Talk:The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

First Aired?

I do not dispute the report that HHGG was aired on BBC Radio 4 in 1978, but I heard it on the BBC World Service before May, 1975. In many sources 1978 is given as the date the program was first aired. That cannot be, however; the reason I know that I first heard it on the BBC World Service before mid 1975 is that I lived in Bangkok, Thailand, from early 1971 to May, 1975, and that is where I heard HHGG (on a Heathkit SW radio that I had built) and recorded it on a audio cassettes. Anyone hearing my recordings has no doubt that the source was a short-wave radio. I gave the radio away before I left Thailand in 1975 and I cannot have recorded it after that date. I didn't note the date of the recordings, probably because I somehow failed to foresee Wikipedia and that there would be any interest in the series outside of the listenership. My best guess would be that the BBC World Service broadcast the series in 1973 or 1974. I cannot say whether the BBC broadcast the series in the Home Service before then, but what I heard and recorded was described by the BBC as the first World Service broadcast.

As for the question of which is better, original recordings, books, movie(s)--it's a point of view. There is only one original of any work of art, and the before-1975 radio broadcast of HHGG is the original of that work. For anyone who heard the original, it is likely that the books rank second in enjoyment, while the movie(s) will fall flat in comparison. I have all the books and I enjoy them, but not nearly as much as the radio series. That is in large part due to brilliant work on the part of the "BBC Radiophonic Workshop" that did a wonderful job with the radio sound effects with what had to have been a very small budget. Conversely, one who read the books first might appreciate them more. It may be said that the original radio plays and the books complement each other, but that the movie is quite jarring to someone like me. Like most people, when I hear a radio play (I still listen to a lot of them because they don't damage my intellect the way TV does) or read a book, I form pictures of the characters in my mind. When I have heard the play again and again and read the books repeatedly as I have with HHGG, the pictures are vivid. Practically nothing in the movie looks the way I picture it.

My point of view is just that, but I can cite two examples of where the latest movie falls short. In the movie “Marvin the Paranoid Android” is not an android. An android is, according to Wikipedia (and my years of mental conjuring), a robot that looks and acts human. It doesn't have to be a replica, designed to be visually indistinguishable from a human, but an android cannot look like the Pillsbury Dough Boy or the Michelin Tire mascot. The second problem with the movie is that Ford Prefect is not of African descent--for those who know the original. It could be argued that a planet near Betelgeuse might be inhabited by persons whose appearance is similar to Earth's Africans, and that would be fine--but that's not the way Ford Prefect is presented in the original. One might as well cast King Arthur or King Lear or Hamlet as a person of African descent, but I don't think it would work if the performance in question were meant to somehow reflect the author's intent.

David Illig Gambrills, MD

I think your recollection is a bit off. Adams pitched the idea to the BBC in 1977. In 1973-74, Adams was writing for Monty Python. freshacconci talktalk 03:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

It was aired on the World Service the same year it was first broadcast on Radio 4 - 1978 - as I remember listening to it on an AM transistor radio that summer, on I think 648khz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.218.42 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

...in popular culture?

Where would the "Hitchhiker's Guide in Popular Culture" go? I'm aware it would get huge, and there is "...as an international phenomenon", but that doesn't include UK stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.2.191 (talk) 15:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Probably nowhere. If what you're thinking of is really notable and not trivia, then it should fit into the existing sections. If not, there is no point making a new section for it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. Several Wikipedia articles include an "In Popular Culture" section toward the end of the article, before notes and references. I came to the Talk section because I noticed it was missing. Off the top of my head, there are: Babelfish - yahoo's translation engine, Paranoid Android - a song by Radiohead, and Trillian the instant messenger client. There's probably many more. It's a shame this thread is from 2009. I don't know how to edit wikipedia or I'd start the section myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.81.101 (talk) 01:51, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

John Carnell

It doesn't seem likely that the John Carnell referred to in the Comic Books section is the same one as in the article that his name links to (the latter died years before HHGG was ever writtten). --Paul (talk) 17:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Lewis Carrol

Am I crazy or does this book bare huge simalarities to that of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland alot of the other works of Lewis Carrol? The number 42 is just one of them. To me they both say the same things except The Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy is alot less confusing.69.225.1.76 (talk) 02:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

You are crazy, but other than that one might have been influenced by the other. felinoel (talk) 10:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Rights

Who owns the rights to this entirety? I am creating an MMORPG and would like to celebrate Towel Day in game with HHGTTG themed items and would prefer to go the legal route... felinoel (talk) 10:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

lol, look at the minutes of when I posted that question. felinoel (talk) 10:55, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't who owns this in its article? Doesn't Wikipedia have to at least say who this property is owned by anyways? felinoel (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Just looking at one of the books, it says copyright 1980 by Serious Productions, LTD. It was published by The Ballantine Publishing Group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.163.228.43 (talk) 00:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Well Serious Productions seems to not exist anymore and I don't know what rights to the franchise as a whole the publisher would have... especially since the books wasn't even the start of the franchise? felinoel (talk) 17:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

In both the US and the UK, copyright lasts for 70 years after the author of the work dies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.81.101 (talk) 01:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

The More Than Complete Hitchhiker's Guide

The More Than Complete Hitchhiker's Guide came out before The Ultimate Hitchhiker's guide and had Young Zaphod Plays it Safe but not Mostly Harmless. I don't know of an edition that also has And Another Thing.Hackwrench (talk) 02:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

'Instalment' vs 'installment'

According to American_and_British_English_spelling_differences#Doubled_in_American_English,

Conversely, there are words where British writers prefer a single l and Americans usually use a double l. In American usage, the spelling of words is usually not changed when they form the main part (not prefix or suffix) of other words, especially in newly formed words and in words whose main part is in common use. Words exhibiting this spelling difference include wil(l)ful, skil(l)ful, thral(l)dom, appal(l), fulfil(l), fulfil(l)ment, enrol(l)ment, instal(l)ment. These words have monosyllabic cognates always written with -ll: will, skill, thrall, pall, fill, roll, stall, still.

By that reckoning, the proper British spelling ought to be 'Instalment'. The current version now reflects that. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Just to support this, I looked up the word in both of my British (English) dictionaries. It is "instalment" (one 'l') in both. I will change the invisible comment in the article to make this clearer. HairyWombat 15:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Lost Chapters of the Guide

I'm trying to read everything by Douglas Adams and getting very close. However I have run into "The Lost Chapters," and have no idea the truth behind it.

Hellium's got a reivew of this called "Short story reviews: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Lost Chapters, by Douglas Adams" and douglasadams.se forum got an article called The Lost Chapters

Looking at those two links and at many others, it does seem likely they are fanfiction. Does anyone know for a fact they are?

But my biggest point is it appears to be big enough (talked about enough & survived long enough) to have atleast a mention in the article as being a old popular fanfiction, being by Adams if it really is (unlikely as it seems), or just say it is uncertain. I didn't want to just start making edits without really knowing much about these lost chapters. It being a fan fiction (likely I just don't know personally) and still staying strong this long, I would think warrant a mention. Curious what other people think of including a mention? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jp0d009 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Radio ?

Does this article belong in the various radio categories or not? We have one editor that wants to remove it from one radio category, but I say that makes no sense, either this belongs with all the relevant (to HGTTG) radio sections, or none (because a sub article is in) Jasonfward (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I am the other editor referred to (and, yes, really it should be all or none). My logic is that we already have an article The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (radio series), which undoubtedly belongs in all the relevant radio categories, so should this article also be in those categories? I'm looking at this from the point of view of someone browsing through the category page -- would they want to see both articles listed? -- Dr Greg  talk  23:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Inside-out madhouse

Anyone recalls where the inside-out madhouse was metioned? I can't seem to find it anywhere. →Yaniv256 ^talk _contribs 20:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

The house of Wonko the Sane? So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish. Nanonic (talk) 22:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes! Thank you! Wonko the sane! Now, there is a good username! Too bad the market for usernames is closed today!→Yaniv256 ^talk _contribs 22:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't panic

Shouldn't it be noted somewhere that the popular phrase "Don't panic" wasn't first made popular by Adams - it was one of the most famous catchphrases in Dad's Army, a seminal British sitcom on the BBC that ran from 1968-1977, and was spoken by Lance-Corporal Jack Jones. I always wondered why Adams used it when it was already so popular and attached in the UK public's mind to Dad's Army. Any thoughts? 86.133.214.31 (talk) 12:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Good point, although the two uses of the phrase are very different; indeed, in a way, diametrically opposite! --Roly (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Why is Google doing a tribute today?

Today, 11 March 2013, Google's homepage banner is a tribute to HHGG. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C08C:A6F0:21C:B3FF:FEC3:2572 (talk) 14:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Today is Douglas Adams' birthday. - GroveGuy (talk) 21:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Novels: So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish

Along the way, they are joined by Marvin, the Paranoid Android, who, although 37 times older than the universe itself (what with time travel and all), has just enough power left in his failing body to read the message and feel better about it all before expiring.[1]

=> "...what with time travel and all...", what does that mean? :P Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

He can be older than the universe because he goes back in time, so he can live longer the universe. Ollieinc (talk) 01:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Poster for Ken Campbell’s ICA production

I’ve just uploaded a pic of the poster from the ICA production to my Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/coconino/14412790193/ and if anyone thinks it should be added to this page please do so or add a link. I’m not sure things like permission to use the poster, it’s not my work, just the photograph of it. Something I noticed is that the poster says the ICA run was from 1-19 May while the current article says 1-9 May. I remember the show very well, it was quite an event. Coconino (talk) 19:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)