Talk:Phrases from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Scrabble-playing caveman

According to Ford, the "cavemen" live in huts, and thus are NOT cavemen. Technical error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.62.51.30 (talk) 22:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Were they not called "cavemen" in the book? Travürsa (talk) 05:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

42

Douglas Adam's used to write for Monty Python, he made is acting debut in episode 42 "The Light Entertainment War". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Monty_Python%27s_Flying_Circus_episodes#3._The_Light_Entertainment_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Adams#Writing

Also, at the beginning of Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life", the stone with the movie's title raises up saying "The Meaning of Liff" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.35.168.230 (talk) 04:19, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but is there any evidence that the ep number and its use in the series are connected? Serendi^podous 05:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I think that Adams was saying that the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything is that it's "for two". Life's not much if you're not sharing it with someone. I think he wanted you to figure this out for yourself, which is why he denied the number had any significance. He was a genius.

jj5 (talk) 04:18, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

In 2008 John Lloyd related that Adams has called 42 "the funniest of the two-digit numbers" and John Cleese also thought so.. When you consider the venerable Stephen Fry saying its "completely obvious" it all adds up to.. well, in my opinion jj5 who thinks that it's "for two" is near, in that there probably is a play on words at heart, just think funny.

Hillbillyholiday81 (talk) 03:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Arthur pulls random letters from a bag, but only gets the sentence "What do you get if you multiply six by nine?" I mean, seriously? Hasn't anyone noticed that the actual answer is 54? I don't think Adams did that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usernamekiran (talk • contribs) 22:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Lots of people have speculated about this, but as Adams said "I don't do jokes in base 13" - Arjayay (talk) 07:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

A postumously-posted interview with Adams, release shortly before the film, indicated that 42 was the bin number at Harrods for his favourite tea (Earl Grey). [It does seem fitting that an English author’s Ultimate Answer is a perfect cuppa. ☺] [Posted on talk because I couldn’t find the reference] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.142.126 (talk) 12:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Not entirely unlike

Isn't the quote actually "almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea"? I could be wrong, but this kind of means almost, but not quite, the complete opposite ;) 2.24.0.135 (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2011 (UTC) Above post was mine, sorry, forgot to sign in. JWBB1508 (talk) 22:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

That is the phrase that has entered pop culture however, incorrect or not. Serendi^podous 12:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

End of Series

One part of this article states that the series ends with Mostly Harmless. However, since And Another Thing... is an official sequel, doesn't it really end with that book? Alphius (talk) 20:32, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Good point. Revised. Serendi^podous 20:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Split 42

I split the section on 42 to a separate page called 42 (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) and got reverted because it wasn't discussed. (I was being WP:BOLD, people). So, comments anyone? D O N D E groovily Talk to me 00:49, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I count approximately 14 references in the section that may demonstrate notability. However, this article does not meet the size criteria in WP:SPLIT. Currently it is at 33k, while the threshold for a split is at least 50k. Certainly, we could try expanding this article and see if there is enough to fill out the other non-42 sections. In my mind, the question of WP:DUE might come into play. How much weight should we really give to "42" in this article vs. how much weight should we give other popular phrases such as "Don't Panic!" ? Elizium23 (talk) 04:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

There is not requirement that an article be a certain size in order to split. If it's 50K, it should be split, that doesn't mean it can't be if it's not. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 03:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Article size is a guideline, and lists the same size criteria, so really isn't as strictly binding as policy, but you haven't exactly provided a compelling justification for the split. Please collect sources that will establish notability (I counted 14 out of 30 that were not direct WP:PRIMARY or questionable sources, from the section.) Elizium23 (talk) 04:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not proposing a split based on article size, but based on 42 being much more notable than any other famous phrase from Hitchhiker's, as well as covering the bulk of this page. And if there's already 14 secondary reliable sources, why are you asking me to find more? D O N D E groovily Talk to me 20:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

That is the first I've heard of your reasons - other than being bold. I am not necessarily asking you to find more, but you should be discerning which of the 30 references in the section will support notability, because by my very cursory count, 16 of them will not. It is also worth checking the rest of the article, which will be left with a whopping four references if we rip out '42', and whether the remaining article will survive a notability test without 42. Elizium23 (talk) 23:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I think that based on my above comment, if the article is "split", it would be prudent to consider merging the rest of this article back into the main book articles and then this one would cease to exist. Elizium23 (talk) 23:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

How would you merge them? What would be left? Serendi^podous 23:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't, because I oppose a split in the first place. Elizium23 (talk) 23:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Given that this article, even as it stands, has already had to undergo an AfD, I really don't think splitting it is a good idea. Strength in numbers. Serendi^podous 09:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

It had an AfD and passed, so I don't think that relevant. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 03:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

There's no limit on the number of AfDs that a single article can undergo, and articles that pass one tend to attract more. Serendi^podous 08:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Ultimate Answer

There is no Ultimate Answer in the books. The actual phrase is "The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything". This article contains several references to the "Ultimate Answer", which doesn't exist in the books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.184.32 (talk) 11:19, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I think you're largely right, though I am fairly sure that DNA used the phrase "Ultimate Answer to the Ultimate Question" at least once. Serendi^podous 11:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Siri reference

I tested it with Siri and she simply said '42', can anyone verify that she does give you a "long thought out response about the Hitchhiker's Guide books and Douglas Adams." --IdanElh (talk) 13:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

There is no reliable secondary source cited for that assertion, so it's probably the anon IP pulling our leg. Elizium23 (talk) 14:38, 7 June 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) 13:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

That would be original research unless a reliable source could be found linking the two. Serendi^podous 13:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not original research to note that 'Don't panic!' from Dad's Army clearly pre-dated The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy; it's not original research to note that due to Dad's Army it was a massively popular catchphrase from the late 60s onwards - see the Nov 2012 obituary of Clive Dunn, the actor concerned, in the Daily Telegraph: "Clive Dunn, whose Dad's Army catchphrase "Don't panic!" was one of the most memorable in television history" [1].

The OR bit connecting the two, Dad's Army and Adam's use of the phrase, is common sense though: all this was part of Adams' cultural heritage. Americans may never have heard of Dad's Army, but it was a deeply ingrained part of the UK's culture.

I know the link between the two can't go in the article because I haven't found a cite explicitly linking the two, but shouldn't it be pointed out that this famous catchphrase was already famous from Dad's Army when Adams started using it? That's not OR at all. The reasons why he used it are the OR. 86.133.214.31 (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

It's OR to present it to the reader as relevant; I could probably find a robot called Marvin from an earlier work, but it would be misleading to draw attention to this if there was no documented connection.

Drawing from existing sources is a good yardstick for judging whether something is worth mentioning - if Adams has never commented on his inspiration for the phrase, and no article or review has ever drawn the connection between the Guide and Dad's Army, it seems safe to take this as sign that it's not particularly significant in the scheme of things. --McGeddon (talk) 13:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I've made that argument before, but I've been shouted down on various political catch-phrases. I don't really agree this time; since we have a reliable source that the phrase "Don't panic!" was in common use as a catch-phrase in England at the time, we must, at least, not imply that Adams originated the phrase. If that requires mentioning that the phrase was in common use, we may have to do so, although there is an implied synthesis. As for Marvin, .... — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I suggest split The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy#Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything (42) to a single article.

It seem it's long enough to split and have enough notability and reference.——Cwek (talk) 05:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

It was discussed above, under "Split 42". The consensus was no. Serendi^podous 05:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

It seem it have a consensus before one year that no yet.But now is change,I suggest a new topics to do that.——Cwek (talk) 00:39, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

And because I compiled the relation of d:Q1879872,d:Q1879675 and d:Q721,DONT add the wrong crosslanguagelink again,please.——Cwek (talk) 00:39, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

"42" = "I thought it would do" as slurred by a drunken Cockney?

Recently, a Russian acquaintance of mine told a joke about a bus crowded with passengers, one of whom is a dude from Georgia -- which, in Russian, is called Gruziya. Another man boards at the back and is trying to hand his fare to the conductor through the crowd, and someone else says Gruzin peredast!, which means "Let the Georgian man pass it along." Unfortunately, the Georgian misheard this as Gruzin pederast!, which translates as -- ahem -- "This fellow from Georgia likes teenage boys in an unwholesome way." Naturally the Georgian takes umbrage, and the gist of his reply is "Go fuck yourself, Ivan", and mayhem ensues. (Trust me, it's fairly hilarious if you hear it in the original Russian.)

Anyway, this set me on a train of thought about phonetic corruptions, and since I'd just had my 42nd birthday, the train switched tracks into Douglas Adams territory, and it occurred to me that "forty-two" sounds just a bit like "farted, too." (Cf. the Jatravartian theory that the universe is formed from Divine Snot.) After playing around with the sounds in my head for a longer, I noticed that the phrase "I thought it would do," if pronounced in a very, very non-RP manner, might come out sounding not entirely unlike "fawwwwty'do."

So, I'm wondering if this general line of thinking -- that "forty two" might be a mangled pronunciation of some other phrase that Adams found amusing -- has been floated before in HHGG fan circles. I mean, it seems like every other explanation has been put forth, but has the "phonetic pun" angle been explored? Many fanks in advance, etc. Throbert McGee (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2013 (UTC)