was delivered via special courier, whenever you send your manuscript analysis send also (under separate cover) at least one clue to the true author's identity which you've found in the manuscript. I wouldn't put it past this person to have planted red herrings as well, so take the time to verify the clue and substantiate its validity to us. By pooling our resources, perhaps we can identify the trickster and turn the tables. The last laugh will yet be our own. >>>>>> Judgement: Peter does not have to discuss any of the manuscript (see judgement to 27:13). He is, however sailing very close to the wind in claiming that the manuscript is definitely a hoax. There are several rules that suggest the opposite very strongly. However, I think in the context of this round and of the fantasy world being built it is not contradictory. Style comments: +1.5 for the new restrictions, but -0.5 for the aforementioned close sailing. Judge's note: I shall interpret 'whenever you send ... send also (under separate cover) ...' to mean, 'send ... and ... in two e-mails posted less than half an hour apart'. The time of the rule will be the mean time of posting of the two mails. I don't think I'm giving away anything you wouldn't have realised by yourselves. ====== Rule 27:21 (Ronald) Fr-18-Nov-94 19:08 INVALID (1 point) >>>>>> Dear friends, I realise that Peter is convinced that somebody is pulling our legs, but I am not. Besides, I am having so much fun in writing a computer program capable of reading the handwriting (Northcroft's or not) of the manuscript, that I will not stop yet. Allow me to take another bit of my pizza, chili and beef, this time, my own invention. The program is not quite debugged. For some reason I don't understand it works better on pages where Northcroft quotes parts from his own novels. Curiously, this is the case on page 17 and the dozen pages that follow. The original of page 17, as Gareth assured me, was written in red ink (blood?) on a torn out page of a Bible. A page from the Apocalypse, very appropriate. I think the year of writing must still be 1854, although it is not given. Here is the text: - ---- First of December One of them died today.... It wasn't by my own hands but, by Jove, does it matter? I am, no doubt, destined for Hell in any case! He suffocated, blew out his last breath, by the very same method, I described in my novel `A woman Possessed': "For a second her mind became clear: she took the pillow placed it slowly, carefully, almost lovely on the Wizard's face" Are my chances turning? There are now four of them left (not counting him who is me).... - ---- Curiously, Northcroft says that there are four members left in the committee, *not counting himself*. I am sure, that any other but me, can and will give an explanation. I just don't understand it. <<<<<< Page 18 contains only one sentence, which my program recognized as a quote from `The Onyx Affair'. No date was mentioned, but as the next page is dated 5/12/1854, this entry (handpainted on silk!) is probably from the beginning of December too. - ----- "He who writes riddles, will be the chosen one" The Observer observed, p. 245 - ----- If this is one of the hints, that Peter talked about, than it excludes Storm, I guess. She's quite a lady and her writings usually don't hold enigmas for me. Storm, please do remember that you owe me a pizza for giving you an alibi like that! >>>>>> Judgement: 27:18 says: "Perusing the next dozen pages, I am chilled to see the count slowly dwindle, entry by entry." I understand this to mean that the count must decrease in EVERY entry. Although it decreases in the first entry you quote, it does not decrease in the second. I would have accepted the possibility that page 18 is only part of a longer entry, but you specifically distinguish this entry from the ones on the previous and next pages. Style comments: +1 for being up to the pizza challenge. ====== Rule 27:22 (Vanyel) Fr-18-Nov-94 07:39 INVALID (-1 point) >>>>>> In skimming through the copy I have of the manuscript, I have noticed that I suddenly receive an impression of (for example) a vividly detailed image of the death of a person. After several similar disconcerting incidents, I decided to see if the computer I own would be able to help. I scanned in a number of pages, and the computer analyzed for patterns, to no avail. Still disturbed, I brought the copy to a psychic friend of mine (a real psi-powered person, not some fly-by-night conman). She looked at it and turned white. "Where did you get this?" she asked. I explained that a committee I was involved with was analyzing it. She then proceeded to explain to me the exact implications of it: the original book, a compilation of miscellaneous diary pages, had been psi-trapped. Even in the photocopy there can be found traces of this, and when reading the very words we are in danger from this insidious trap. It seems that, when certain sections are read, the reader is in danger of being "locked in" to the mind of the writer. Fortunately, merely skimming I only saw through the eyes of the writer. My psychic friend then threw out shielding for herself and me, and we looked it over together. Thus I must warn you all: without special shielding, reading certain pages may be dangerous. Especially but not exclusively the following pages seem trapped: 20, 28, 38, 41, 68, 78, and 84. What the significance of these numbers is, I do not know. But reading further, I find a clue; on page 17 I found the following excerpt: - -- Haha! I have finally, at long last, found a way of preventing the insidious committee from invading my presence! I have performed the most secret ritual of the ancients on my book--if the Committee continues, I shall have them in my power! I shall quote an excerpt of this ritual, translated from the original Egyptian: "Take then, that you might lock the walker, and cast this on your most sacred of writings!" The walker, of course, refers to those who walked past the hieroglyphic histories, and the writings were actually the carving on the wall--will such a spell work on a paper manuscript? It is worth a try! I shall recite this ritual over every page which gives most intimate details of my life... The Committee shall regret the fateful day it tried to tangle with me! - -- He continues his babbling, it seems, but it is blurred severely. This might be explained by the fact that this was written on what looks like a napkin, in thick ink, as from a broken quill. Something has been spilled on this page, it seems, which caused the blurring. This new development causes me great concern--none of us are safe. I have noted only the pages which are strong enough to be noticed through both the photocopy *and* psi-shielding, so there are presumably places which are still dangerous that I have not noticed. As an added precaution, I can only tell you that in future readings of the manuscript you must transcribe in some way the ward you have used; in this way can we all be sure that you have protected yourself from invasion by Northcroft and verify that you are still yourself. There are many methods of warding; most boil down to a simple psychic shielding, and poems, chants, body movements, and so forth, are merely mnemonic to keep yourself remembering the proper psychic manipulations, but nevertheless I must require that each of you transcribe your own method each time. You must, of course, vary the warding each time, as Northcroft will be able to catch on and counter-ward it for the next time. >>>>>> Judgement: Does not consist of the two mails demanded by 27:20, or give a clue to the true identity of the author. I can't see any reason to suppose that Vanyel had not received Peter's rule at the time he posted this one, as Peter's rule doesn't seem to have been delayed anywhere and there was over 8 hours between them. Style comments: Contains a good idea, but seems to ignore 27:8 and 27:18 as well. ====== - -- Stephen R. E. Turner Stochastic Networks Group, Statistical Laboratory, University of Cambridge e-mail: sret1@cam.ac.uk WWW: http://www.statslab.cam.ac.uk/~sret1/home.html "Never go to sea with two chronometers; take one or three." (Anon.)