A friend asked me to answer this question: What was the full name of the person who considered side 2 of Pod damn near perfect?, using the article: The album was generally well received. Several music critics favorably compared the album to Deal's work with the Pixies, among which were William Van Meter, Rob Sheffield, and Steve Kandell of Spin. Kandell and Sheffield mentioned tracks including "Fortunately Gone" as superior to songs by that group. Kandell noted Pod appealed to fans of the Pixies' "Gigantic", which was written and sung by Deal. In AllMusic, Heather Phares described Pod as a "vibrantly creative debut" that was better than the Pixies' 1990 album Bossanova, and argued that the Pixies should have recorded more of Deal's compositions.The Rough Guide to Rock's Piers Clifton and Melody Maker's Simon Reynolds viewed Pod as lacking energy in comparison to the Pixies' work. To Clifton, it was "plodding", while Reynolds felt it sounded "inhibited, moribund, stilted" and "never [let] it rip like the Pixies". Reynolds added that "Whenever a song gathers momentum or thrust, [the Breeders] throw in a weird bit, a gear change or an abrupt stop. They seem unhappy with the idea of simple rock exuberance." Steve Taylor of The A to X of Alternative Music also found Pod inferior to music of the Pixies, but was impressed with Deal's ability to move from bass to guitar.Some reviews found Pod under-developed or insubstantial. Jon Dolan in Blender likened it to a poorly-constructed building. Robert Christgau of The Village Voice described it unfavorably as more "art project" than the work of a band, and Greg Sandow in Entertainment Weekly felt the lyrics were sometimes forced.Wif Stenger of Trouser Press called the first side "a bit shaky" but considered side 2 to be "damn near perfect". NME's Steve Lamacq described the album as "a tight-ish piece of tantalising rock", and said that listeners who found it too minimalist would soon warm to it. Karen Schoemer of The New York Times praised Pod's intelligence and originality., what would be the answer ?
----
Answer: Wif Stenger
Q: A friend asked me to answer this question: What specific role do the carvings above the donor's head in the present work, analogous to those in van Eyck's earlier van der Paele and Madonna of Chancellor Rolin, likely serve?, using the article: A landscape can be seen through the window behind St. Catherine. Because of the miniature scale of the painting it can be seen only at close up. The view is built with extremely fine brushwork and shows a number of highly detailed buildings and hills before snowcapped mountains.A lance rests against the shoulder of a youthful-looking St. Michael. Michael is dressed in elaborately jewelled and coloured armour, his left arm holding his helmet, while his right hand rests on the shoulder of the donor as he is presented to Mary. The donor kneels in prayer before the Virgin, with his hands held upwards as if in prayer, although they are not clasped. He wears a gold ring on his right small finger, and is dressed in a long olive-green houppelande, at the time the height of fashion and an indicator of status within the Burgundian court. The gown has a fur-lined high collar and deep baggy sleeves, also lined with fur. The donor's bowl-shaped haircut, rounded at the fringe but cut above his ears, is also typical of mid-1430s Netherlandish fashion. Except for the red hood, the garment closely resembles that worn by the groom in the Arnolfini Portrait.The capital of the pillar above the donor's head is lined with carvings of military scenes. Similar carvings are seen near the donor in van Eyck's earlier van der Paele and Madonna of Chancellor Rolin, and where they depict events or personal circumstances from the donor's life. Those in the present work likely serve a similar role, however because the donor is unidentified it is unknown as to what they may refer. Elisabeth Dhanens speculates that they might depict the sarcophagus of Hippolytus in Pisa, which she believes adds credibility to the belief the donor was of Italian origin; she also notes the military scene reflects St. Michael's status as military commander. Ward compares the carving to a similar one found in the Washington Annunciation. Unlike in van Eyck's earlier votive portraits the donor is positioned at a remove from the Marian apparition, and at a much..., what would be the answer ?
A: they depict events or personal circumstances from the donor's life
A friend asked me to answer this question: Whose father disowns her?, using the article: The year is 1965, and 10-year-old Sandra and her parents, Abraham and Sannie, are white Afrikaners. Her parents are shopkeepers in a remote area of the Eastern Transvaal and, despite Sandra's mixed-race appearance, have lovingly brought her up as their white little girl. Sandra is sent to a boarding school in the neighbouring town of Piet Retief, where her (white) brother Leon is also studying, but parents of other students and teachers complain that she does not belong. She is examined by State officials, reclassified as coloured, and expelled from the school. Sandra's parents are shocked, but Abraham fights through the courts to have the classification reversed. The story becomes an international scandal and media pressure forces the law to change, so that Sandra is classified as officially white again. By the time she is 17, Sandra realises she is never going to be accepted by the white community. She falls in love with Petrus, a young black man and the local vegetable seller, and begins an illicit love affair. Abraham threatens to shoot Petrus and disown Sandra. Sannie is torn between her husband's rage and her daughter's predicament. Sandra elopes with Petrus to Swaziland. Abraham alerts the police, and has them arrested and put in prison for the illegal border crossing. Sandra is released by the local magistrate to return home with her parents, but she decides to return to Petrus, as she is pregnant with his child. Her father disowns her., what would be the answer ?
----
Answer:
Sandra