From peter@wolfe.netMon Aug 21 20:37:04 1995
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 09:12:44 -0700
From: Peter Sarrett <peter@wolfe.net>
To: frc@nvg.unit.no
Subject: Round 41 ends


Round 41: ASCII ART

Judge: Peter
Wizard: Jeremy

Final Standings
---------------
Wizard (Jeremy):	5.0 points (Wizard)
Bruce:			2.0 points
Storm:			0.75 points
Dug:			0.5 points
Vanyel:			0.25 points
Greg:		       -2.5 points (Winner and Judge for next round)

Proposal 41:A: To overturn the ruling on 41:5, rendering it VALID.
FAILED 3:1 against.
FOR: Vanyel
AGAINST: Jeremy, Storm, Gareth

Rules
-----

Rule 41:1     Dug             VALID     0 points
---

     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
    <OJ's Bronco gets caught in a snow storm>

  Every valid rule in Round 41 will contain a 40x20 character frame like the
one you see above.  The frame and the characters within will constitute the
one and only piece of ASCII art work for that rule.

----
Validity: It's the first rule.  You'd have to go pretty far out of your way
to blow it.  Although it HAS been done...

Style: Setting limits is a fine idea, but any positive merit was cancelled
out by the title of your artwork.  OJ has long since stopped being stylish.
As for the blank page concept, the Joker did it better in the old Batman
series with his Death of a Bat canvas, which infused more emotion into the
work than your uninspired piece, with it's heavy-handed overuse of the space
bar, demonstrates.

=====

Rule 41:2     Dug          VALID      0.75 points
---

     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                   .                  -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
        <When minimalism meets pointilism>

  The ASCII art in each valid rule (except the first, of course) will build
upon the ASCII art from the previous valid rule.
  Each piece of ASCII art will be titled.
---
Validity: No problems.

Style: The artist, like a child emerging from its mother's womb, seems to be
struggling to break free of his dependency on the space bar.  His first
steps are tentative, and one can only hope he will gain the confidence to
grapple with grander forms in future works.  Apparently, the artist has come
to grips with neither symmetry nor asymmetry, choosing instead a middle
ground guaranteed to excite few and offend none.  His title shows a keen
sense of the ironic, and the restraint demonstrated (especially considering
the "building" required in the future) is commendable.

=====

Rule 41:3       Vanyel         INVALID       1.25 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                 _____                *
     *                `.   .'               *
     -                  `.'                 -
     *                 .' `.                *
     *                '_____`               *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
                     <Time>

In the interest of equal time, no author shall build on eir own art.
---
Validity: I gave this some thought, since "shall" can be read to imply
future, but in the end I decided that the rules in an FRC round are meant to
be considered as a set.  There is no inherent concept of past or future
unless a rule explicity says something like "all future rules."  Since Dug
built on his own art in 41:2, this rule is not consistent with other rules
and is thus INVALID.

Style: The artist focuses on a single iconic image of time, and a fairly
typical one at that.  At first glance, one wonders what he's trying to say
here that's new.  Is this canvas, in essence, a waste of time?  Is that it's
point?  But on closer inspection, one sees that there is no sand in this
hourglass.  The vessel of time is empty.  It has no substance, no meaning.
If the canvas were turned upside-down, the hourglass would remain in
equilibrium.  The artist is stating that time is an empty concept, a notion
which has been rejected as INVALID by the general public.
     The rule itself, however, was a nice response to Dug's rapid-fire
opening, and I like that Vanyel tied in the subject of the rule to the 
artwork.

=====

Rule 41:4       Dug             VALID   -1.5 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                                      *
     -                   .                  -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
             <Flea receives windfall>

  The flea is fortunate, but we artists must _earn_ our respect.  To wit:

  The ASCII artwork in any valid rule (excepting 41:1, of course) shall
differ from the ASCII artwork in the previously valid rule by only N
characters, where N is determined by the following formula:

  N = (1 + the number of style points earned by the artist, i.e. player, to
that point in Round 41, rounded to the nearest integer) or 1, whichever is
greater
---
Validity: Consistent with previous rules.

Style: The artist moves from the abstract to the concrete, pandering to the
inanity of the masses.  The use of the dollar sign and the obvious parallel
of the flea's financial windfall and the monetary rewards the artist hopes
to receive for selling out to the vagaries of the marketplace underscores
his shift in perspective.  This is the type of pedestrian work which one
expects in a Motel 6, not an illustrious forum such as ours.  The author
also incorporates an overly complicated way of bringing style points into
the matter, with the "+1" portion being an obvious hack.

=====

Rule 41:5       Vanyel          INVALID           -1.0 point
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                  <                   *
     -                   .                  -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
             <The surprised gambler>

In the future, to keep the critics on their toes, every artist must post
a piece of art which is varied by at least 4 characters from eir most
recently posted artwork that was part of a valid rule.  Unless, of
course, e has not yet posted a valid rule--such newcomers needn't worry
about variance from eir own work, merely that of others.
---
Validity: 41:4 describes the number of characters by which consecutive
artworks must differ.  Vanyel had 1.25 style points when he posted this
rule.  According to 41:4, his art had to differ by 2 characters.  It only
differs by 1.

Style: Hackneyed imagery: the gambler, with dollar signs for pupils, has
eyes for nothing but money; the line above his head indicating surprise.
While the Museum of Modern Art may find this work a fine example of
cartoonist symbolism, it seems ill suited to our forum.  We've already 
had a rule restricting the number of characters you can add.  This one 
seems to be an attempt to stop Dug from posting another rule unless 
someone other than he or Vanyel did so.  Had Vanyel counted correctly, it 
might have worked. 

=====

Rule 41:6       The Wizard (Jeremy)          VALID           -2 points
---

     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                                      *
     -                  :.                  -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
             <Ugly Duckling Unmasked>

Abstract expressionism is dead - art does convey
meaning understandable to ALL! 

ASCII art must be titled to reveal one aspect of
the artist's understanding of his/her Work.
---
Validity: Everything looks good.

Style: This piece taunts the viewer, challenging him to divine the artist's
meaning from the seemingly incongruous title.  One can't help but wonder if
the ugly duckling is depicted in the artist's work, or if the ugliness being
unmasked is in the viewer himself.  The undercurrent of contempt for the
viewing public is palpable.  To this, the artist adds a rule which 
creates a vague and all but unenforcable requirement.  While abstract 
expressionism may be fine in art, it fares less well in the FRC.  It is 
tempting to invalidate it (did the title of 41:1 demonstrate 
understanding?  I don't think so, but who am I to say?), but this rule is 
so loose I can't see that it makes much difference one way or the other.

=====

Rule 41:7       The Wizard (Jeremy)          INVALID         3 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                                      *
     -                  :.                  -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****


What I had intended (artistically) in "Ugly Duckling Unmasked" was for
the viewer to see the scene as a pond viewed from above.  The three
ducklings are swimming in formation with one space left empty (that
recently evacuated by the shunned "ugly" duckling).  Trailing forlornly
behind, the Ugly Duckling is revealed in isolation to be the beautiful
swan.  The ducklings view the swan's size as grotesque, we observe
grand lines; they see unnatural contortions of form, we see the graceful
S-curve of the neck ($).

I have submitted (naiively) to the critic, hoping for stylistic affirmation.
Such a fool I have been!  In his haughty condescention he concludes that
where he lacks the wit to percieve the artist's design there must have
been none.  What hope is there for the true artist in this totalitarian
committee - when one holds absolute power over style?

There is only one true path out of this confining wilderness: absolute
rejection of accepted forms, nullification as ART!  Vive la revolution!
Death to the Critic!

  \\                                               ///
 \\\\                                           //// /
   \\\\****|**                                 /////
     *\\\\    **|****                        //// /
     * \\ \\         |****|*              //// ///***
     *    \\\\\             ***|***       /////     *
     *      \\\\                   *|***/////       *
     -        \\\\\                  //////         *
     *          \ \\                /// ///         -
     *          \\\ \\           ///////  |         *
     *            \\\\\\\        /////    |         *
     *            || \\\\ \    /////      |         *
     -            UU    \ \\X///// /      U         *
     *                  \\ XX\X///                  -
     *                   //XXXX\/                   *
     *                   ////XX\ \\                 *
     *                 /////  \\\ \\                *
     -              / ////    | \\\\ \              *
     *            /////       U    \\\\             -
     *          //// /                \\\\          *
     *         //////                    \\\\       *
     *       ///// /|****|****|****|****|**\\\\     *
     ****| ///// //                         \\\\\   * 
         ////  / ||                           \\ \\**
       ///  //   U|                             \\\\\
      / ////      U                              \\\\\
---
Validity: Obviously, this rule was never intended to be valid.  It
flagrantly violates at least 2 rules.

Style: It is ever the role of the critic to probe, to prod, to urge the
artist to push the boundaries of his imagination and explore new horizons
with his work.  It appears I've struck a nerve with Jeremy, and in
responding he has plumbed new reserves of vigor and expression, breaking
through the tired mode typical of so many artists today and finally finding
a style of his own.  The bold strokes of this canvas, the in-your-face
attitude that screams, "Look at me!  I defy your authority!  I deny your
interpretations!  I am what I am-- deal with it!"  It is a shame that rules
of this forum prevent Jeremy's piece from taking the place of honor it so
deserves, but perhaps its mere existence will create changes in the
establishment.
        I also laughed my butt off.

=====

Rule 41:8       Dug             VALID           1.25 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.                  -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
          <SuperLine Vanquishes DotFace>

  "The critic has to educate the public, the artist has to educate the
critic."  -- Oscar Wilde

  Our artist community must unite!  Assailed by politicians who want to cut
our funding and gag our expression, by judges who want to deny our style, we
artists must support each other and our work.

  "Ugly Duckling Unmasked," for instance, is a brilliant display of
post-modern ASCIIsm.  Jeremy has taken the set form of previous rules 
from a new perspective, showing us that ASCII can be accessible from any 
direction.  Critics have cautioned that the ugliness is the viewer, but 
such cynicism ignores the obvious result of unmasking ugliness:  
revealing beauty.  A newcomer to the ASCII art scene, Jeremy has breathed 
fresh life into this venerable art form, and we should be thankful that 
he shares our round.

  Considering the extra-rule tension in Round 41, I think it fitting that
all future valid rules provide critical _praise_ of the art and artist from
the preceding valid rule.
---
Validity: No problems I can see.

Style: Dug's emerging style, while reminiscent of Warhol and Lichtenstein,
is nevertheless acquiring a character more uniquely his own.  Appropriating
what is perhaps the most recognized scene in comic book history, Dug reduces
it to its bare essence and makes us reexamine it with a fresh perspective.
And although something undefinable is lost in the transition, the piece
offers the promise of what Dug may yet grow into as an artist.
        I was wondering when someone would start incorporating my "critic"
comments into the round.  Jeremy was the first, but his was merely a
response.  Here Dug acts on the critiques to affect the round, although 
in a fairly non-restrictive way.  I also like the title of his piece.

=====

Rule 41:9       Storm           VALID           0.75 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.                  -
     *                   |                  *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
           <In One Ear And Out The Other>

  I am almost embarrassed to put forward a work which owes such a large
debt to the pioneering work of Dug, but I cannot help observe that the 
intensity of his vision has been fettered by the remnants of the Comic
Code--and therefore I see myself more as a restorer than an originator,
restoring his seminal image of Superline to the free, albeit gory,
conception which he must surely have intended.

  Each future rule must, in the spirit of solidarity, indicate some way
in which it violates commonly accepted codes:  here, of course, the
graphic (some might even say disturbing) portrayal of violence.
---
Validity: No problems.

Style: This newcomer is clearly a student of Dug's work, but here the
student outstrips the teacher.  Her interpretation of the Superline scene
comments on the violence of our times and raises disturbing questions about
the wholesomeness of Superline, a national and cultural icon.  Making us
think, forcing us to reevaluate the world around us-- that's what art is
about.  I eagerly await Storm's next piece.
        A clever expansion on Dug's artistic theme, but hampered by a rule
which, like Jeremy's last valid one, will be difficult to catch someone on
(unless no attempt whatsoever is made to satisfy it).

=====

Rule 41:10      Bruce           VALID           0.5 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.)                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
                <Ignorance is Bliss>

Storm, as always, has shrouded her brilliance in overmodest denial of 
her creative abilities. However, to lower her work to the level of the 
trite work of the comic pages is too much. <In One Ear...> has captured 
a larger threat and truth of our society, which is far beyond the reach 
of the paint-by-numbers work which preceded it. The ennui! The horror!

My work is only a comment on a small facet of the human condition, 
which proves the lie of those who would "grin and bear it".

Because the essence of art and expression is the transcendence of 
language, (after all, as the unsophisticated might put it, "a picture 
is worth a thousand words") and to spare us further intrusions of comic 
(indeed!) work, no ASCII art shall contain words.
---
Validity: It's a close call, but I guess it satisfies 41:9.
Style: This painting says little to me, and I will say less about it.
        Bruce's restriction is hardly a restriction at all, given the
development of this round.  There doesn't seem to be any danger of words
showing up in art.  Lame.

=====

Rule 41:11      Greg            VALID           0 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.:                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
            <Automatic Teller Machine>

Bruce has done a remarkable work at deconstructing
our present society.  I felt as though I were
reading an essay by Kierkegaard (Probably an
excerpt from Either/Or) when viewing his work.  Now,
I admit that Kierkegaard is seldom considered a 
deconstructionalist, but Bruce has managed to
unite the viewpoints in a remarkable fashion.

I am attempting to draw my inspiration from Warhol.
Modern commercial enterprise as art.  I admit that
my work is not anywhere near the quality or represen-
tational character of Warhol, but I am constrained
by my medium.

By the way, One might argue that this work is non-
compliant with rule 40:2, which says that each
piece must build on the previous valid rule.  I
hoped that the Judge would accept my interpretation
that "build on" does not necessarily imply 
"incorporate."

In addition, this work is not a valid 'C' program,
therefore it violates commonly accepted codes.

I do not know who the Wizard is, so if either Bruce
or the Judge is the Wizard:  Hail to you Wizard, have
mercy on me for addressing you incorrectly.

No future rules may include emoticons, where an
emoticon is any combination of ASCII characters
intended to represent a human face.
---
Validity: Early on, I decided that "build on" is sufficiently vague to allow
a number of interpretations.  When dealing with metaphorical paint on
canvas, painting on top of another work can certainly be construed as
building upon that work.  I will warn people, however, that this
interpretation has limits: most of the old artwork must be preserved in the
new one.  As for 41:9, as I indicated at the time it too is vague.  Greg's
twist is clever enough to let it fly, and I'll let each such twist go by
once.  I wouldn't advise trying the programming language tactic again.

Style: Seen it, done it, been there.  Greg's takes the safe route with his
opening foray into the art world, giving us a representational work with no
personal style or panache.  This piece tells me nothing about the human
condition, it evokes no visceral response-- it merely is.  One spares 
only a moment to glance at this piece before moving on to something more 
evocative.
        Welcome aboard, Greg.  It is most unstylish to include comments to
the Judge in the body of your rule.  Had your restriction come before your
comments, I might have considered the comments to be outside of the rule
itself, but clearly that is not the case.  In the future, you may wish to
adopt the convention of separating your rule from the rest of your message
by divider lines or other indicators.  This faux pas is nicely balanced by
the restriction itself, which is actually a fairly clever one considering
the characters which have been in use thus far.  I'll warn people in advance
that emoticons can be found in the strangest places, so check your art
carefully.

=====

Rule 41:12      The Wizard (Jeremy)         INVALID         1.5 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :!:                 -
     *                   T                  *
     *                                     *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
              <Terrible Swift Sword>

In this work I symbolize my rebirth from nihilism in the form
of the avenger.  Rejection of the Critic is too simple (and as
I can see, too much to hope for from my colleagues - but who
can blame them, we all must eat...), I must reenter the fray, if
only to dog the heels of the Critic (who masks his pitiful ignorance
with the mere trappings of wisdom - the antithisis of Swandom, and
the rejection of my rightful Title).

   {And here you must forgive my digression, but how can anyone
   doubt the Critic is a Fool after his reaction to Bruce's
   sublime "Ignorance is Bliss"?  The Critic's blissed-out
   words: "There doesn't seem to be any danger of words
   showing up in art.  Lame." display his shallow view.
   Bruce masterfully provides the art world with the raw material to
   refute this Simpleton as this and all future rules will incorporate
   at least one additional alphabetical ASCII character into
   their art.}

As the avenger I will battle the narrow-minded, the unjust and those that
abet such perpetrators.  How can I claim this moral high-ground? Am I
not as imperfect as anyone?  By the act of self-sacrifice. I will, in
all future rules find a way to rebut the Critic.  But mustn't we all, as
moral human beings raise ourselves above the morass?  Thus, everyone
else must, in their next valid rule, impose a restriction solely upon
themselves, which they must non-trivially fulfill in all future valid rules.
(Be careful of skating too close to triviality, you may get by the Judge, but
the Wizard is not without his punishments...)

There is one and only one exception to my restrictions, in order to reward
those who sat out the round so far in solidarity with my misguided art
strike, and to encourage greater participation in ASCII art, the next two
valid rules from anyone not yet having submitted a rule in this round will
be excempted from the other restrictions in this rule.

Herein I have refuted the present Rightist Ideology of our society which 
would deny the moral good of self-sacrifice and the making of exceptions 
for the stylistically disadvantaged, in favor of a narrow belief in 
self-interest as the panacea for all of society's ills. 

P.S. 'ATM' by our newest member is a truly interesting work; we all hope
his fame lasts longer than Warhol's allotted 15 minutes.
---
Validity: Take a close look at Jeremy's art.  It violates either 41:1, 41:4,
or both, depending on how you interpret the rules and the art.

Style: Terrible yes, as that curve toward the front of the blade would
render it difficult to wield effectively.  Jeremy offers lip service to
defying convention, yet offers us nothing more than a bit of iconography.
He presents an image designed to be represent his ideal, a visual sound bite
for the remote control generation.  Yet again we see art selling out to
better reach the masses, and the irony is that Jeremy fails to notice his
hypocracy.
        Jeremy continues to craft stylish rules which fit the persona he's
adopted for the round.  His score would have been higher but for a couple of
faults.  Imposing an additional restriction on himself would have been VERY
stylish, had he not gone on to force other people to do the same.  Also, the
last paragraph about Greg's art was clearly tacked on as an afterthought and
it shows, not meshing well at all with the rest of the rule.

=====

Rule 41:13      Bruce           VALID           0.5 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.:                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                  $                   *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****X****|****|****|*****
        <Capitalism through the Shredder>

Gregory has taken limitations that would have buried
the lesser talents of Warhol and turned them into a
great strength. A delicious twist, "Modern commercial
enterprise as art", especially given today's
unfortunate trend of "Art as modern commercial
enterprise". Thus I thank him for the inspiration to
comment on what I think the amassed riches of these
"artists" are worth.

I humbly ask you to note that it also challenges the
common code seen in our gallery that our work must be
confined within the frame, rather than incorporating it.
---
Validity: Bruce pushes the limits left and right with this one.  According
to 41:4, Bruce could modify 1.5 characters with his art.  He had to decide
whether to round up or down.  As it turns out, it didn't matter which way he
decided to go on the rounding issue--  I had already decided that, since
41:4 did not specify one way or the other, that either would be acceptable.
Next he explores 41:1 by modifying the frame.  Rule 41:1 says that all rules
must include "a 40x20 character frame like the one you see above."  It does
not say it must be *exactly* like that frame.  I interpret 41:1 as defining
the frame's dimensions and then offering a sample, but not requiring future
art to duplicate that sample.  So Bruce is safe there.  Finally, does
modifying the frame challenge a common code?  Since nobody else touched the
frame, it's reasonable to say that it was generally thought to be off
limits.  Hence, 41:9 (told you it was a loose rule) is satisfied also.  Note
that this rule arrived after Jeremy's and was clearly sent before seeing
Jeremy's.  Had Jeremy's been VALID, this would have been INVALID and so
would have been judged UNSUCCESSFUL.  However, without Jeremy's rule, this
one becomes VALID and is thus judged as such.

Style: Bruce's comment about Greg's art is thoughtful and well-taken.  Bruce
quite literally pushes the boundaries of art with this piece-- I
half-expected to see a pile of dollar signs beneath the frame.  It is a
shame that this bold exploration of form comes at the expense of substance.
Jealousy is an ugly thing, and the hypocracy of Bruce's work becomes clear
when you consider that it, too, could undoubtedly be acquired for a price.
        Bruce earns cajones points for the walking out on a few limbs with
this rule, but promptly loses most of them for not including any sort of
RULE within it.  Bad form!

=====

Rule 41:14      The Wizard (Jeremy)     INVALID         2 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                 .^.                  -
     *                 :$:                  *
     *                  Y                   *
     *                  |    $ $            *
     *                  |     X             *
     *********|****|****|****|*|*****|*****|*
      <After the Fall - The Forest Primeval>

After the recent tragic loss of the Wizard's recent creation
"Terrible Swift Sword" due to a manufacturer's defect in the
framing material (which resulted in the much-publicized fall
from the wall of a local gallery and subsequent disqualification
from this judged show), the Wizard has retired to the 
seclusion of his family's summer home and until future notice
all public statements will be conveyed by his lawyers and
publicists at the firm of Dewey, Cheetham & Howe.

Press Release:
   "After the Fall - The Forest Primeval", the most recent 
piece unveiled by the Wizard today has taken ASCII art a 
quantum leap forward, destroying both the commonly held beliefs
that art which "differs" by a particular number of characters
must hold the positions of the previous characters constant, and 
that a work must "build upon" another in the narrow sense of
painting over the same canvas.  Here the Wizard provides a work 
which differs by the appropriate number of characters but has used 
them as his creative impulse wills to create an allegorical 
response built upon the stimulating work of Bruce in his "Capitalism
through the Shredder".
   The Wizard acknowledges the pioneering work of Bruce who first
had the vision to recognize the plasticity of the "frame" in ASCII
art, and hopes that this extension of the concept is pleasing to
him.
   In this work the Wizard poses the question "What Now?" after 
Capitalism has been shredded and our society has fallen apart.  The
answer is at once serene and idyllic (showing new shoots rising
from the forest floor, promising a return to Eden), while at the same
time deeply disturbing (if one steps back from the canvas the shoots 
are reminicent of missiles, mortars, crossed swords, even a nascent 
mushroom cloud).  In this dilicious ambiguity is found the works power.
The most telling details are in the fine brush strokes where the
iconic $-signs can be found in the buds themselves, chillingly hinting
at the inevitibility of our fall from grace from any new Eden.

DCH-Wiz-001

The Wizard requires that all valid rules which alter the position
of any character from the previous valid rule must not leave any 
character from that rule in the same position as it was before (all 
characters in the frame are excempt from this restricion).
---
Validity: Much as I would have liked to rule this valid, as it would open up
delightful new avenues to explore, in the end I just couldn't in good
conscience do so.  Fortunately I'm spared having to decide whether or not it
violates 41:4 (although I'm leaning toward the opinion that it does),
because I definitely think it violates 41:2.  41:2 requires that each work
build upon the previous one.  The Wizard offers the view that this can apply
to the concept of a work, not just its physical form.  I disagree.  This
piece builds on the THEME of the previous artwork, but it does not build
upon the art itself, thus violating 41:2.  I thought I had given a pretty
good indication of my interpretation of 41:2 in my judgement of 41:11, and
this ruling is consistent with that.

Style: This artist has certainly earned the title of The Wizard, having
blossomed from mere mimickry to truly independent expression.  The
juxtaposition of good and evil, the threat of darkness lurking behind the
light, shows far greater depth than anything this forum has yet witnessed.
Each examination of the canvas reveals a new layer of meaning.  It is a
terrible injustice that the Wizard, in trying to expand the horizons of this
forum, repeatedly runs up against its boundaries.

=====

Rule 41:15      Greg            VALID           0 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                  $                   *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.:                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                  $                   *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****X****|****|****|*****
         {"Tippecanoe" (Over the Falls)}

It is clear that Bruce is one of the few
geniuses of ASCII art.  Perhaps only the
brave Wizard can challenge him.  His
work "shreds" all predecessors.

This work refers to the presidential campaign
of William Henry Harrison, who was known as
"Tippecanoe," for reasons I have never fully
understood.  Perhaps it had something to do
with his having been born in a log cabin, which
he wasn't.  I have long thought it fitting that
President Harrison was only president for a
few short months, having caught pneumonia 
during his inaugural address.  Harrison ran
a simply horrid campaign against Old Kinderhook,
Martin VanBuren, filled with lies and invective.
For Harrison, political power was the currency
of the day, and his brainless pursuit of it led
to his own destruction, crashing into the rocks
at the bottom of the falls, so to speak.

You may note that I saw no reason to follow the
commonly accepted code of placing <Angles> around
the title, {Braces} serving the job just as well.

All future titles must include a pun, and the
word or phrase being punned must be included 
in quotes.
---
Validity: No problems I can see.

Style: The Critic is on vacation today.
        Including clever puns in a rule may be stylish.  Forcing other
players to do so is not.  Also, the extended history lesson was a little
too... well, extended.

=====

Rule 41:16      The Wizard (Jeremy)     INVALID         0.5 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                  $                   *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                 --|>                 *
     -                  :.:                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                  $                   *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      @
     ****|****|****|****X****|****|****|**@@*
                <My Bow 'n Arrow>

Hi, my name is Timmy.  My Dad says he can't make
pictures in a single day so he won't but Mommy says
then He'll never be able to paint again.  Daddy
said he'd rather eat lead paint (I think).

Daddy doesn't know I'm sending this, He'll probablee
be mad bacause I broke the rules, you know the one
everyone knows about children obeying their parents.
But I think He'll be very sad if he can't paint no more.

I really liked the last painting, the one by Mr. Greg
of the canoe - it was neato.  I thought it looked
like my bow, so I added the arrow.

I'm really sorry I got my finger prints on the frame, but
they "woodent" come out.  Maybe my Dad won't notice if
everyone from now on makes at least one mark on the frame
too, would you all please do that for me?

- Timmy, age 8, the Wizard's kid
---
Validity: This rule may violate a few other rules.  It certainly violates
41:15, which requires puns in all future titles.  Although "woodent" is in
quotation marks as required, it is not part of a titular pun.

Style: Nice transmutation of the art, fair restriction, but neither great
nor poor.

=====

Rule 41:17      Greg            INVALID         -2.5 points
---
     ****|****|****|****|****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                    ___               *
     -                   /   |              -
     *                  $  _ |              *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.:                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                  $                   *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****X****|****|****|*****
                 <Who "Axed" you?>

	My previous work ("Tippecanoe") was
	clearly the best entry so far.  Not
	just art, but art history.  The 
	critic professes to be away, but
	the judge still critiques.  I am
	obviously the most talented entrant
	in this contest.

	Here I use non-standard english in
	my title.

	Because the judge obviously doesn't
	know great work when he sees it,
	The style-points shall be recalculated
	so that Greg received 3 style-points 
	for each of his previous
	valid rules.  In short, Greg
	had 6 style points after the judge's
	verdict on 41:15.  This is my change
	to the rules.

	If you don't like extended histories,
	how about extended histrionics? 
---
Validity: As Stephen pointed out, this is a clear violation of the Reg Ords
which grant the Judge authority to award style points for rules.  Even if
this did not violate the Reg Ords, it would still be invalid because if
violates 41:4.  At the time this rule was posted, Greg did not have enough
style points to add as many characters to the artwork as he did.  His style
points need to be changed for this rule to be valid, but they couldn't be
changed unless & until this rule was judged valid.  A no-win scenario for 
Greg.

Style: Trying to wrest control of style points away from the Judge is most
unstylish, as is trying to boost your own in such a heavy-handed manner.  So
I suppose you might say that I don't much care for histrionics.  =)

=====

Rule 41:18      Bruce           INVALID         1 point
---
     ****|****|****|****X****|****|****|*****
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                   I                  -
     *                  $                   *
     *                   |                  *
     *                   $                  *
     *                   |                  *
     -                  :.:                 -
     *                   |                  *
     *                  $                   *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     -                                      -
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     *                                      *
     ****|****|****|****X****|****|****|*****
                  <"Been Gun?">

"Tippecanoe" (Over the Falls) achieves a dynamic synthesis of 
opposites; both an historical commentary and a lively, engaging 
artwork. We await more virtuoso work from the Great Greg.

What can we say about the violence of Ben Gunn? While it is commonly 
accepted that we are powerless against the rising tide of violence, we 
take action here and plug up his gun to prevent him from claiming 
further victims.

To engender understanding of the artists that have come before, at 
least one of the characters that is changed in this and each future 
artwork must not be a ' ' <space>.
---
Validity: This rule violates rule 41:10, which prohibits words within
artwork.  The letter I is, alas, a word.  Some might say that the letter "X"
is also a word, but I'm going with the more general view that there are only
two one-letter words in English.