Talk:The Jungle

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.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
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>

Is the book fiction or not? This isn't really explained anywhere in the article... -Yes it is: the book is referred to as a "novel" throughout the article.

• The family depicted in the book is fictional. However, the events and situations that the characters face are typical of the setting. Therefore, many historians consider the book to be historically accurate on broad terms. This article should be expanded to include more information about the content of the book itself.134.29.149.254 17:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Great book, I highly suggest it. Mainly for the socialist output.Do you think that this deserves to be added to the portion about wages in 1906?

"But a big man cannot stay drunk very long on three dollars."

Three dollars in 1906 equates to 61 dollars in 2005 -- quite enough to get drunk. An oversight? Or is it that pricey to get drunk?]

Prices don't necessarily inflate equally. It's quite possible that alcohol was much more expensive during that period of time, particularly since it couldn't be mass produced as easily. Although it does seem a little sketchy (what were alcohol prices said to be in other parts of the book?) his figures couldn't be ridiculously off when you consider he's writing about contemporaries. Sarge Baldy 23:55, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

• Shouldn't some of the criticism be mentioned? There's a ton of it.

• If one goes to a bar in West Hollywood, California, U.S., for instance, and drinks alcoholic beverages, then the price may exceed $61 in 2005.
• I think a table of wages, food expenses, rent, the price of the home they tried to buy, and other items including the price of alcoholic drinks should be compiled for this book to put things in perspective. What is wrong with an unbiased table that both shows the legitimate and profligate spending of the Lithuanian family of Jurgis Rudkus in The Jungle with the chapters in which those monetary amounts are given?

--anon

i am distressed by the fact that the bulk of this article seems to be taken directly from the text of "of meat and myth", also linked at the end of the page and generated by the mackinak center for public policy. neither article attempts to show evidence for such assertions as, "Subsequent investigation proved that most of Sinclair’s allegations of unsanitary practices had little factual basis." the first investigation was deemed by roosevelt himself to be overly defensive of the industry. it even declared that the inspection laws were not being followed due to expense. (gabriel kolko, "meat inspection: theory and reality") the neill-reynolds report, while flawed, does vindicate some of sinclair's work. Uncleosbert 21:42, 11 December 2005 (UTC)uncleosbert

Agreed, it seems strongly biased. It points out some very sketchy investigations from an organization, the federal government, very much accused in the work as being part of the problem and supportive of the meat-packing industry. It clearly ignores any possibility of bias in the government's study, and calls their findings "facts". Likewise that entire stretch of dialogue is one-sided, making an argument that the book is pure fiction with no truth to it, extending this throughout without any counter of opinion. Sarge Baldy 23:47, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I also agree. This information seems biased. Also, as someone who has read the book, I don't feel four paragraphs largely in defense of the meat packing industry are appropriate on this page. Perhaps they belong elsewhere; but Sinclair was primarily writing about socialism. That's the theme of his book. This isn't a journalistic expose on meatpacking that requires vigorous fact-checking. Sinclair wrote a piece of fiction, largely to promote socialism. I'd support moving the argument on meatpacking facts or fallacies elsewhere. The book clearly had a major impact on the meatpacking industry, but placing that debate here distracts from encyclopedic coverage of the novel's plot, literary themes, and political statements. I feel a page on Sinclair's book should focus more on Sinclair's book and less on what such-and-such committee's report had to say about the aftermath of an industry mentioned in that work of fiction. --Anon, 12 December 2005

I am confused. Is not the line "Subsequent investigation proved that most of Sinclair’s allegations of unsanitary practices had little factual basis" referring to the Bureau of Animal Husbandry's report. At least, a reference to that report immediately follows that sentance. So how is that "no evidence"? If there is evidence of problems with the report, then those could be discused.

-- annon

that's it precisely... it is referring to that report only and that report is already questioned by several sources. to cite it as the only investigation as if it had been satisfactory to the fed at the time is to give an incomplete picture of the investigation conducted. in fact, doubleday conducted an independent investigation before agreeing to publish the jungle, presumably to determine if it was going to result in charges of libel. i'm rounding up some cites...

Uncleosbert 01:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)uncleosbert

Havin

[edit] mackinac.org seems to be a questionable source

I would very much like to know whether or not Sinclair's claims had any factual basis. One of the main sources drawed upon in the article seems very biased. It definitely has one possible glaring factual error upon a cursory review.

== http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=7229 "Some two million visitors came to tour the stockyards and packinghouses of Chicago every year. Thousands of people worked in both. Why is it that it took a novel written by an anti-capitalist ideologue who spent but a few weeks there to unveil the real conditions to the American public?" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/1900/pop.html ==

Illinois census data would suggest that the equivalent of ~40% of the entire population of Illinois or more than the entire population of Chicago would annually visit Chicago's meatpacking facilities and stockyards. I very much doubt visits to the Chicago meatpacking industry were this popular or could even bear this amount of annual traffic, even though Chicago was a major transportation hub at the time. It seems very much to me that this mackinac.org article is very biased and commits a logical fallacy in dismissing the Neill-Reynolds report. It's sole claim against the Neill-Reynolds report was that Neill and Reynolds were inexperienced in the meat-packing industry. It makes no other claim to dispute the Neill-Reynolds report. It seems to me that even those inexperienced in the meatpacking industry would be able to refute or deny some of the sanitation and safety claims in Sinclair's book. I highly suggest editing the body of the article to remove this biased source and making it more neutral until more facts come to light.

-- 01:13, 31 December 2005 (UTC)Dec 30 2000

I agree completely with what has been said here. This article seems to be very biased and mackinac.org does not appear to be a reputable site. As such, I have decided to remove the majority of the section entitled "Public Reaction and Federal Response".

-- Lvialviaquez 03:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Literary analysis

I agree that the sentence "for lack of a proper ending" should have been deleted. It would be nice, though, to have a section entitled something like "Critical response". It's one of those works that was trounced by the critics of the time, and again over the years, but has had so much staying power that it must now be called a classic. "Jungle as metaphor" could be a subcategory of this. Any takers? Novickas 21:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Judging from the amount of vandalism on this page, the novel must be assigned really often in high school. Wish there were some way to quantify that; it's too bad that they don't see any connection between this book and the issues discussed in Fast Food Nation. Novickas 22:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)