text:
Ruddigore

Ruddigore; or, The Witch's Curse, originally called Ruddygore, is a comic opera in two acts, with music by Arthur Sullivan and libretto by W. S. Gilbert. It is one of the Savoy Operas and the tenth of fourteen comic operas written together by Gilbert and Sullivan. It was first performed by the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company at the Savoy Theatre in London on 22 January 1887.

The first night was not altogether a success, as critics and the audience felt that Ruddygore (as it was then called) did not measure up to its predecessor, The Mikado. After some changes, including respelling the title, it achieved a run of 288 performances. The piece was profitable, and the reviews were not all bad. For instance, The Illustrated London News praised the work of both Gilbert and, especially, Sullivan: "Sir Arthur Sullivan has eminently succeeded alike in the expression of refined sentiment and comic humour. In the former respect, the charm of graceful melody prevails; while, in the latter, the music of the most grotesque situations is redolent of fun."

There were further changes and cuts, including a new overture, when Rupert D'Oyly Carte revived Ruddigore after the First World War. Although never a big money-spinner, it remained in the repertoire until the company closed in 1982. A centenary revival at Sadler's Wells in London restored the opera to almost its original first-night state. In 2000, Oxford University Press published a scholarly edition of the score and libretto, edited by Sullivan scholar David Russell Hulme. This restores the work as far as possible to the state in which its authors left it and includes a substantial introduction that explains many of the changes, with appendices containing some music deleted early in the run. After the expiration of the British copyright on Gilbert and Sullivan works in 1961, and especially since the Sadler's Wells production and recording, various directors have experimented with restoring some or all of the cut material in place of the 1920s D'Oyly Carte version.

Background

After The Mikado opened in 1885, Gilbert, as usual, promptly turned his thoughts to finding a subject for a next opera. Some of the plot elements of Ruddigore had been introduced by Gilbert in his earlier one-act opera, Ages Ago (1869), including the tale of the wicked ancestor and the device of the ancestors stepping out of their portraits. Heinrich Marschner's 1828 opera, Der Vampyr, involves a Lord Ruthven who must abduct and sacrifice three maidens or die. Locals claim that the Murgatroyd ancestors in Ruddigore are based on the Murgatroyd family of East Riddlesden Hall, West Yorkshire. According to his biographers, Sidney Dark and Rowland Grey, Gilbert also drew on some of his earlier verse, the Bab Ballads, for some plot elements. The song "I know a youth who loves a little maid" can be traced back to the Bab Ballad "The Modest Couple", in which the very shy and proper Peter and Sarah are betrothed but are reluctant to shake hands or sit side by side. Sir Roderic's Act II song "When the night wind howls" had its forerunner in one of Gilbert's verses published in Fun magazine in 1869:

Fair phantom, come! The moon's awake, The owl hoots gaily from its brake, The blithesome bat's a-wing. Come, soar to yonder silent clouds; The ether teems with peopled shrouds: We'll fly the lightsome spectre crowds, Thou cloudy, clammy thing!

The opera also includes and parodies elements of melodrama, popular at the Adelphi Theatre. There is a priggishly good-mannered poor-but-virtuous heroine, a villain who carries off the maiden, a hero in disguise and his faithful old retainer who dreams of their former glory days, the snake-in-the-grass sailor who claims to be following his heart, the wild, mad girl, the swagger of fire-eating patriotism, ghosts coming to life to enforce a family curse, and so forth. But Gilbert, in his customary topsy-turvy fashion, turns the moral absolutes of melodrama upside down: The hero becomes evil, the villain becomes good, and the virtuous maiden changes fiancés at the drop of a hat. The ghosts come back to life, foiling the curse, and all ends happily.

Sullivan delayed in setting Ruddigore to music through most of 1886. He had committed to a heavy conducting schedule and to compose a cantata, The Golden Legend, for the triennial Leeds Music Festival in October 1886. He also was squiring Fanny Ronalds to numerous social functions. Fortunately, The Mikado was still playing strongly, and Sullivan prevailed on Gilbert to delay production of Ruddigore. He got down to business in early November, however, and rehearsals began in December. During the Act II ghost scene, it would be impossible for the cast to see Sullivan's baton when the stage was darkened for the Ancestors' reincarnation. A technological solution was found: Sullivan used a glass tube baton containing a platinum wire that glowed a dull red.

The opera encountered some criticism from audiences at its opening on 22 January 1887, and one critic wondered if the libretto showed "signs of the failing powers of the author". After a run shorter than any of the earlier Gilbert and Sullivan operas premiered at the Savoy except Princess Ida, Ruddigore closed in November 1887 to make way for a revival of H.M.S. Pinafore. To allow the revival of the earlier work to be prepared at the Savoy, the last two performances of Ruddigore were given at the Crystal Palace, on 8 and 9 November. It was not revived in the lifetimes of the composer or author.

Roles

 * Mortals
 * Sir Ruthven Murgatroyd Disguised as Robin Oakapple, a Young Farmer (comic baritone)
 * Richard Dauntless His Foster-Brother – A Man-o'-war's-man (tenor)
 * Sir Despard Murgatroyd of Ruddigore, A Wicked Baronet (bass-baritone or baritone)
 * Old Adam Goodheart Robin's Faithful Servant (bass)
 * Rose Maybud A Village Maiden (soprano)
 * Mad Margaret (mezzo-soprano)
 * Dame Hannah Rose's Aunt (contralto)
 * Zorah Professional Bridesmaid (soprano)
 * Ruth Professional Bridesmaid (speaking/chorus)
 * Chorus of Professional Bridesmaids, Villagers, Bucks and Blades

 * Ghosts
 * Sir Rupert Murgatroyd The First Baronet
 * Sir Jasper Murgatroyd The Third Baronet
 * Sir Lionel Murgatroyd The Sixth Baronet
 * Sir Conrad Murgatroyd The Twelfth Baronet
 * Sir Desmond Murgatroyd The Sixteenth Baronet
 * Sir Gilbert Murgatroyd The Eighteenth Baronet
 * Sir Mervyn Murgatroyd The Twentieth Baronet
 * Sir Roderic Murgatroyd The Twenty-first Baronet (bass-baritone)
 * Chorus of Ancestors

Act I
In the town of Rederring, in Cornwall, a chorus of professional bridesmaids frets that there have been no weddings for the last six months. All of the eligible young men are hopeful of a union with Rose Maybud, the prettiest maiden in the village, yet they are too timid to approach her. The desperate bridesmaids ask Rose's aunt, Dame Hannah, if she would consider marrying, but she has vowed to remain eternally single. Many years previously, she had been betrothed to "a god-like youth" who turned out to be Sir Roderic Murgatroyd, one of the bad baronets of Ruddigore. Only on her wedding day had she discovered his true identity.

Dame Hannah tells the bridesmaids about the curse of Ruddigore. Centuries ago, Sir Rupert Murgatroyd, the first Baronet of Ruddigore, had persecuted witches. One of his victims, as she was burnt at the stake, cursed all future Baronets of Ruddigore to commit a crime every day, or perish in inconceivable agonies. Every Baronet of Ruddigore since then had fallen under the curse's influence, and died in agony once he could no longer bring himself to continue a life of crime.

After the horrified bridesmaids exit, Dame Hannah greets her niece, Rose, and asks whether there is any young man in the village whom she could love. Rose, who takes her ideas of Right and Wrong from a book of etiquette, replies that all of the young men she meets are either too rude or too shy. Dame Hannah asks particularly about Robin Oakapple, a virtuous farmer, but Rose replies that he is too diffident to approach her, and the rules of etiquette forbid her from speaking until she is spoken to. Robin enters, claiming to seek advice from Rose about "a friend" who is in love. Rose says that she has such a friend too, but Robin is too shy to take the hint. Rose's devotion to etiquette prevents her from taking the first step, and so they part.

Old Adam, Robin's faithful servant, arrives and addresses Robin as Sir Ruthven (pronounced "Rivven") Murgatroyd. Robin reveals that he is indeed Sir Ruthven, having fled his home twenty years previously to avoid inheriting the Baronetcy of Ruddigore and its attendant curse. He tells Adam never to reveal his true identity. Now Richard Dauntless, Robin's foster-brother, arrives after ten years at sea. Robin tells him that he is afraid to declare his love to Rose, and Richard offers to speak to her on his behalf. When Richard sees Rose, however, he falls in love with her himself and proposes immediately. After consulting her book of etiquette, Rose accepts. When Robin finds out what has happened, he points out his foster-brother's many flaws through a series of backhanded compliments. Realising her mistake, Rose breaks her engagement with Richard and accepts Robin.

Mad Margaret appears, dishevelled and crazed. She has been driven to madness by her love for Sir Despard Murgatroyd, the "Bad Baronet". She is jealously seeking Rose Maybud, having heard that Sir Despard intends to carry Rose off as one of his daily "crimes". Rose tells her, however, that she need not fear, as she is pledged to another. They leave just in time to avoid the arrival of the Bucks and Blades, who have come to court the village girls, followed by Sir Despard, who proceeds to frighten everyone away. He muses that, although he is forced by the family curse to commit a heinous crime every day, he commits the crime early, and for the rest of the day he does good works. Richard approaches him and discloses that Despard's elder brother Ruthven is alive, calls himself Robin Oakapple, and is going to marry Rose later that day. The elated Despard declares himself free of the curse, as he can now transfer the baronetcy to his brother.

The village gathers to celebrate the nuptials of Rose and Robin. Sir Despard interrupts, revealing that Robin is his elder brother and must accept his rightful title as the Bad Baronet. Rose, horrified at Robin's true identity, resolves to marry Despard – who refuses her: now free of the curse, the ex-baronet takes up with his old love and fiancée Mad Margaret, who is ecstatic. Rose then accepts Richard, as he "is the only one that's left." Robin leaves to take up his rightful identity as Sir Ruthven Murgatroyd.

Act II

At Ruddigore Castle, Robin (now Sir Ruthven) tries to come to grips with being a bad baronet, a task at which he proves to be spectacularly lacking. Old Adam suggests various evil crimes, but Robin prefers minor acts that are not criminal, but "simply rude". Richard and Rose enter to ask Robin's consent to their marriage, which he gives grudgingly.

Robin's weak crimes stir his ancestral ghosts from their usual haunt of the castle's portrait gallery. The curse requires them to ensure that their successors are duly committing a crime every day, and to torture them to death if they fail. They inquire as to Robin's compliance with this requirement. They are not pleased to learn that the newly-recognised baronet's crimes range from the underwhelming (filing a false income tax return: "Nothing at all", say the ghosts; "Everybody does that. It's expected of you.") to the ridiculous (forging his own will and disinheriting his unborn son). Robin's uncle, the late Sir Roderic Murgatroyd, orders him to "carry off a lady" that day or perish in horrible agony. After the ghosts treat him to a sample of the agonies he would face, Robin reluctantly agrees. He tells Adam to go to the village and abduct a lady – "Any lady!"

Despard, meanwhile, has atoned for his previous ten years of evil acts and has married Mad Margaret. The two of them now live a calm, dispassionate life of moderately-paid public service. They come to the castle and urge Robin to renounce his life of crime. When Robin asserts that he has done no wrong yet, they remind him that he is morally responsible for all the crimes Despard had done in his stead. Realising the extent of his guilt, Robin resolves to defy his ancestors.

Adam has now complied with Robin's orders but has unfortunately chosen to abduct Dame Hannah. The dame proves formidable indeed, and Robin cries out for his uncle's protection. Sir Roderic duly appears, recognises his former love and, angered that his former fiancée has been abducted, dismisses Robin. Left alone, he and Dame Hannah enjoy a brief reunion. Robin interrupts them, accompanied by Rose, Richard and the bridesmaids. He quibbles that, under the terms of the curse, a Baronet of Ruddigore can die only by refusing to commit a daily crime. Refusing is therefore "tantamount to suicide", but suicide is, itself, a crime. Thus, he reasons, his predecessors "ought never to have died at all."* Roderic follows this logic and agrees, stating that he is "practically" alive.

Now that Robin is free of the curse, Rose once again drops Richard and happily resumes her engagement to Robin. Roderic and Dame Hannah embrace, while Richard settles for the First Bridesmaid, Zorah.

 * Note: In the original ending, all of the ghosts came back to life. In the revised ending substituted by Gilbert after the premiere, only Sir Roderic comes back to life.

Musical numbers

 * Original Overture (arranged by Hamilton Clarke, includes "I once was as meek", "Oh, why am I moody and sad?", "Welcome, gentry", "The battle's roar is over" and "When a man has been a naughty Baronet")
 * Revised Overture (arranged by Geoffrey Toye, 1920; includes "I once was as meek", "When the night wind howls", "I know a youth", "My eyes are fully open", "I shipped, d'ye see" and Hornpipe)

 * Act I
 * 1. "Fair is Rose" (Chorus of Bridesmaids)
 * 2. "Sir Rupert Murgatroyd" (Hannah and Chorus)
 * 3. "If somebody there chanced to be" (Rose)
 * 4. "I know a youth" (Rose and Robin)
 * 5. "From the briny sea" (Chorus of Bridesmaids)
 * 6. "I shipp'd, d'ye see, in a revenue sloop" (Richard and Chorus)
 * 6a. Hornpipe
 * 7. "My boy, you may take it from me" (Robin and Richard)
 * 8. "The battle's roar is over" (Rose and Richard)
 * 9. "If well his suit has sped" (Chorus of Bridesmaids)
 * 10. "In sailing o'er life's ocean wide" (Rose, Richard, and Robin)
 * 11. "Cheerily carols the lark" (Margaret)
 * 12. "Welcome, gentry" (Double Chorus)
 * 13. "Oh, why am I moody and sad?" (Sir Despard and Chorus)
 * 14. "You understand? I think I do" (Richard and Sir Despard)
 * 15. Finale Act I
 * "Hail the bride of seventeen summers" (Ensemble)
 * Madrigal, "When the buds are blossoming" (Ensemble)
 * "When I'm a bad Bart, I will tell taradiddles!" (Robin and Chorus)
 * "Oh, happy the lily" (Ensemble)

 * Act II
 * 16. "I once was as meek" (Sir Ruthven and Adam)
 * 17. "Happily coupled are we" (Rose and Richard)
 * 18. "In bygone days" (Rose with Chorus of Bridesmaids)
 * 19. "Painted emblems of a race" (Sir Ruthven, Sir Roderic, and Chorus of Ancestors)
 * 20. "When the night wind howls" (Sir Roderic and Chorus)
 * 21. "He yields, he yields" (Chorus)
 * 22. (original) "Away, remorse!" ... "For thirty-five years I've been sober and wary" (Robin)
 * 22. (replaced) "Away, remorse!" ... "Henceforth all the crimes" (Robin) (The original song was replaced about a week into the original run. For the history of this number, see Versions.)
 * 23. "I once was a very abandoned person" (Margaret and Despard)
 * 24. "My eyes are fully open" (Margaret, Sir Ruthven, and Despard)
 * 25. "Melodrame"
 * 26. "There grew a little flower" (Hannah with Sir Roderic)
 * 27. Finale Act II (Ensemble)
 * "When a man has been a naughty baronet"
 * "For happy the lily" (reprise) (Ensemble) (See Versions).

Premiere and reception
The first night was not as successful as the other Savoy opera premieres because of controversy over the title and the revivification of the ghosts, and reservations about the plot and music. According to the St James's Gazette, "The first act was well received by the audience. Number after number was rapturously encored, and every droll sally of dialogue was received with a shout of appreciative mirth." The interval was long (a half hour) as the elaborate picture gallery needed to be set up, but D'Oyly Carte had anticipated this and had printed indulgence slips which were distributed. It was marked by noisy hubbub when Lord Randolph Churchill was spotted in the crowd, but a loud shout of "No politics!" brought relative calm. The second act, however, ended badly. On 23 January 1887, under the heading "Their First Flat Failure; The First Gilbert and Sullivan Opera Not a Success", The New York Times reported, "When the curtain finally fell there was hissing – the first ever heard in the Savoy Theatre. The audience even voiced sentiments in words and there were shouts and cries such as these: 'Take off this rot!' 'Give us The Mikado!'"  The paper added, "(T)he name is decidedly against it."

The performance was hampered by an off night for Leonora Braham as Rose Maybud and by George Grossmith's usual first night jitters, a week after which he fell dangerously ill and had to be replaced by his understudy, Henry Lytton, for almost three weeks. Sullivan noted in his diary, "Production of Ruddigore [sic] at Savoy.  Very enthusiastic up to the last 20 minutes, then the audience showed dissatisfaction."

Critical reception
On the day of the premiere, The New York Times, whose correspondent attended the dress rehearsal the day before, warned, "The music is not up to the standard of Sir Arthur Sullivan. As a whole it is largely commonplace ... Gilbert's dialogue in the first act is here and there very amusing, but in the second it is slow and tedious." The press generally agreed with the Savoy audience that the second act of the premiere was inferior to the first. The Times opined that "the fun which runs alive in the first act runs completely dry in the second, which is long and tedious, and winds up with an anti-climax of inanity." The Times praised both the libretto and the music of the first act ("Everything sparkles with the flashes of Mr. Gilbert's wit and the graces of Sir Arthur Sullivan's melodiousness... one is almost at a loss what to select for quotation from an embarrassment of humorous riches.") but rated the score, as a whole, "of a fair average kind, being not equal to The Sorcerer but certainly superior to Princess Ida." Punch also thought the second act weak: "The idea of the burlesque is funny to begin with, but not to go on with". The Pall Mall Gazette thought the libretto "as witty and fanciful as any of the series" though "the second half of the last act dragged a little." The New York Times reported, "the second (act) fell flat from the beginning and was a gloomy and tedious failure." According to the St. James's Gazette, "gradually the enthusiasm faded away and the interest of the story began to flag, until at last the plot seemed within an ace of collapsing altogether."

The Era commented, "the libretto as a whole is very weak and loosely constructed." Fun asked, "Could it be possible that we were to have a dull play from the cleverest and most original humorist of the day? Alas! It could – it was." According to the Pall Mall Budget, "the players seemed to be nervous from the start. Miss Braham forgot her lines, and was not in voice.  Mr. (George) Grossmith was in the same plight". The Times also criticised Braham, stating that she "acted most charmingly, but sang persistently out of tune". The staging was also criticised: The Times stated, "The ghost scene ... of which preliminary notices and hints of the initiated had led one to expect much, was a very tame affair." The Era thought Sullivan's score "far from being fresh and spontaneous as is his wont".

Not all newspapers were adversely critical. The Sunday Express headlined its review "Another Brilliant Success". The Sunday Times agreed and stated that the work was "received with every demonstration of delight by a distinguished and representative audience." The Observer also praised the piece, though allowing that it "lacks something of the sustained brilliance" of The Mikado. The Daily News applauded the innovation of Sullivan (who conducted, as usual, on the first night), of conducting with a baton tipped with a small incandescent light. Scholar Reginald Allen suggested that the reviews in the Sunday papers may have been better than the others because their critics, facing deadlines (the premiere was on Saturday night, and finished late because of the long interval), may not have stayed to the end. Fun, having disparaged the libretto, said of the music, "Sir Arthur has surpassed himself". The Pall Mall Gazette praised the "charming melodies, fresh and delightful as ever"; The Daily News wrote that "Mr Gilbert retains in all its fulness his unique facility for humorous satire and whimsical topsy-turveydom" and praised Sullivan's "melodic genius which never fails". Lloyd's Weekly Newspaper said, "Sir Arthur Sullivan must be congratulated."

Subsequent reviews and reception

Subsequent reviews, written after Gilbert and Sullivan had renamed the show and made other changes, were generally more favourable. A week after the premiere, the Illustrated London News praised the work, the actors and both Gilbert and, especially, Sullivan: "Sir Arthur Sullivan has eminently succeeded alike in the expression of refined sentiment and comic humour. In the former respect, the charm of graceful melody prevails; while, in the latter, the music of the most grotesque situations is redolent of fun." On 1 February 1887, The Theatre wrote, "There can be no doubt that by its admirable production of Messrs. Gilbert and Sullivan's latest work the Savoy management has scored another of those shining and remunerative successes that its enterprise, intelligence, and good taste have repeatedly achieved – and merited." A week later, The Academy reckoned that Ruddygore (as it was still called in the review) was probably not so good as Patience or The Mikado, nor as "fresh" as H.M.S. Pinafore, but "it is better than ... Princess Ida, the Pirates, and Iolanthe". The Musical Times called the work "one of the most brilliant examples which the associated art of Messrs. Gilbert and Sullivan has brought into existence," and said that Sullivan had "written some of his freshest and most delightful melodies." However, in the view of The Manchester Guardian, reviewing the Manchester premiere in March 1887, "The weakness of his central idea has led Mr Gilbert into extravagance without wit and parody without point."

On 5 February 1887, The New York Times reported the change of name to Ruddigore. "In consequence of the criticisms on the piece, the second act has been changed.  The pictures, with the exception of one, no longer come down from their frames.  The houses are packed, as they always are in London, but the opinion is universal that the thing will be a worse failure in the provinces and America than Iolanthe." In a letter cabled to The New York Times and printed on 18 February, Richard D'Oyly Carte denied that the piece was a failure, stating that box office receipts were running ahead of the same time period for The Mikado, despite the absence of the ailing Grossmith, who was by then recovering. He acknowledged that there had been "isolated hisses" on the first night because some audience members did not like the reappearance of the ghosts or a reference to the "Supreme Court" (according to D'Oyly Carte, misunderstood as "Supreme Being") but asserted that both objections had been addressed by the removal of the offending material, and that audience reaction had been otherwise enthusiastic. He added, "The theatre is crammed nightly."

The American productions met with mixed success. The demand for tickets for the first night was so great that the management of the Fifth Avenue Theatre sold them by public auction. A "large and brilliant" audience assembled for the New York premiere on 21 February 1887. "After the first half of the first act there was a palpable diminution of interest on the part of the audience, and it must be admitted that there were times during the course of the evening when people were bored." While the critic had praise for many members of the cast and felt the production would improve once the cast was more familiar with the work, the reviewer concluded that "Gilbert and Sullivan have failed." On the other hand, the American tour, beginning in Philadelphia six days later, met with a much more favourable audience reaction. "That the opera is a great success here and another "Mikado" in prospective popularity there can be no question.... The general verdict is that Sullivan never composed more brilliant music, while Gilbert's keen satire and pungent humor is  [sic] as brilliant as ever." During the summer of 1886, Braham secretly married J. Duncan Young, previously a principal tenor with the company. In early 1887, shortly into the run of Ruddigore, Braham informed Carte that she was pregnant with her second child, a daughter, who would be born on 6 May. Geraldine Ulmar, the Rose in the New York cast, was summoned to London to take over the role.

Gilbert ranked Ruddigore along with The Yeomen of the Guard and Utopia, Limited as one of his three favourite Savoy operas. Later assessments have found much merit in the piece. After it was revived by the D'Oyly Carte Opera company in 1920, the work remained in their regular repertory, and it has generally been given a place in the regular rotation of other Gilbert and Sullivan repertory companies. By 1920, in a reappraisal of the piece, Samuel Langford wrote in The Manchester Guardian that "the gruesome strain is the real Gilbertian element" but "the opera has abundant charm among its more forbidding qualities". In 1934 Hesketh Pearson rated the libretto among Gilbert's best. In a 1937 review, The Manchester Guardian declared, "It is incomprehensible that Ruddigore should ever have been considered less attractive than the other comic operas in the Savoy series. The libretto gives us Gilbert at his wittiest, and in the music we hear Sullivan not only in his most tuneful vein but also as a master of more subtle rhythms than he commands elsewhere. Moreover, the parody is one that all can enjoy to the full, for here the satire is not pointed at a coterie, nor at this or that æsthetic movement, but at the absurdities of a melodramatic tradition which is nearly as old as the stage itself."

In 1984, Arthur Jacobs rated Ruddigore "One of the weaker of Gilbert's librettos, it was seen (especially after the freshness of invention in The Mikado) to be rather obviously relying on brushed-up ideas.... The plot is supposedly a burlesque of what was 'transpontine' melodrama.... But that brand of melodrama was itself hardly alive enough to be made fun of. As the Weekly Dispatch put it: 'If stage work of the kind caricatured in Ruddygore or The Witch's Curse is not extinct, it is relegated to regions unfrequented by the patrons of Mr D'Oyly Carte's theatre'."

Musical content
The Sullivan scholar Gervase Hughes characterised Sir Roderic's song "When the night wind howls" as "unquestionably the finest piece of descriptive music that Sullivan ever wrote, worthy of a place beside Schubert's Erlkönig, Wagner's overture to The Flying Dutchman, and well above Saint-Saëns' Danse macabre, all of which are tone-paintings in a similar colour. Although the vocal score gives not a hint of the uncanny brilliance of the orchestration, it demonstrates the sure footholds by which the music in a round dozen bars finds its way from D minor to A flat major and back and the shattering impact of the fortissimo chorus entry at an interrupted cadence on the chord of B flat major. The progressions that follow look to be unusual, but if we study them carefully we realise that here Sullivan is not feeling his way in unfamiliar territory. Rather we may find in these few bars an apotheosis of his matured harmonic resource."

Changes during the initial run
After the unfavourable reception that the opera received on opening night, Gilbert and Sullivan made numerous significant cuts and alterations: Sullivan recorded in his diary:

 * [23 January 1887]: Gilbert and Carte came. Pow-wow. Several changes and cuts decided on.
 * [24 January]: Alterations made in finale [2nd act]: ghosts not brought back to life.
 * [25 January]: Long rehearsal for cuts and changes (without band).
 * [30 January] Wrote and scored new song (second act) for Grossmith.
 * [31 January]: Busy all day. Went to American consulate to sign agreement for American "Ruddygore". Finished score of new finale

Gilbert and Sullivan made the following changes:

 * The initial title, Ruddygore, was changed: because of claims that "ruddy" was too similar to the then-taboo curse word "bloody", it was shortly changed to Ruddigore. Gilbert's response to being told they meant the same thing was: "Not at all, for that would mean that if I said that I admired your ruddy countenance, which I do, I would be saying that I liked your bloody cheek, which I don't."
 * "I once was as meek" (No. 16) originally had two verses. In the cut second verse, Robin's servant says that he has changed his name from Adam Goodheart to Gideon Crawle since he is now a "bad Bart.'s steward."  Old Adam is then referred to as "Gideon Crawle" or "Gideon" for the rest of Act II.  After the cut, he remained Old Adam throughout, except for a single erroneous reference ("Gideon Crawle, it won't do!") which persisted in many librettos well into the 20th century.
 * "In bygone days" (No. 18) was cut from two verses to one.
 * "Painted emblems of a race" (No. 19) originally had two extra passages, including a March of the Ghosts after they descend from their frames, both of which were cut. (This alteration may have occurred before the premiere.) The dialogue between Robin and the ghosts afterwards was also shortened.
 * The patter song after the recitative "Away, remorse!" (No. 21a) was changed from "For thirty-five years I've been sober and wary" to "Henceforth all the crimes that I find in the Times". The rewriting of the song was prompted by a letter from Gilbert to Sullivan dated 23 January 1887: "I can't help thinking that the second act would be greatly improved if the recitation before Grossmith's song were omitted and the song re-set to an air that would admit of his singing it desperately – almost in a passion, the torrent of which would take him off the stage at the end. After a long and solemn ghost scene, I fancy a lachrymose song is quite out of place".
 * Despard's and Margaret's stated (in No. 22) place of employment was changed from "a Sunday School" to "a National School".
 * The dialogue scene among Robin, Despard and Margaret before the patter trio (No. 23) was shortened.
 * The dialogue scene before "There grew a little flower" (No. 25) was considerably shortened; the first version exploring the topsy-turvy idea that if Sir Roderic and Dame Hannah were married, her husband would be a ghost, and she would therefore be a wife and a widow at the same time (this concept was recycled in The Grand Duke). Roderic originally entered through a trap door in the floor, where red flames could be seen shooting around him.  This was changed to an entrance from the picture frame.
 * The second revivification of the ghosts was dropped, with only Roderic being revived. Somewhat implausibly, this required the "chorus of Bucks and Blades" from Act I to be present at the castle at the end of Act II, to provide a four-part chorus for the finale.
 * The finale was revised and extended, ending with a common-time reworking of "Oh happy the lily", rather than a straight reprise as previously.

The original vocal score, published in March 1887, represented this revised version of the musical text. A 1987 recording by the New Sadler's Wells Opera, for which David Russell Hulme was adviser, restored most of the surviving material from the first-night version, including "For thirty-five years I've been sober and wary", as well as the extra music from the ghost scene. The recording and the production were based in part on Hulme's research, which also led to the 2000 Oxford University Press edition of the Ruddigore score, in which the music for some passages was published for the first time.

Revisions in the 1920s

Ruddigore was not revived professionally during the authors' lifetimes. When it received its first professional revival in December 1920 in Glasgow – and then in London, in October 1921 – the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company made a number of further cuts and changes that were incorporated in scores and used in subsequent D'Oyly Carte productions and recordings. David Russell Hulme, editor of the Oxford University Press 2000 scholarly edition of the score, has attributed the cuts and other changes to the music principally to Harry Norris, musical director of the D'Oyly Carte at the time of the Glasgow revival, and the modifications to the opera's orchestration, as well as the new overture, to Geoffrey Toye. He concluded that some lesser changes may have been made by Malcolm Sargent, but in a few cases Hulme was uncertain as to which conductor was responsible for which change.

The most conspicuous changes were as follows:

 * Geoffrey Toye, the D'Oyly Carte musical director for the first London revival in 1921, supplied a new overture to replace the original overture arranged by Hamilton Clarke.
 * The playoffs to the Act I numbers "Sir Rupert Murgatroyd" (No. 2) and "If somebody there chanced to be" (No. 3) were shortened.
 * In the Act I song "My boy, you may take it from me" (No. 7), the repetitions of the introduction were omitted, and only the last repeat with Richard was retained.
 * The Act I duet "The battle's roar is over" (No. 8) was cut.
 * Some cuts were made within the Act I finale (No. 15) to shorten transitions between sections.
 * Drum rolls and other orchestral effects were added to the ghost scene in Act II (Nos. 19–20)
 * The Act II recitative and patter song "Away, remorse" ... "Henceforth all the crimes" (No. 21a) was cut.
 * The "Melodrame" (No. 24) was cut.
 * The Act II finale was replaced. The finale as composed and revised by Sullivan had consisted of "When a man has been a naughty baronet", plus a modified reprise of "Oh, happy the lily" in 4/4 time. The replacement (ironically rather closer to Sullivan's discarded original) was a straight reprise of "Oh, happy the lily" in the form it had taken in the Act I finale, in 9/8 time.

The standard Chappell vocal score was revised in the late 1920s to reflect these changes, except that the "Melodrame" and "The battle's roar is over" continued to be printed. The G. Schirmer vocal score published in America agreed with the revised Chappell score, except that it also included Robin's Act II recitative and patter song "Henceforth all the crimes" and both versions of the Act II finale.

The publication of the Oxford University Press edition in 2000 made it easier to restore passages deleted from the opera. Due to the many different editions available and the work's complex textual history, there is no standard performing version of Ruddigore. Comparing the two extant overtures, Gervase Hughes wrote:

"[T]he original overture to Ruddigore ... is a crude 'selection' hardly redeemed by its spirited ending. The final cadence is by no means typical of Sullivan. In this overture a 'double chorus' ... is taken complete from the opera – an unsatisfactory move because it vitiates its effect in the proper place. Nor is the orchestration of the passage particularly skilful. ... When Ruddigore was revived after some thirty-four years this jumble was found unsuitable ... and a new overture (which has been used ever since) was written by Geoffrey Toye. No precedents were followed and there is nothing Sullivanesque about it except the actual tunes; if one of them is momentarily developed in a manner that suggests a haunted ballroom rather than a haunted picture-gallery there is no great harm in that."

Productions

In contrast to its predecessor, The Mikado, Ruddigore had a comparatively short original run of 288 performances. The provincial tour was very brief, closing by early June 1887. Gilbert designed the ladies' and principals' costumes himself, while C. Wilhelm created the Ancestors' costumes. The set was by Hawes Craven. Six portraits of the ancestors that appeared in Act II of the original London production have survived and are on display at Normansfield Hospital Entertainment Hall, southwest London. A production in New York with D'Oyly Carte personnel ran for 53 performances. The opera was not revived during Gilbert and Sullivan's lifetimes.

The first revival was in December 1920 in Glasgow, and the first London revival was the following year. The opera was cut and heavily revised, including a new overture and a new second-act finale. The revival was a success, and from that point on, Ruddigore was a permanent fixture in the D'Oyly Carte repertory until its closure in 1982. New costumes were designed by Percy Anderson in 1927. It was included in every season until the winter of 1940–41, when the scenery and costumes (along with those of three other operas) were destroyed in enemy action. In Australia, no authorised production of Ruddigore was seen until 23 June 1927, at the Theatre Royal, Adelaide, produced by the J. C. Williamson company. A new D'Oyly Carte production debuted on 1 November 1948, with new costumes and an Act II set designed by Peter Goffin. From then on, it was played in every season through 1976–77, aside from 1962–63 (a season that included a lengthy overseas tour). New touring sets were designed by Goffin in 1957. In the late 1970s, the Company started to play a reduced repertory. Ruddigore was included in the 1976–77 tour, then for five months in 1978–1979; and finally in 1981–82.

In 1987, the New Sadler's Wells Opera produced Ruddigore using a new edition of the text that restored many of the passages that prior productions had cut. Among recent professional productions, the Gilbert and Sullivan Opera Company has mounted the opera at the Buxton Opera House, and both Britain's Opera North and America's New York Gilbert and Sullivan Players mounted well-regarded stagings in 2010. Opera North revived its production in 2011 and 2012.

The following table shows the history of the D'Oyly Carte productions in Gilbert's lifetime:

Historical casting
The following tables show the casts of the principal original productions and D'Oyly Carte Opera Company touring repertory at approximately 10-year intervals through to the company's 1982 closure:

Recordings
The four D'Oyly Carte Opera Company recordings (1924, 1931, 1950, 1962) substantially reflect the 1920s cuts and alterations, although they differ in some details. None of these four recordings include Robin's Act II recitative and patter song. There is no commercial recording of Ruddigore as Gilbert and Sullivan left it, but the 1987 New Sadler's Wells recording largely presents the opera with the materials that were included on its first night.

The Gilbert and Sullivan Discography judges that the best commercial recording is the New Sadler's Wells disc and that, of those by the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company, the 1924 and 1962 recordings are best. It also asserts that the Brent Walker video of Ruddigore is one of the stronger entries in that series. More recent professional productions have been recorded on video by the International Gilbert and Sullivan Festival.

Selected recordings
 * 1924 D'Oyly Carte – Conductor: Harry Norris
 * 1931 D'Oyly Carte – Conductor: Malcolm Sargent
 * 1950 D'Oyly Carte – Conductor: Isidore Godfrey
 * 1962 D'Oyly Carte – Orchestra of the Royal Opera, Conductor: Isidore Godfrey
 * 1963 Glyndebourne Festival Chorus, Pro Arte Orchestra, Conductor: Malcolm Sargent
 * 1967 Halas and Batchelor Films (animation; abridged) – D'Oyly Carte, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, Conductor: James Walker
 * 1982 Brent Walker Productions (video) – Ambrosian Opera Chorus, London Symphony Orchestra, Conductor: Alexander Faris; Stage Director: Christopher Renshaw
 * 1987 New Sadler's Wells – Conductor: Simon Phipps

Adaptations and references in literature and culture
Adaptations of the opera have included the following.

 * The Ghosts of Ruddigore by Opera della Luna
 * Ruddy George, or Robin Redbreast, a burlesque with words by H.G.F. Taylor and music by Percy Reeve; it premiered at Toole's Theatre on 26 March 1887 and ran for about 36 performances.

References in literature have included several novels in which the setting of the story involved a production of Ruddigore, such as Murder and Sullivan by Sara Hoskinson Frommer (1997) and Ruddy Gore by Kerry Greenwood (2004; the 7th Phryne Fisher book). The Ghosts' High Noon by John Dickson Carr (1969) was named for the song of the same name in Ruddigore. In "Runaround", a story from Isaac Asimov's I, Robot, a robot in a state similar to drunkenness sings snippets of "There Grew a Little Flower". In chapter 12 of John Myers Myers' novel Silverlock Sir Despard appears and admits that he fakes his evil acts; the locals are so used to this that he needs to pay the girls extra to scream when abducted.

Plot elements from G&S operas entered subsequent musicals; for example, 1937's Me and My Girl features a portrait gallery of ancestors that, like the portraits in Ruddigore, come alive to remind their descendant of his duty. The "Matter Patter" trio is used (with some changed lyrics) in Papp's Broadway production of The Pirates of Penzance, and the tune of the song is used as "The Speed Test" in the musical Thoroughly Modern Millie. It is also sung in a season 5 episode of Spitting Image where Labour leader Neil Kinnock is portrayed singing a self-parody to the tune. The same song is pastiched in the documentary film Bronies: The Extremely Unexpected Adult Fans of My Little Pony. In the Doctor Who Big Finish Productions audio, Doctor Who and the Pirates, songs from Ruddigore and other G&S operas are parodied.

Ruddigore is mentioned in the law case of Banks v. District of Columbia Dep't of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs, 634 A.2d 433, 441 fn. 1 (D.C. 1993), which cites Ruddigore's admonition to "blow your own trumpet". A production of "Ruddigore" is the main plot point in Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries, Season 1 Episode 6, "Ruddy Gore", based on the Phryne Fisher novel of the same name. The stars of the opera are being killed off in an effort to bankrupt the production company.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Ruddigore


text:
Talk:Miles Davis

melody of "Dig" on Miles Davis's gravesite
The opening notes of "Dig," Miles Davis's contrafact on "Sweet Georgia Brown," are inscribed on his headstone.Cdg1072 (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Discography Section
The discography list on this page (separate from the main article: Miles Davis discography) is bothering me. I can't figure out what it's trying to list. It feels like a bunch of listed releases have counter examples not included.

 * Compilations: Some of this is just because Davis was active during an interesting time during the history of how music was released: I noticed some edit history where someone tried to split the section to have his 10" LPs and 12" LPs listed which I feel wasn't a terrible idea. A lot of his earlier material released on 10" was later compiled together in 12" releases that are more well known than the original releases (Dig (Miles Davis album) is probably better known than The New Sounds and Blue Period (album) - all three are listed for now). Birth of the Cool (also a compilation) is certainly more well known than many of his other releases and yet isn't listed, and Classics in Jazz doesn't even have its own Wiki article.
 * I think we should either add Birth of the Cool or remove Dig, Miles Davis and Horns, Blue Haze, Walkin', Bag's Groove, and Miles Davis and the Modern Jazz Giants
 * I think we should also add Modern Jazz Trumpets which is marked as a "compilation" right now, but I'd argue it's a split (compiled from a few artists) rather than a "compilation" (like, in the sense of a "best of"/re-issue release)
 * Live material: Live-Evil (Miles Davis album) and We Want Miles are live albums and listed, yet plenty more live albums aren't. Live-Evil is a bit special since it includes a bit of extra studio material (roughly 16 min of the album's 101 min of material).
 * I understand why we'd keep Live-Evil, but it should arguably be removed. We should definitely drop We Want Miles.
 * Soundtracks: Jack Johnson (album) is listed but not Ascenseur pour l'échafaud (soundtrack) or Jazz Track? Should we list Ascenseur (France/Europe only release originally) or Jazz Track as that was in his home market? Both? What about other soundtracks like Siesta? Dingo? Hot Spot?
 * Jazz Track can also have a similar discussion to the compilation stuff, what about releases that are mostly compilations but have one/few new recording(s) added? Since Jazz Track was Ascenseur with three additional unreleased tracks, and ones that are quite interesting/important in the Miles Davis chronology.
 * I really don't know what is best for this. I think it'd be a bit weird to have stuff like Dingo and Siesta listed, but at the same time Jack Johnson and Ascenseur make sense to me as those are well known.

There's probably some good cleaning up to be had at Miles Davis discography and Template:Miles Davis as well, but starting the conversation here for now, and I'll start by removing We Want Miles which seems to be the most egregious issue on this page for now. Hopefully a discussion can be had and an agreement reached. -- Will Mak  050389  03:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Well, I let this sit for a month and no one responded, so I'm making the changes I think are best. If there's pushback, let's discuss reasoning here. I think my only additional note is that I included both Ascenseur and Jazz Track, but on the same numbered list item, since the former was the original release, and the latter was the release in his primary market (US), so I think both have a clear claim for being included.
 * We might also want to consider archival stuff like Circle in the Round and Directions (Miles Davis album).
 * -- Will Mak  050389  02:26, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

 * WP:WPMAG says to . How "major" they are can be determined from the literature available on them, including the translated coverage at their articles. For Jack Johnson, the story of that album paints it as a soundtrack effort that evolved into a stand-alone studio album, and marketed as such (independently from the documentary film), and having notability (and notoriety) in Davis' artistic development. Live albums like Agharta also are key releases that I wouldn't think should be omitted. I don't see nearly the same level of importance attached to Dingo or The Hot Spot, for example. Piotr Jr. (talk) 20:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Very late to this but I have the same problems! I would love to help with this if I can get some consensus. Davis released albums after Columbia released the LP but before the 12" won the format war. The 12" reissues being called "comps" when they're effectively albums bothers me, and I also think the live albums need cleaning up TlonicChronic (talk) 06:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Gravestone
His gravestone says ‘Sir Miles Davis’. Was he knighted. 86.156.2.208 (talk) 17:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

 * probably just a way of showing respect. Like how you call people "sir" in completely informal situations. Rateb4isik (talk) 17:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation
Another optional full name of Miles Morales, who atypically has the last name of his mother, Rio Morales, rather than of his father, Jefferson Davis (brother of the Prowler) הראש (talk) 15:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * That would be original research as Morales never goes by "Miles Davis". It seems very unlikely that anyone would be searching for "Miles Davis" in the expectation of finding Morales Grachester (talk) 16:11, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Label
Should Fontana (or Capitol) be listed as one of Davis's labels? My understanding is he released Ascenseur pour l'échafaud on Fontana, but he had contracts with Prestige, Columbia and Warner. And if Capitol is there, my guess is Blue Note and Debut should be added as well. It feels like there should be more or less, but I don't feel confident enough to boldly edit. TlonicChronic (talk) 06:28, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Miles Davis


text:
Sándor Ferenczi

Sándor Ferenczi (7 July 1873 – 22 May 1933) was a Hungarian psychoanalyst, a key theorist of the psychoanalytic school and a close associate of Sigmund Freud.

Biography

Born Sándor Fränkel to Baruch Fränkel and Rosa Eibenschütz, both Polish Jews, he later magyarized his surname to Ferenczi.

As a result of his psychiatric work, he came to believe that his patients' accounts of sexual abuse as children were truthful, having verified those accounts through other patients in the same family. This was a major reason for his eventual disputes with Sigmund Freud.

Prior to this conclusion he was notable as a psychoanalyst for working with the most difficult of patients and for developing a theory of more active intervention than is usual for psychoanalytic practice. During the early 1920s, criticizing Freud's "classical" method of neutral interpretation, Ferenczi collaborated with Otto Rank to create a "here-and-now" psychotherapy that, through Rank's personal influence, led the American Carl Rogers to conceptualize person-centered therapy.

Ferenczi has found some favour in modern times among the followers of Jacques Lacan as well as among relational psychoanalysts in the United States. Relational analysts read Ferenczi as anticipating their own clinical emphasis on mutuality (intimacy), intersubjectivity, and the importance of the analyst's countertransference. Ferenczi's work has strongly influenced theory and praxis of the interpersonal-relational theory of American psychoanalysis, as typified by psychoanalysts at the William Alanson White Institute.

Ferenczi was president of the International Psychoanalytical Association from 1918 to 1919.

Ernest Jones, a biographer of Freud, termed Ferenczi as "mentally ill" at the end of his life, famously ignoring Ferenczi's struggle with pernicious anemia, which killed him in 1933. Though desperately ill with the then-untreatable disease, Ferenczi managed to deliver his most famous paper, "Confusion of Tongues" to the 12th International Psycho-Analytic Congress in Wiesbaden, Germany, on 4 September 1932.

Ferenczi's reputation was revived in 2002 by publication of Disappearing and Reviving: Sandor Ferenczi in the History of Psychoanalysis. One of the book's chapters dealt with the nature of the relationship between Freud and Ferenczi.

Activity in psychoanalytic therapy
Contrary to Freud's opinion of therapeutic abstinence, Ferenczi advocated a more active role for the analyst. For example, instead of the relative "passivity" of a listening analyst encouraging the patient to freely associate, Ferenczi used to curtail certain responses, verbal and non-verbal alike, on the part of the analysand so as to allow suppressed thoughts and feelings to emerge. described in a case study how he used a kind of behavioral activation (uncommon in the psychoanalytic therapy at that time) when he asked an opera singer with performance anxiety to “perform” during a therapy session and in this way to struggle with her fears.

Clinical empathy in psychoanalysis
Ferenczi believed the empathic response during therapy was the basis of clinical interaction. He based his intervention on responding to the subjective experience of the analysand. If the more traditional opinion was that the analyst had the role of a physician, administering a treatment to the patient based upon diagnostic judgment of psychopathology, Ferenczi wanted the analysand to become a co-participant in an encounter created by the therapeutic dyad. This emphasis on empathic reciprocity during the therapeutic encounter was an important contribution to the evolution of psychoanalysis. Ferenczi also believed that self-disclosure of the analyst is an important therapeutic reparative force. The practice of including the therapist's personality in therapy resulted in the development of the idea of mutual encounter: the therapist is allowed to discuss some content from his/her own life and thoughts, as long as it is relevant to the therapy. This is in contrast to the Freudian therapeutic abstinence according to which the therapist should not involve his/her personal life with the therapy, and should remain neutral. The mutual encounter is a precedent for the psychoanalytic theory of two-person psychology.

The "confusion of tongues" theory of trauma
Ferenczi believed that the persistent traumatic effect of chronic overstimulation, deprivation, or empathic failure (a term further elaborated by Heinz Kohut) during childhood is what causes neurotic, character, borderline and psychotic disorders. According to this concept, trauma develops as a result of the sexual seduction of a child by a parent or authority figure. The confusion of tongues occurs when the child pretends to be the spouse of the parent. The pathological adult interprets this infantile and innocent game according to his adult "passion tongue" and then forces the child to conform to his passion tongue. The adult uses a tongue the child does not know, and interprets the child's innocent game (his infantile tongue) according to his disturbed perspective. For example, a father is playing with his little girl. During their common game, she offers him the role of her husband and wants him to sleep with her just as he sleeps with her mother. The pathological father misinterprets this childish offer, and touches his daughter in an inappropriate manner while they are in bed together. Here, the child spoke her innocent childish tongue, and the father interpreted her offer with his passionate adult sexual tongue. The adult also attempts to convince the child that the lust on his part is really the love for which the child yearns. Ferenczi generalized the idea of trauma to emotional neglect, physical maltreatment, and empathic failure. The prominent manifestation of these disturbances would be the sexual abuse.

A Lacanian reading of Ferenczi's 'Confusion of Tongues' was published in 2018 by Miguel Gutiérrez-Peláez. Raluca Soreanu has investigated the metapsychological implications of 'Confusion of Tongues' the Clinical Diary for a theory of psychic splitting.

Regressus ad uterum
In Thalassa: A Theory of Genitality (Versuch einer Genitaltheorie, 1924), Ferenczi suggested that the wish to return to the womb (regressus ad uterum) and the comfort of its amniotic fluids symbolizes a wish to return to the origin of life, the sea. This idea of an "uterine and thalassal regression" became a feature of the so-called Budapest School, up to the disciple Michael Balint and his 1937 paper on "Primary [Object-]Love". According to Ferenczi, all forms of human practice, especially sex, were an attempt to reestablish genitalia with the intrauterine experience – a theory which resonated with architect Richard Neutra and may have inspired, or supplemented, Neutra's fascination with uterine suspension. At the same time, Thalassa is embedded in discourses of popular biology, which are reinterpreted by Ferenczi by using psychoanalytic models. Far from simply leaning on Ernst Haeckel, Wilhelm Bölsche, and post-Lamarckism to bolster the psychoanalytic paradigm, Ferenczi defamiliarizes these popular discourses just at a time when they were starting to inform eugenicist projects.

title: Sándor Ferenczi


text:
Robert Asprin

Robert Lynn Asprin (June 28, 1946 – May 22, 2008) was an American science fiction and fantasy author and active fan, known best for his humorous series MythAdventures and Phule's Company.

Background
Robert Asprin was born in St. Johns, Michigan, and attended the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, Michigan from 1964 through 1965. From 1965 through 1966 he served in the United States Army. He was married, twice, and had two children. He was active in science fiction fandom and in the early years of the Society for Creative Anachronism using the name "Yang the Nauseating", and co-initiated the society Great Dark Horde during 1971. He was also the initiator and an influential member of the Dorsai Irregulars. In 1976, he was nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation for The Capture, a cartoon slide show written by Asprin and drawn by Phil Foglio.

Early writing
Asprin's first novel, The Cold Cash War, an expansion of an earlier short story of the same title, was published in 1977.

During the next few years, he created and edited (with his then-wife, Lynn Abbey) the Thieves' World series of shared world anthologies, credited as the first project of its type. Many of the authors later produced novels and stories of the theme which were not included in the anthologies, beginning with Beyond Sanctuary by Janet Morris, the first "authorized" Thieves World novel, published in 1985. Janet Morris and Chris Morris later produced two more authorized Thieves' World novels and a series of related novels about their character Tempus and the Sacred Band of Stepsons. A series of graphic novels followed during the mid-1980s, and several other authors, including Andrew J. Offutt and David Drake, published novels about their characters. In 2002, Lynn Abbey revived the series with the novel Sanctuary.

During 1978, Asprin began the "MythAdventures" series, chronicling the comic adventures of Skeeve and Aahz, with the book Another Fine Myth. Illustrated originally by Frank Kelly Freas, and later by Phil Foglio, the pun-rich books concern a "demon" magician who has lost his powers and his inexperienced human apprentice as they travel through a variety of worlds. Some of the early "Myth" novels were adapted later as comic books by Foglio and others. The Myth books have been published by three publishing companies over the years: Donning Starblaze, Meisha Merlin and, as of 2008, Wildside Press.

During the 1990s, Asprin's "Phule" novels concerned the humorous science-fiction exploits of a rag-tag "Space Legion" and its wealthy and iconoclastic commander, Willard Phule.

Hiatus in writing career
Due to a series of personal and financial problems, Asprin published little during the 1990s, although he had two books on The New York Times Best Seller list, which piqued the interest of fans and the Internal Revenue Service. He eventually negotiated an agreement with the IRS that encouraged him to resume writing, and during the early 2000s he published several novels, mostly in collaboration with authors Peter Heck, Jody Lynn Nye, and Linda Evans. These novels included continuations of the series "Myth Adventures" and "Phule's Company" as well as works of new series.

Later work
One of Asprin's last projects was NO Quarter, originally co-authored with Eric Del Carlo, and later edited by Teresa Patterson. It is a dark fantasy/suspense/murder mystery novel set in the author's beloved New Orleans French Quarter. Although the novel's fantasy elements (voodoo and black magic, tarot readings and precognition, ghosts and mysticism) are secondary to the brutal murder that is the emphasis of the plot, it is set in the same milieu as Asprin's Griffen McCandles novels (Dragons series), Dragons Luck and Dragons Wild. The two protagonists of NO Quarter, Maestro and Bone, also appear as minor characters of the Dragons novels. Maestro, the mysterious professional pool player and fencing master in NO Quarter, is fictionalized but based recognizably on the author. NO Quarter was published November 2009 by DarkStar Books.

Asprin's ofttimes co-author, Jody Lynn Nye, has completed one further Griffen McCandles novel, Dragons Deal, and continued the Myth Adventures series. Dragons Deal was published by Ace in December 2010.

Death and aftermath
Asprin died on May 22, 2008, of heart failure at his home in New Orleans. He was found lying on a sofa with a Terry Pratchett novel still open in his hands. He was to have been the Guest of Honor at Marcon that weekend.

During 2008, his heirs donated his archive to the department of Rare Books and Special Collections at Northern Illinois University.

Myth Adventures series

 * Another Fine Myth (1978)
 * Myth Conceptions (1980)
 * Myth Directions (1982)
 * Hit or Myth (1983)
 * Myth-ing Persons (1984)
 * Little Myth Marker (1985)
 * M.Y.T.H. Inc. Link (1986)
 * Myth-Nomers and Im-Pervections (1987)
 * M.Y.T.H. Inc. in Action (1990)
 * Sweet Myth-tery of Life (1993)
 * Myth-Ion Improbable (2001) set chronologically between Myth Directions and Hit or Myth
 * Something M.Y.T.H. Inc. (2002)
 * Myth-Told Tales (2003) with Jody Lynn Nye. The book is a collection of short stories including both new and previously written works.
 * Myth Alliances (2003) with Jody Lynn Nye
 * Myth-taken Identity (2004) with Jody Lynn Nye
 * Class Dis-Mythed (2005) with Jody Lynn Nye
 * Myth-Gotten Gains (2006) with Jody Lynn Nye
 * Myth-Chief (2008) with Jody Lynn Nye
 * Myth-Fortunes (2008) with Jody Lynn Nye
 * Myth-Interpretations (2011) short fiction collection
 * Myth-Fits (2016) with Jody Lynn Nye

Omnibus editions

 * MYTH Adventures (1984)
 * Myth Adventures One (Another Fine Myth, Myth Conceptions) (1985)
 * Myth Alliances (Myth-ing Persons, Little Myth Marker, M.Y.T.H. Inc. Link) (1986)
 * The MYTH-ing Omnibus (Another Fine Myth, Myth Conceptions, Myth Directions) (1992)
 * The Second MYTH-ing Omnibus (1992)
 * M.Y.T.H. Inc. in Action / Sweet Myth-Tery of Life (2002)
 * M.Y.T.H. Inc. Link / Myth-Nomers and Im-Pervections (2002)
 * Myth Adventures Three (2002)
 * Myth-ing Persons / Little Myth Marker (2002)
 * Robert Asprin's Myth Adventures Volume One (Books 1–6) (July 2006)
 * Robert Asprin's Myth Adventures Volume Two (Books 7–12) (January 2007)

Duncan and Mallory series
A series of three graphic novels published by Starblaze Graphics.
 * Duncan and Mallory (1986) with Mel White
 * The Bar None Ranch (1987) with Mel White
 * The Raiders (1988) with Mel White

Phule's Company series

 * Phule's Company (1990)
 * Phule's Paradise (1992)
 * A Phule and His Money (1999) with Peter J. Heck
 * Phule Me Twice (2000) with Peter J. Heck
 * No Phule Like an Old Phule (2004) with Peter J. Heck
 * Phule's Errand (2006) with Peter J. Heck

Time Scout series

 * Time Scout (1995) with Linda Evans
 * Wagers of Sin (1996) with Linda Evans
 * Ripping Time (2000) with Linda Evans
 * The House that Jack Built (2001) with Linda Evans

Cold Cash series

 * The Cold Cash War (1977)
 * Cold Cash Warrior (1989) with Bill Fawcett

Wartorn series

 * Resurrection (2004) with Eric Del Carlo
 * Obliteration (2006) with Eric Del Carlo

Griffen McCandles (Dragons) series

 * Dragons Wild (April 2008), ISBN 0-441-01470-4
 * Dragons Luck (April 2009), ISBN 0-441-01680-4
 * Dragons Deal (December 2010) with Jody Lynn Nye, ISBN 978-0-441-01926-7
 * Robert Asprin's Dragons Run (October 2013) sole author: Jody Lyn Nye, ISBN 978-0-425-25697-8

Other novels

 * Tambu (1979)
 * The Bug Wars (1979)
 * Mirror Friend, Mirror Foe (1979) with George Takei
 * Catwoman: Tiger Hunt (1992) with Lynn Abbey
 * For King and Country (July 2002) with Linda Evans, ISBN 0-7434-3539-7
 * E.Godz (March 2005) with Esther M Friesner, ISBN 0-7434-9888-7
 * NO Quarter (October 2009) with Eric Del Carlo and Teresa Patterson, ISBN 978-0-9819866-0-9
 * License Invoked (February 2001) with Jody Lynn Nye, ISBN 0-671-31978-7

Selected short fiction

 * "The Ex-Khan" in Angels in Hell (1987), part of the Heroes in Hell series
 * "Two Gentlemen of the Trade" in Festival Moon (1987), part of the Merovingen Nights series
 * "A Harmless Excursion" in Smugglers Gold (1988), also from Merovingen Nights
 * "Mything in Dreamland" with Jody Lynn Nye in Masters of Fantasy (2004), part of the Myth series

Thieves' World series

 * Thieves' World (1979)
 * Tales from the Vulgar Unicorn (1980)
 * Shadows of Sanctuary (1981)
 * Storm Season (1982)
 * The Face of Chaos (1983)
 * Wings of Omen (1984)
 * The Dead of Winter (1985)
 * Soul of the City (1986)
 * Blood Ties (1986)
 * Aftermath (1987)
 * Uneasy Alliances (1988)
 * Stealers' Sky (1989)

Other writing

 * The Capture, cartoon slide show written by Asprin and illustrated by Phil Foglio; nominated for a 1976 Hugo Award

title: Robert Asprin


text:
Talk:Amway

Founding date is inaccurate
An FTC ruling states that AmWay was founded in 1949 as Ja-Ri Corporation and that its name was changed to AmWay in November 1963.

This information ought to be updated. 2600:1700:1310:7CC0:BCA4:99AE:802F:CBFA (talk) 18:34, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 October 2023
Change the first sentence: Amway (short for "American Way") is an American multi-level marketing (MLM) company that sells health, beauty, and home care products.

To: Amway (short for "American Way") is an American direct selling company that sells health, beauty, and home care products.

Sources for the change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amway#cite_note-Xardel-2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amway#cite_note-3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amway#cite_note-4 Nkrasinski (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: why? MLM seems to me to be more specific and informative as direct selling can use both single-level and multi-level marketing Cannolis (talk) 17:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Misleading Redaction
The sentences: "Amway has been investigated in various countries and by institutions such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for alleged pyramid scheme practices. It has never been found guilty, though it has paid tens of millions of dollars to settle these suits."; are incomplete and misleading because this section does not include that the FTC already established that it is not a pyramid scheme through the In re Amway Corp. ruling in 1979. One needs to read the entire article to know about that, but the doubt is already seeded. To be fair, mentioning the FTC in the article's header should also include the corresponding outcome of that process. Otherwise do not mention it and let the reader go through the article to know about the FTC investigation and the results. Finally, the comments about the "FTC" and the "...paid tens of millions of dollars..." together, imply that the company paid to the FTC in 1979 which was not the case. 24.114.71.102 (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Amway


text: Talk:Palermo

title: Talk:Palermo


text:
Monreale

Monreale (Sicilian: Murriali ) is a town and comune in the Metropolitan City of Palermo, in Sicily, Southern Italy. It is located on the slope of Monte Caputo, overlooking the very fertile valley called "La Conca d'oro" (the Golden Shell), a production area of orange, olive and almond trees, the produce of which is exported in large quantities. The town, which has a population of approximately 39,000, is about 7 km inland (south) of Palermo, the regional capital.

Monreale forms its own archdiocese and is home to Monreale Cathedral, a historical Norman-Byzantine cathedral, one of several buildings named in a UNESCO World Heritage Site, a group of nine inscribed as Arab-Norman Palermo and the Cathedral Churches of Cefalù and Monreale.

History
After the occupation of Palermo by the Arabs (the Emirate of Sicily), the Bishop of Palermo was forced to move his seat outside the capital. The role of a cathedral was assigned to a modest little church, Aghia Kiriaki, in a nearby village later known as Monreale. After the Norman conquest in 1072, Christians took back the former Palermo cathedral. Probably the village's role as a temporary ecclesiastical centre played a part in King William II's decision to build a cathedral here.

Monreale was a small village for a long time. When the Norman Kings of Sicily chose the area as their hunting resort, more people and commerce came to the area after the royalty built a palace (probably identifiable with the modern town hall).

Under King William II, a large monastery of Benedictines coming from Cava de' Tirreni, with its church, was founded and provided with large assets. The new construction also had an important defensive function. Monreale was the seat of the metropolitan archbishop of Sicily, which from then on exerted a significant influence over Sicily.

In the 19th century, underage marriages, or those performed without the blessing of the bride's parents, were known as "the marriages of Monreale", according to Eliza Lynn Linton. These referred to marriages performed in remote places, where the law was less observed. (see Gretna Green).

The Cathedral
The cathedral of Monreale is one of the greatest extant examples of Norman architecture. It was begun in 1174 by William II and completed four years later. In 1182 the church, dedicated to the Nativity of the Virgin Mary, was, by a bull of Pope Lucius III, elevated to the rank of a metropolitan cathedral.

The church is a national monument of Italy and one of the most important attractions of Sicily. Its size is 102 metres long and 47 meters wide. The façade is characterized by two large towers (one partially destroyed by lightning in 1807) and a portal with Romanesque bronze doors decorated by Bonanno Pisano. The interior is on the Latin cross plan, divided by ogival arcades, and features fresco cycles executed during the reigns of William II and Tancred of Sicily (c. 1194). The cloister has 228 small columns, each with different decorations influenced by Provençal, Burgundian, Arab and Salerno medieval art.

Other sights

 * Castellaccio ("Bad Castle"), an example of a fortified convent on the Monte Caputo, at 764 m above sea level. It was built in the 12th century by King William II together with the Cathedral and the annexed monastery. It measures c. 80 x 30 m on an irregular plan with four towers on the western side, a middle tower and an entrance tower on the eastern side.
 * Abbey church of San Martino delle Scale, founded in the 6th century AD. It is on the Latin cross plan with a dome, a choir with paintings by Paolo De Matteis (1727), two small side apses, chapels in the transept and ten chapels in each of the aisles. The interior was decorated in 1602 with stuccoes. The baptismal font near the sacristy is from 1396.
 * Church of Collegiata (16th-19th centuries)
 * Church of Santa Ciriaca
 * Church of San Silvestro

International relations
Monreale is twinned with:
 * 🇵🇱 Bielsko-Biała, Poland

Notable people

 * Rocky Segretta (1899–1953), American football player

title: Monreale


text:
Ponzi scheme

A Ponzi scheme is a form of fraud that lures investors and pays profits to earlier investors with funds from more recent investors. Named after Italian businessman Charles Ponzi, this type of scheme misleads investors by either falsely suggesting that profits are derived from legitimate business activities (whereas the business activities are non-existent), or by exaggerating the extent and profitability of the legitimate business activities, leveraging new investments to fabricate or supplement these profits. A Ponzi scheme can maintain the illusion of a sustainable business as long as investors continue to contribute new funds, and as long as most of the investors do not demand full repayment or lose faith in the non-existent assets they are purported to own.

Some of the first recorded incidents to meet the modern definition of the Ponzi scheme were carried out from 1869 to 1872 by Adele Spitzeder in Germany and by Sarah Howe in the United States in the 1880s through the "Ladies' Deposit". Howe offered a solely female clientele an 8% monthly interest rate and then stole the money that the women had invested. She was eventually discovered and served three years in prison. The Ponzi scheme was also previously described in novels; Charles Dickens's 1844 novel Martin Chuzzlewit and his 1857 novel Little Dorrit both feature such a scheme.

In the 1920s, Charles Ponzi carried out this scheme and became well known throughout the United States because of the huge amount of money that he took in. His original scheme was based on the legitimate arbitrage of international reply coupons for postage stamps, but he soon began diverting new investors' money to make payments to earlier investors and to himself. Unlike earlier similar schemes, Ponzi's gained considerable press coverage both within the United States and internationally both while it was being perpetrated and after it collapsed – this notoriety eventually led to the type of scheme being named after him.

Characteristics
In a Ponzi scheme, a con artist offers investments that promise very high returns with little or no risk to an investor. The returns are said to originate from a business or a secret idea run by the con artist. In reality, the business does not exist or the idea does not work in the way it is described or the extent of returns is made up or exaggerated. The con artist pays the high returns promised to their earlier investors by using the money obtained from later investors. Instead of engaging in a legitimate business activity, the con artist attempts to attract new investors to make the payments that were promised to earlier investors. The operator of the scheme also diverts clients' funds for the operator's personal use.

With little or no legitimate earnings, Ponzi schemes require a constant flow of new money to survive. When it becomes hard to recruit new investors, or when large numbers of existing investors cash out, these schemes collapse. As a result, most investors end up losing much or all of the money they invested. In some cases, the operator of the scheme may simply disappear with the money.

Red flags
According to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), many Ponzi schemes share characteristics that should be "red flags" for investors.
 * High investment returns with little or no risk. Every investment carries some degree of risk, and investments yielding higher returns typically involve more risk. Any "guaranteed" investment opportunity should be considered suspect.
 * Overly consistent returns. Investment values tend to go up and down over time, especially those offering potentially high returns. An investment that continues to generate regular positive returns regardless of overall market conditions is considered suspicious.
 * Unregistered investments. Ponzi schemes typically involve investments that have not been registered with financial regulators (like the SEC or the FCA). Registration is important because it provides investors with access to key information about the company's management, products, services, and finances.
 * Unlicensed sellers. In the United States, federal and state securities laws require that investment professionals and their firms be licensed or registered. Most Ponzi schemes involve unlicensed individuals or unregistered firms.
 * Secretive or complex strategies. Investments that cannot be understood or on which no complete information can be found or obtained are considered suspicious.
 * Issues with paperwork. Account statement errors may be a sign that funds are not being invested as promised.
 * Difficulty receiving payments. Investors should be suspicious of cases where they don't receive a payment or have difficulty cashing out. Ponzi scheme promoters sometimes try to prevent participants from cashing out by offering even higher returns for staying put.

According to criminologist Marie Springer, the following red flags can also be of relevance:
 * The sales personnel or adviser are overly pushy or aggressive (may involve high-pressure sales).
 * The initial contact took place by a cold call or through a social network, a language-based radio or a religious radio advertisement.
 * The client cannot determine the actual trades or investments that have been carried out.
 * The clients are asked to write checks with a different name than the name of the corporation (such as an individual) or to send checks to a different address than the corporate address.
 * Once the maturity date of their investment arrives, clients are pressured to roll over the principal and the profits.

Methods
Typically, Ponzi schemes require an initial investment and promise above-average returns. They use vague verbal guises such as "hedge futures trading", "high-yield investment programs", or "offshore investment" to describe their income strategy. It is common for the operator to take advantage of a lack of investor knowledge or competence, or sometimes claim to use a proprietary, secret investment strategy to avoid giving information about the scheme. The basic premise of a Ponzi scheme is "to rob Peter to pay Paul". Initially, the operator pays high returns to attract investors and entice current investors to invest more money. When other investors begin to participate, a cascade effect begins. The schemer pays a "return" to initial investors from the investments of new participants, rather than from genuine profits.

Often, high returns encourage investors to leave their money in the scheme, so that the operator does not actually have to pay very much to investors. The operator simply sends statements showing how much they have earned, which maintains the deception that the scheme is an investment with high returns. Investors within a Ponzi scheme may face difficulties when trying to get their money out of the investment.

Operators also try to minimize withdrawals by offering new plans to investors where money cannot be withdrawn for a certain period of time in exchange for higher returns. The operator sees new cash flows as investors cannot transfer money. If a few investors do wish to withdraw their money in accordance with the terms allowed, their requests are usually promptly processed, which gives the illusion to all other investors that the fund is solvent and financially sound.

Ponzi schemes sometimes begin as legitimate investment vehicles, such as hedge funds that can easily degenerate into a Ponzi-type scheme if they unexpectedly lose money or fail to legitimately earn the returns expected. The operators fabricate false returns or produce fraudulent audit reports instead of admitting their failure to meet expectations, from which point on the operation can be considered a Ponzi scheme.

A wide variety of investment vehicles and strategies, typically legitimate, have become the basis of Ponzi schemes. For instance, Allen Stanford used bank certificates of deposit to defraud tens of thousands of people. Certificates of deposit are usually low-risk and insured instruments, but the Stanford certificates of deposit were fraudulent.

Unraveling
Theoretically, it is possible for certain Ponzi schemes to ultimately "succeed" financially, at least so long as a Ponzi scheme was not what the promoters were initially intending to operate. For example, a failing hedge fund reporting fraudulent returns could conceivably "make good" its reported numbers, for example by making a successful high-risk investment. Moreover, if the operators of such a scheme are facing the likelihood of imminent collapse accompanied by criminal charges, they may see little additional "risk" to themselves in attempting to cover their tracks by engaging in further illegal acts to try and make good the shortfall (for example, by engaging in insider trading). Especially with investment vehicles like hedge funds that are regulated and monitored less heavily than other investment vehicles such as mutual funds, in the absence of a whistleblower or accompanying illegal acts, any fraudulent content in reports is often difficult to detect unless and until the investment vehicles ultimately collapse.

Typically, however, if a Ponzi scheme is not stopped by authorities it usually falls apart for one or more of the following reasons:
 * 1) The operator vanishes, taking all the remaining investment money. Promoters who intend to abscond often attempt to do so as returns due to be paid are about to exceed new investments, as this is when the investment capital available will be at its maximum.
 * 2) Since the scheme requires a continual stream of investments to fund higher returns, if the number of new investors slows down, the scheme collapses as the operator can no longer pay the promised returns (the higher the returns, the greater the risk of the Ponzi scheme collapsing). Such liquidity crises often trigger panics, as more people start asking for their money, similar to a bank run.
 * 3) External market forces, such as a sharp decline in the economy, can often hasten the collapse of a Ponzi scheme (for example, the Madoff investment scandal during the market downturn of 2008), since they often cause many investors to attempt to withdraw part or all of their funds sooner than they had intended.

In some cases, two or more of the aforementioned factors may be at play. For example, news of a police investigation into a Ponzi scheme may cause investors to immediately demand their money, and in turn cause the promoters to flee the jurisdiction sooner than planned (assuming they intended to eventually abscond in the first place), thus causing the scheme to collapse much faster than if the police investigation had simply been permitted to run its course.

Actual losses are extremely difficult to calculate. The amounts that investors thought they had were never attainable in the first place. The wide gap between "money in" and "fictitious gains" make it virtually impossible to know how much was lost in any Ponzi scheme.

Pyramid scheme
A pyramid scheme is a form of fraud similar in some ways to a Ponzi scheme, relying as it does on a mistaken belief in a nonexistent financial reality, including the hope of an extremely high rate of return. However, several characteristics distinguish these schemes from Ponzi schemes:
 * In a Ponzi scheme, the schemer acts as a "hub" for the victims, interacting with all of them directly. In a pyramid scheme, those who recruit additional participants benefit directly. Failure to recruit typically means no investment return.
 * A Ponzi scheme claims to rely on some esoteric investment approach, and often attracts well-to-do investors, whereas pyramid schemes explicitly claim that new money will be the source of payout for the initial investments.
 * A pyramid scheme typically collapses much faster because it requires exponential increases in participants to sustain it. By contrast, Ponzi schemes can survive (at least in the short-term) simply by persuading most existing participants to reinvest their money, with a relatively small number of new participants.

Cryptocurrency Ponzi
Cryptocurrencies have been employed by scammers attempting a new generation of Ponzi schemes. For example, misuse of initial coin offerings, or "ICOs", has been one such method, known as "smart Ponzis" per the Financial Times. Most schemes have a low recovery rate with investors losing their funds permanently.

The novelty of ICOs means that there is currently a lack of regulatory clarity on the classification of these financial devices, allowing scammers wide leeway to develop Ponzi schemes using these pseudo-assets. Also, the pseudonymity of cryptocurrency transactions and their international nature involving countless jurisdictions in many different countries can make it much more difficult to identify and take legal action (whether civil or criminal) against perpetrators.

The May 2022 collapse of TerraUSD, a stablecoin propped up by a complex algorithmic mechanism offering 20% yields, was described as "Ponzinomics" by Wired. Another example of a well known ponzi scheme involving cryptoassets was the ICO of AriseBank or AriseCoin, involving claims about founding the world's first "decentralized bank". The SEC successfully recovered the funds stolen in the ICO. A similar scheme was perpetrated by the founders of the fraudulent cryptocurrency Bitconnect.

In September 2022, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan, described cryptocurrencies as "Decentralised Ponzi Schemes".

Economic bubble
Economic bubbles are also similar to a Ponzi scheme in that one participant gets paid by contributions from a subsequent participant until inevitable collapse. A bubble involves ever-rising prices in an open market (for example stock, housing, cryptocurrency, tulip bulbs, or the Mississippi Company) where prices rise because buyers bid more, and buyers bid more because prices are rising. Bubbles are often said to be based on the "greater fool" theory. As with the Ponzi scheme, the price exceeds the intrinsic value of the item, but unlike the Ponzi scheme:
 * In most economic bubbles, there is no single person or group misrepresenting the intrinsic value. A common exception is a pump and dump scheme (typically involving buyers and holders of thinly-traded stocks), which much more closely resembles a Ponzi scheme than other types of bubbles.
 * Ponzi schemes typically result in criminal charges when authorities discover them but, other than pump and dump schemes, economic bubbles do not typically involve unlawful activity, or even bad faith on the part of any participant. Laws are only broken if someone perpetuates the bubble by knowingly and deliberately misrepresenting facts to inflate the value of an item (as with a pump and dump scheme). Even when this occurs, wrongdoing (and especially criminal activity) is often much more difficult to prove in court compared to a Ponzi scheme. Therefore, the collapse of an economic bubble rarely results in criminal charges (which require proof beyond a reasonable doubt to secure a conviction) and, even when charges are pursued, they are often against corporations, which can be easier to pursue in court compared to charges against people but also can only result in fines as opposed to jail time. The more commonly-pursued legal recourse in situations where someone suspects an economic bubble is the result of nefarious activity is to sue for damages in civil court, where the standard of proof is only balance of probabilities and where the plaintiff need not demonstrate mens rea.
 * In some jurisdictions, following the collapse of a Ponzi scheme, even the "innocent" beneficiaries are liable to repay any gains for distribution to the victims. In this context, "innocent" beneficiaries can include anyone who unwittingly profited without being aware of the fraudulent nature of the scheme, and even charities to which perpetrators often give to relatively generously while a scheme is in operation in an effort to enhance their own profile and thereby "profit" from the resulting positive media coverage. This typically does not happen in the case of an economic bubble, especially if nobody can prove the bubble was caused by anyone acting in bad faith, moreover a person whose own participation in an economic bubble is not particularly notable is not likely to enhance participation in the bubble and thus personally profit by donating to charity.
 * Items traded in an economic bubble are much more likely to have an intrinsic value that is worth a substantial proportion of the market price. Therefore, following collapse of an economic bubble (especially one in a commodity such as real estate) the items affected will often retain some value, whereas an investment that is part of a Ponzi scheme will typically be worthless (or very close to worthless). On the other hand, it is much easier to obtain financing for many items that are the frequent subject of bubbles. If an investor trading on margin or borrowing to finance investments becomes the victim of a bubble, he or she can still lose all (or a very substantial portion) of his or her investment capital, or even be liable for losses in excess of the original capital investment

Exit scam
A Ponzi scheme which ultimately terminates with the operator absconding is similar to an exit scam. The main difference is that an exit scam does not involve any sort of investment vehicle with the accompanying promised returns. Instead, exit scammers either accept payment for product which they never ship (usually after gaining a reputation for reliably shipping product) or steal funds held in escrow on behalf of third parties (the latter often involves the operators of illegal darknet markets that facilitate the sale of illicit goods and services).

Ponzi finance
The term "ponzi finance" generally designates non-sustainable patterns of finance, such as borrowers who can only meet their debt commitment if they continuously obtain new sources of financing, often at an accelerating pace and/or ever-increasing interest rates until the borrower cannot secure more financing at any interest rate and becomes insolvent. The term was first coined by economist Hyman Minsky.

Ponzi game
In economics, the term "ponzi game" designates a hypothesis where a government continuously defers the repayment of its public debt by issuing new debt: each time its existing debt arrives at maturity, it borrows funds from new and/or existing lenders in order to repay its existing debt.

title: Ponzi scheme


text:
Talk:Viral copyright license

Not bad. One down. Now, how do you cover the use of the GPL (clumsily) to cover patents, as at openpatents.org (where 15 so far have been released, mostly in image processing?), or other patent pools run by consortia, corps universities or governments?

Do you want that as a side note here or in "viral patent license" - if so then "viral trademark license" is going to need to be added for symmetry, and discuss things like Java and X/Open and POSIX, which require extensions to the standard to be integrated into the test suites once the consortia agree.

Yeah, there should be some coverage of those things, but maybe not right away. The terms and the culture clearly came out of the free software movement, and so the others should be described in terms of that. For example, openpatents should have its own page, and should simply note that it uses patent licenses with features similar to those found in the GPL, etc. There should probably be some overall IP-licensing discussion that points to various specific pages. Let me think about it. --LDC

This should be merged with copyleft. The claim in the first paragraph, that "other" copyleft licenses are not viral, is wrong. The concept of copyleft is inherently viral, and I don't think there are licenses which are viral but not copyleft. AxelBoldt 01:52 Sep 30, 2002 (UTC)

This article was started early in Wikipedia's history, but represents the most invented and poor language I've seen, not to mention POV. good laugh. should probably be deleted. --71.161.220.206 02:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Viral copyright license