reply to Saint_Cad:
Is the stealing the main plotline of the story? Only an important element to the main plot.
Was the story written before 1900? No.
If not, does it take place before 1900? No.
Were the items used to make a poison? No. I’m thinking those old-timey cosmetics has lead or arsenic in them and combined with alcohol and eggs they were ingested by a victim. Yikes. Scary, but not important here.
Is the story a novel? Short story? Some medium other than literature?
Was it a children’s story?
Is a crime committed in the story, other than the theft?
Is it important what the items were used for?
Was the story inspired by real-life events? If so, is that related to why it’s being kept secret?
reply to Ana_Byrd:
Is the story a novel? No. Short story? No. Some medium other than literature? Yes.
Was it a children’s story? For the whole family.
Is a crime committed in the story, other than the theft? No.
Is it important what the items were used for? Yes.
Was the story inspired by real-life events? Possibly, though nothing specific that I know.If so, is that related to why it’s being kept secret? Authorities did not want a certain part of the story told because…
Was it a film? TV series?
Was the story’s content politically sensitive?
Was it considered embarrassing for the author? For someone else?
Were there legal complications of some copyright/trademark related sort?
Was the work itself illegal? Did anyone in real life get in trouble because of it?
Edit: Would it help to know what sort of authorities these are?
I’m thinking of the story about the crossword puzzles that contained codewords for the D-Day landings. Espionage was suspected, but it was just a coincidence.
I’m wondering if there anything similar in this puzzle.
Questions:
Did the authorities believe the story gave away official secrets?
Did it actually give away official secrets?
Was it connected to a war? WWII?
reply to Ana_Byrd:
Was it a film? No. TV series? Yes.
Was the story’s content politically sensitive? No.
Was it considered embarrassing for the author? No. For someone else? No.
Were there legal complications of some copyright/trademark related sort? No.
Was the work itself illegal? No.Did anyone in real life get in trouble because of it? No.
Edit: Would it help to know what sort of authorities these are? Yes.
reply to Peter_Morris:
Questions:
Did the authorities believe the story gave away official secrets? No.
Did it actually give away official secrets? No
Was it connected to a war? No. WWII? No.
Was the TV series a sitcom?
A drama?
A variety show?
Were these aforementioned authorities some type of network decision makers, such as executives and/or censors and/or producers and/or whatnot?
Were they sponsors?
Were the authorities concerned because if those “certain parts of the story” were told, members of the public would learn how to do something they ought not be doing?
Were the eggs eaten?
Was the alcohol drunk?
Were the cosmetics worn on someone’s skin?
Was the opposition by the authorities connected to the part of the story involving the eggs, cosmetics, and alcohol?
reply to dirtball:
Was the TV series a sitcom? Yes.
A drama? No.
A variety show? No.
Were these aforementioned authorities some type of network decision makers, such as executives and/or censors and/or producers and/or whatnot? Yes.
Were they sponsors? No.
Were the authorities concerned because if those “certain parts of the story” were told, members of the public would learn how to do something they ought not be doing? No.
reply to Chronos:
Were the eggs eaten? Yes.
Was the alcohol drunk? Yes.
Were the cosmetics worn on someone’s skin? Yes.
Was the opposition by the authorities connected to the part of the story involving the eggs, cosmetics, and alcohol? Not directly, but they are both tied together by the solution to the egg/cosmetic/alcohol mystery.
The elements of the story the authorities found objectionable:
Were they told anyway, in defiance of the authorities’ wishes?
Was there some negotiation that led to a compromise in how those elements were handled?
Were those elements deemed objectionable due to any type of sexual behavior?
reply to dirtball:
The elements of the story the authorities found objectionable:
Were they told anyway, in defiance of the authorities’ wishes? No.
Was there some negotiation that led to a compromise in how those elements were handled? Yes.
Were those elements deemed objectionable due to any type of sexual behavior? No.
Is the maid relevant? That is, would the solution be any different if the part about the maid was left out?
Edit: Does this have anything to do with the BBC’s restrictions on advertising?
reply to Ana_Byrd:
Is the maid relevant? That is, would the solution be any different if the part about the maid was left out? No. The maid part is only important in that it shows how some of the characters attempted to find an answer to the missing items puzzle.
Edit: Does this have anything to do with the BBC’s restrictions on advertising? No.
This is really two puzzles in one. Figure out why the authorities had trouble with the story and that could point to the answer of just why the items disappeared. On the other hand, solving the missing item mystery might lead a solver into guessing why the authorities had trouble with the story.
Since sitcoms often inhabit cartoonish or surrealistic worlds, it might help to nail this down:
Would it be easy to believe that this story could take place in the real world, exactly as portrayed in the show?
Would it be possible for it to happen but highly unlikely?
Would it be just plain impossible?
reply to dirtball:
Since sitcoms often inhabit cartoonish or surrealistic worlds, it might help to nail this down:
Would it be easy to believe that this story could take place in the real world, exactly as portrayed in the show? Yes. At least that was how it was intended anyway.
Would it be possible for it to happen but highly unlikely? I would say in reality the story is fairly unlikely, but maybe not “highly unlikely.”
Would it be just plain impossible? No.
Was the show made in UK? USA? Another largely English-speaking country? Europe? A fairly free/ democratic country?
Were “the authorities” actually a government body? Senior people in the TV company? A non-Government organisation? A bunch of experts who claim to be “authorities” on a particular subject?
Was the show ever broadcast, despite the objections? If so, was it broadcast edited? unedited?
Could the show be broadcast today, without objection from the authorities?
reply to Peter_Morris:
Was the show made in UK? USA? Yes, USA. Another largely English-speaking country? Europe? A fairly free/ democratic country?
Were “the authorities” actually a government body? I don’t think so, though the government might have been in agreement with them. Senior people in the TV company? Yes. A non-Government organisation? Yes. See previous and post #5193. A bunch of experts who claim to be “authorities” on a particular subject? No.
Was the show ever broadcast, despite the objections? Only after the compromise. If so, was it broadcast edited? Just with the compromise intact. unedited? No.
Could the show be broadcast today, without objection from the authorities? Yes.
Did the objections involve only one single episode of the show?
Did the authorities’ objections primarily have anything to do with believing the cost of producing the episode(s) in question would be too high?
Or that it would be too controversial?