From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the General Project Discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit) After peer review an importance of Top is now assigned this classic novel, it is still in need of more information to raise the quality of the article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Tasks you can do: Novels WikiProject Announcements and open tasks (watch • edit • discuss) → Please help with tagging articles! This WikiProject now includes "Novels", "Novellas", "Novelettes" and "Short Stories" of narrative form! Critique (Featured Article): None current - "7 achieved / 2 removed" Review: Erast Fandorin Improve: Nineteen Eighty-Five • Vathek • Enderby Outside • The Runes of the Earth • The Giver • Crown of Shadows • More... Create: Black Cocktail • Blackthorn Winter • London, 1850 • The Fatal Eggs • More... Novel without Infobox (auto list): many novel articles do not have an infobox - and need one (auto generated list) - may need expansion of article too A new policy proposal has been started and this is to be seen at Wikipedia:Speedy deletion criterion for unsourced articles, please take a look at these and comment. This is a vital subject and all editors should consider the implications. These are NOT active yet, but could have wide reaching consequences. Please contribute your views. Our Collaboration Department is continuing with one more title Waverley (novel) for the current month. Get collaborating on the article and also look at nominating other titles to be considered. Pages that only exist as redirects: Men at Arms changes

This article lacks an infobox, {{Infobox Book}} which is part of the standard display of novel information developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels and also Wikipedia:WikiProject Books. You can help by copying the "source code" into the attached article, and filling in the information yourself, or by providing the following information here on the Talk page so that someone else can construct the box:
	~title of novel~ ~cover image of novel fair use~ ~image caption to give edition details~ ~author of novel~ ~country of publication~ ~language of original novel~ ~illustrator for novel~ ~cover artist name for novel~ ~novel genre~ ~publisher for novel~ ~dd month yyyy~ Print (~binding~) ~pagecount pp (~binding~ edition)~ ~ISBN ~999999999~ (~hardcover~ edition)~ ~prior book in series if relevant~ ~subsequent book in series if relevant~
Edit this message

<noinclude>

Contents 1 Discussion 1.1 First novel in English? 1.2 Connection to Rousseau in this article? 1.3 "man friday"? 1.4 Editing the Plot 1.5 Turtle eating Frenchman 1.6 no modern book can boast of such worldwide esteem 1.7 Needed: A web-edition of the first edition published in 1719 1.8 Tobago 1.9 Crusoe - Caruso 1.10 Mention in the media

[edit] Discussion

An event in this article is a April 25 selected anniversary (may be in HTML comment)

---

[edit] First novel in English?

Far from being the first novel in English (perhaps Le Morte d'Arthur?), Robinson Crusoe was not even the first novel by Defoe. His first novel was The Consolidator, or, Memoirs of Sundry Transactions From the World in the Moon., published in 1705 (text at http://www.gutenberg.net/etext04/conso10.txt).

I can't find anyone online who calls The Consolidator a novel. Without having read it, I have to suspect it has to due with narrative structure. However many sites refer to Robinson Crusoe as "considered by many the first English novel". I think our phrasing is equally vague and presents the situation correctly. Rmhermen 15:31, Apr 1, 2004 (UTC)

Take a look! It's a long prose fiction, similar to Gulliver's Travels. Not a novel of character, but a novel of ideas. I guess NPOV demands that I make a page First novel in English to address the controversy. — Gdr 16:46 2004-04-01

---

I saw a humorous sign in an auto mechanic shop which said "Only Crusoe could get everything done by Friday".  :-)

---

Walt Disney did [Robin Crusoe, U.S.N.] as parody.

However, "I was born in the year 1632, in the city of York, of a good
family, though not of that country, my father being a foreigner of
Bremen, who settled first at Hull. He got a good estate by
merchandise, and leaving off his trade lived afterward at York, from
whence he had married my mother, whose relations were named
Robinson, a good family in that country, and from whom I was called
Robinson Kreutznear; but by the usual corruption of words in England
we are now called, nay, we call ourselves, and write our name, Crusoe,
and so my companions always called me. ... "

I was told the family name meant "Crucified Fool" back in AP Honors English.

The translation of the German "Kreutznaer" (not "Kreutznear") as "crucified fool" is incorrect. "Narr" means fool, but "naer" is different in spelling and pronunciation. "Kreutz" is an old spelling of the German word for "cross", but not for "crucified". AxelBoldt 13:59, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

I'd like to disambiguate the link to corn in the article. Anyone know for a fact if it refers to wheat or maize? --Ben Brockert 05:34, May 11, 2004 (UTC)

Neither. (It's barley; see chapter 9.) Gdr 18:37, 2004 May 14 (UTC)

I don't have the book on hand, I'll take your word for it. --Ben Brockert 21:50, May 14, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, you do. See the "external links" section on the article page. Gdr 13:30, 2004 May 16 (UTC)

Oh ah. Good point. More specifically, I don't care about it enough to bother. I'm still taking your word on it. --Ben Brockert 22:32, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Connection to Rousseau in this article?

Somthing like:

"In Jean-Jacques Rousseau's treatise on education, "Emile, or Education", the main character, Emile, is allowed to read only one book before the age of 12, "Robinson Crusoe". Rousseau wants Emile to identify himself as Crusoe, required to reply upon himself for all of his needs. In Rousseau's view, Emile needs to imitate Crusoe’s experience, allowing necessity to determine what is to be learned and accomplished. This is one of the main themes of Rousseau's educational model."

Thoughts?

Rflynn1000 13:18, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)rflynn1000

I agree this is a vital point in the novel. Friday is also the archetype of the noble savage. Though many identify Robinson's utilitarianism with Defoe's, Friday is portayed by the author in a much more positive light, and is one of the few characters that are actually bigger than life. What about Robinson's spiritual quest? How do you think the island changes the way he looks at the "civilised world"? --Wikipedius 20:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "man friday"?

http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext96/rbcru10.txt

Search on "man friday". Seems to be in the book numerous times. --Stbalbach 02:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, in the context of sentences such as "I took my man Friday ..." but never as "Man Friday". Do you not see the difference? SilentC 03:26, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

The OED has an entry for "man Friday"

The etymology section says:

[Alluding to Robinson Crusoe's servant Friday in Defoe's novel, whom Crusoe usually refers to as ‘my man Friday’.

1719 D. DEFOE Life Robinson Crusoe 224 And first, I made him know his Name should be Friday, which was the Day I sav'd his Life.

The definition says:

Someone regarded as having the characteristics of Defoe's man Friday; a servant, an attendant; a personal assistant who does all kinds of work; a companion.

The first recorded use example is from 1809 says:

a1809 R. M. WILSON Jrnl. (modernized text) in H. G. Thursfield Five Naval Jrnls. (1951) 247 The steward..puts great confidence in his Man Friday.

Etymologically it does appear in the book. As a proper noun it does not. I think it's best to just do what the OED did, say how it was originally used, and how it was later used. - Stbalbach 03:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

-- Stbalbach 03:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed SilentC 04:12, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I've added the comma back, as it's grammatically more likely, but I don't have a copy to hand — could someone check? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

It is without the comma in the OED and in the Gutenberg copy online. -- Stbalbach 18:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editing the Plot

I am editing the plot to delete all parts of the story after the point in which Robinson Crusoe leaves the island. I have three different publications of the book, and none of them include Robinson going back and forth from the Brazils to England and meeting up with his captain friend. After boarding the English ship, the book merely says that "[Robinson Crusoe] returned to England after a thirty-five year absence", and the book ends.

It's in the Norton edition (see References). -- Stbalbach 05:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Turtle eating Frenchman

Could you provide further details of the report referred to here?

"One report describes a Frenchman who, after two years of solitude on Mauritius, tore his clothing to pieces in a fit of madness brought on by a diet of nothing but raw turtles." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.158.128.85 (talk • contribs) .

There is also a "citation requested" tag for it in the article. -- Stbalbach 21:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] no modern book can boast of such worldwide esteem

Very good example of peacock terms. Vapour

Equating Western literary world with "the literary world" would be Eurocentric but I would leave it for now. Vapour

Here is the full sentence:

Despite its simple narrative style and the absence of the supposedly indispensable love motive, no modern book can boast of such worldwide esteem.

1) RC is considered the most widely published book in history, in the world (behind some of the religious texts). It has been a publishing hit since the day it was published, into "modern" (current) times. The article discusses this, it is very unusual in how widely published it is, there are few comparisons. 2) It is an axiom, in the modern publishing world, that novels will never succeed unless they have a "love interest" of some kind.

In other words, despite the books antiquated 18th c narrative techniques, and lack of any female interest, it remains at the top of the list in global readership. Now, how you want to word all this is simply a matter of style - I didn't write it originally, but thought it was pithy. It really is a shame to see the meaning of it totally changed and deleted from the article, this is standard mainstream interpretation for anyone who has studied the work, in particular over some obscure "politically correct" POV about "eurocentric". -- Stbalbach 23:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I would say RC is still widely published but its readership is gradually decreasing especially with younger and/or non western generation because the relevance and its significance is harder to grasp. I'm a Japanese and I can say that very few people have actually read the book though many are aware of its basic premiss. The name of RC's companion, Friday, would be considered quite difficult in trivia quiz. I can appreciate the cultural relevance of RC because I'm familiar with the West. For this reason, I also believe that "worldwide esteem" is pushing it too far. "how you want to word all this is simply a matter of style". This is the key here. In fact, in wikipedia, it is not matter of style. It is a matter of policy.

"RC is considered the most widely published book in history, in the world (behind some of the religious texts). It has been a publishing hit since the day it was published, into "modern" (current) times."

The above describtion refer to verifiable fact (though citation is needed). "no modern book can boast of such worldwide esteem." is an unverifiable claim. I will use yours. Vapour

The whole thing should read "by the end of the 19th century.." - once you enter the era of modern literature and mass-produced books (paperbacks in the 1930s) this claim goes out the window. But it is still relevant from a literary history viewpoint, RC really was one of the most widely published and read books in the 18th and 19th centuries, something that everyone read. -- Stbalbach 01:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

And I would like to read why it had such strong impact. To be honest, it is not far off to say that the current TV series "Lost" is a distant offspring of RC. It did define the whole castaway survival genere. I would say there are lot more one can say about RC. I would appreciate if you can expand on the themes and influence section. Vapour

Yeah that is known as "Robinsonade" which the article mentions. I agree a lot needs to be expanded on. -- Stbalbach 14:07, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needed: A web-edition of the first edition published in 1719

Hi, I am looking for people who might like to join me in an attempt to produce a web-edition after the first edition of RC. I could provide scans of the original and an html-text to be revised in the joint effort, yet woul not like to do the work all alone. (See http://www.pierre-marteau.com/editions/1719-robinson-crusoe.html for a first glance - I would not mind if the text we'd produce became public domain, quite the contraray...) --Olaf Simons 15:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by web edition since Project Gutenberg has it online and you have already put a copy online. Do you mean an annotated edition? I created an annotated edition of 'Travels with a Donkey in the Cévennes' by Robert Louis Stevenson - perhaps something like that? -- Stbalbach 20:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The Gutenberg text is a scan of an unknown text source (maybe 19th or early 20th century). It lacks for instance the original preface. Spelling and punctuation are modernised... it is a text you cannot quote with any authority. One should have an html-text following an early edition (I'd propose to follow the first, with all its mistakes and to note these mistakes where necessary, since that gives a picture of what the first readers actually got). The edition to be prodcuced would have page references to the first edition so that anyone could refer to it (RC, first edition, 1719, p.256). The link I gave [1] offers the edition to be produced up to page 3 to give an example (the rest is Gutenberg text). It needs to be checked and corrected throughout. To do that you put the html in one window and the acrobat-reader with the scan of the original pages into the other and then you check the edition sentence by sentence... tedious work, yet good work as that would produce an edition scientists and students all over the world could refer to. Being one of these scholars I'd be ready to offer the literary historian's commentary with the edition we would produce. I'd just like to shoulder that with some other folks. 36 pages, that's a weekend's job, jet ten weekends are no nice work any longer, so if I find ten people who want to read RC anyway, I'll ofer them copies of the original and the html-text to be revised. --Olaf Simons 08:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Distributed Proofreaders does this. They have a large base of volunteers that do this kind of work. -- Stbalbach 13:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Good tip, let's see whether I can win them... (on the other hand, if there are fans around who think they'd like to produce such an edition, contact me at olaf.simons@pierre-marteau.com) --Olaf Simons 09:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tobago

An anon editor added that the island "was thought to be that of Tobago". Beyond the obvious problem that this is a work of fiction, and "thought" by who, based on what evidence - the island of Tobago is a well-known tourist destination and certainly would be economic incentive to claim to be the island - but I notice it is about 50 miles in length which would be much bigger than the island of the novel. --Stbalbach 16:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crusoe - Caruso

Just added a paragraph to the "Cultural Influences" section about the common confusion of Crusoe and Caruso. I still find this persistent mix-up, perhaps because of the lingering influence of the misponunciation embedded in the closing theme song of Gilligan's Island. In any case, I would welcome any additional contributions and editing by those more knowledgeable than I on this issue.

Dr. T. 17:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mention in the media

There's a good article in First Monday, which mentions extensively this page and errors in it. It would probably be worth taking a look. Cheers. Cormaggio ^{is learning} 11:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Good article. -- Stbalbach 15:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone remember a French T.V. adaptation of 'Robinson Crusoe' made sometime in the sixties I think? It was shown many times on British T.V. in a dubbed version. Might be worth a mention along with some other film and T.V. adaptations perhaps.The Relativist 11:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)