Is this really Cecil?

Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports
1

After reading Cecil’s most recent column (Why do the bubbles in Guinness Stout float down? 26-May-2000) I found myself wondering if the writer of this article is really Cecil. OK, I haven’t been around much lately (and usually just lurking when I am around) and maybe his style just doesn’t have that oh-so-familiar feel that it once did, but the tone of this article seems strange to me.

Now, tell me what you really think, but the following quotes seem to be out of character of the Uncle Cecil I have grown to know and love.

“But this is the Straight Dope, goddammit.” Now cursing is not unusual, but such a strong epitath to be used as part of a rational for fighting ignorance seems strange to me (unless of course he had been sampling some of Dublin’s finest as he was composing the article). Also, Cecil has always written in a fine conversational tone, but this seems to be pushing the envelope of incomplete sentences for such well spoken man.

“Since I didn’t care to be seen strolling into a gin mill at nine in the morning…”. Since when has Cecil cared what people thought of him in his fight against ignorance?

“I recognize that Guinness is made in Dublin, but England, Ireland, it’s all the same, ain’t it?” Cecil has always been one to mock some well known facts in jest, but where is the jest here? This just seems dumb to me (is he just making a rather weak poke at the Irish - not that I’m Irish or anything).

“Not only do the bubbles float downward under certain conditions, but people have devoted, well, maybe
not their lives, but a good two or three days to figuring out why.” This statement seems as if he is saying that devoting two or three days is impressive research. I dont think Cecil would be very impressed at two or three days effort. Two or three years, maybe.

“…mix of nitrogen and carbon dioxide rather than pure CO2 as the bubblizing ingredient.” Bubblizing ingredient? Does Cecil not know that bubbles in a beer glass are called a head? For someone so dedicated to fighting ignorance, he seems to have (in the past) always used the correct terms when labeling elements of the subject at hand (unless of course he is poking fun).

OK, this is starting to get long. What do the teaming masses think, has someone stuffed Unle Cecil in a closet and trying to fill the big guys shoes, or what? Maybe I’m just getting cynical, or plain full of shit, but either way, I’m sure this crowd will give it to me straight.

2

How odd - I found myself thinking exactly the same thing upon reading this particular Article.

In reflection, a few of his other columns recently haven’t felt quite right, though none have been nearly as … alien as this last one…

What’s the Straight Dope?

3

It’s as real as Cecil gets.

Peace.

4

You know, In felt the same way too. It just didn’t seem right. In fact, I first thought I was looking at his mailbag and someone from the SD team was responding, then I went back and found it was supossedly Cecil himself.

I thought it just me, but I think your on to something.

5

Unca CeCe sez:

And…

THere’s more too, but I didn’t feel like cutting and pasting it all.

Cecil rocks…but he seems to have a sort of edge to his writing sometimes…

-Sam

6

Isn’t there a forum for comments on Cecil’s columns?

Is genereal questions that forum?

Hmmm?

7

There wasn’t a Cecil to begin with, he’s just a personality created by the SD board.

8

Off to Comments on Cecil’s Columns

9

Oh, I dunno. I think Unca Cece’ has mellowed a bit in the past 25 years. But I didn’t find the Guinness article to be out of character, myself. It seems to me to contain some dry humor that might have whooshed some folks (the “two or three days” line was one such, IMO), some gratuitous abuse (the “England/Ireland line” was much more an insult to Americans), and a bit of flippancy (“bubblizing,” forsooth–sure it’s a head, but you want he should call it “headizing?”).

All in all a fairly typical Cecil column.

10

The column being discussed is

Why do the bubbles in Guinness Stout float down? (26-May-2000)

I personally didn’t think that the style was so much different from other recent columns. But I’m no literary expert. Could someone find some web-based software in which we could feed this column and another recent one, with the software determining if the two were written by the same author? If not, could someone write such a program? We need cold, hard facts.

11

If our new mod had been paying attention, he would have noted that for Guinness, far from

we should allow the facts to settle and approach room temperature lest we miss their delicate flavours.

12

The column was mildly suprising to me, for different reasons. The writing seemed like Cecil, but I was suprised he had to research it, since the fluid-dynamic scientists studying Guiness made the news a few months ago as a sort of a fun science story. I would think that anyone who reads newspapers on a daily basis should have known that one off the top of their head.

Also, my impression of Cecil is that he should know a thing or two about alcoholic beverages, and would have known about the widget, which is somewhat obscure beer knowledge, but not terribly obscure.

13

Surely the Baconites have invented such software?

14

It wouldn’t suprise me if Cecil didn’t write the column. After all, it has happenned before.

Head on over to

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=25727

Take a look at my post (it’s about the 29th one there) that starts off with “What we have here is blatant case of misdirection”.

15

Cecil wishes me to express his regret that you didn’t get the Guinness column.

As for this being a fun-science item Cecil should have known about … maybe the average person should have known this. However, Cecil does not participate in popular culture. I am not saying this as a matter of brag, just fact. Occasionally this puts him in the position of not knowing things you’d think everyone would know. (“Why are those people talking into those little transistor radios they’re carrying? Don’t they know they’re supposed to listen?” On the other hand, not knowing what you’re supposed to know often has its advantages in this business.

16

I could probably whip up something here without too much difficulty… The usual criterion is standard deviation of word length and sentence length, no? Anyone more knowledgable than I care to weigh in?

17

I’m a little late jumping in here, but I feel it’s my duty to call attention to the fact that Per, the author of the OP, is an impostor! Yes, that’s right, a phoney, a fake, a fraud. Ha, ha! He or she is posing as a longtime follower of the Straight Dope, but this obviously is not the case.

Exhibit A:

“Teaming masses”??? No ho ho, I don’t think so. Nice try, but you’re busted. Time to 'fess up, “Per”: who are you, really, and who sent you here? Huh? Huh? Spill your guts.

18

Hm. I don’t know Chronos. I suspect that you can’t go too far back in time, since people’s writing styles evolve. And if a change occurred some time back…
Perhaps a script that does the counting (Perl is a perfect parser for text!) that would alert you of any unusual breaks in style as you go through the archives by date?

19

IMHO - Cecil = Ed Zotti = CKDextHavn = (every so often) SD Science Advisors

20

Nixon, are you saying that CKDextHavn, Cecil Adams and Ed Zotti are one and the same person? A bold assertion indeed! :eek:

Or are you saying that Cecil Adams sometimes slacks off and hands over the column to lesser intellects while he’s tanning in Aruba?