Talk:Lord Alfred Douglas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class.

I believe that later in life Douglas became a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer. If someone knows something substantive about this, it should probably be added to the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:15, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Douglas translated The Protocols of the Elders of Zion into English in 1919, one of the first translations of that notorious anti-Semitic piece of propaganda. This is documented in Norman Cohn's "Warrant for Genocide".

Not a Nazi (sympathiser though, in 1941 he published a sonnet in praise of Churchill, and wrote a letter to the Times advocating the takeover of the ports in Eire for the war (Murray page 317)! Hugo999 10:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents 1 Bosie 2 KBE 3 Added Bibliography & Secondary Sources 4 Douglas and boys 5 Sectioning 6 Birthday! 7 Name

[edit] Bosie

I believe that "Bosie" should link here, as those searching for a clarification from Oscar Wilde's letter will most likely search this term first. CaveatLector 04:32, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely. Wilco. -- Jmabel | Talk 22:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] KBE

I have deleted the reference to Douglas being a KBE, which was incorrect. Jason Boyd 23:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added Bibliography & Secondary Sources

I also added some material to the entry and clarifed some parts.Jason Boyd 13:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Douglas and boys

Douglas' tastes were similar to those of Wilde, as attested by various sources ("When they did become lovers, Oscar and Bosie flaunted their desire for working-class boys, entertaining them everywhere from the Savoy Hotel to the Cafe Royal." Charles Kaiser in the Washington Post). Thus he has as much right to be considered a pederastic lover as Wilde. Haiduc 02:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd kind of like a better source than that, but if you want to add the category back go ahead. It would be nice if some of this was discussed in the article. -- JJay 02:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sectioning

I think the recent retitling of sections and breakdown into small sections (the edit also makes a couple of improvements in the text) is ill-conceived and the names used are basically ill-chosen (too informal). I won't revert them singlehandedly, but would support reverting at least the bulk of them. Other opinions would be welcome. - Jmabel | Talk 06:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Birthday!

He was born today, congratulations, mate! He would have been 136 today, way to go=)) --Shandris^{the azylean} 12:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

We now start the article by referring to him as "The Lord Alfred Bruce Douglas". I have almost never seen this form used for him or any other British nobleman outside of a court protocol context. Has this honestly become our style (so to speak)? Or was this one zealous editor whom no one bothered to revert? - Jmabel | Talk 05:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

He wasn't The Lord in any event. - Kittybrewster 09:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Similarly, throughout the article we are calling him "Lord Alfred". I am reasonably sure this goes against Wikipedia style. - Jmabel | Talk 05:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

A style that I wholly deplore though this is not the place to argue the point. - Kittybrewster 09:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

It's nothing to do with Wikipedia style. Peers are correctly referred to as, eg. "The Lord Smith". However Bosey was not a peer. He was merely the son of a Marquess, but not the first-born and hence was never in line to inherit the marquessate. He had the courtesy title "Lord Alfred Douglas". It does not mean that he was actually a "lord". The word "The" is completely wrong. JackofOz 09:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Disagree "merely", but otherwise totally agree. - Kittybrewster 09:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Erm, that was me. Sorry. "The Lord" is correct (have a look at Debrett's Correct Form if you don't believe me, or references in the Court Circular to "the Lord Nicholas Windsor" and "the Lord Frederick Windsor"), but I'm quite happy to accept that it's not our style. But "Lord Alfred" seems perfectly okay. We are allowed to use "Lord John", "Sir John", etc., rather than just using the surname. But I must admit, I changed most of them to "Lord Alfred" as a reaction against the use of "Bosie", which I feel is a totally inappropriate and far too familiar way for an encyclopaedia to refer to him. I'm quite happy for "Douglas" to be used as long as that isn't. Proteus (Talk) 09:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that Bosie is unaccceptable. Lord Alfred is fine. DCF (page 46) says re ygr son of a Duke or Marquess "there is no authority for the prefix of 'The' before his name. - Kittybrewster 09:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

But still uses it... (And there won't be any authority — it's a courtesy title, not a legal one, so customary usage is all that really counts. And the usage of the Court Circular is enough for me.) Proteus (Talk) 09:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Uses it where? - Kittybrewster 10:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

When it gives the style of a younger son of a Duke or Marquess:

Envelope

Formal and Social The Lord Edward FitzGerald

Proteus (Talk) 13:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

My copy is 1971 and says Lord Edward Fitzgerald - Kittybrewster 14:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it. I have the 2002 edition. Proteus (Talk) 14:38, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Interesting thought contributed by a friend to me today. "The" is applied where there are no prospects of promotion. e.g. Marquess of Tavistock is not "The" because he stands to inherit the Dukedom of Bedford. His younger brother however would be "the" Lord (Tom) Russell because he does not stand to inherit his father's dukedom. Apparently this statement is made in Lady Colin Campbell’s Guide to Being a Modern Lady. - Kittybrewster 19:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

This isn't a Court Circular, it's an encyclopedia. We should follow the usage of the biographers we use as sources; and I would be astounded if that usage were not "Lord Alfred Bruce Douglas", with some omitting Bruce. Go ahead; astound me. Septentrionalis 15:33, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I concur. Standard usage in scholarly works for the younger sons of English, Scottish, Irish, GB, and UK dukes and marquesses is "Lord Firstname Lastname" (without "The" as appears in the Court Circular). In the Dictionary of National Biography article, after the first line, he is always referred to as "Douglas" and therefore I have followed suit and changed subsequent references in the wiki-article. Noel S McFerran 16:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I disapprove. - Kittybrewster 16:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see that it makes much of a difference whether "Douglas" or "Lord Alfred" is used - both are appropriate. "Lord Alfred," I would suggest, should only be preferred in instances where he has to be distinguished from other people with the surname "Douglas," even though it was likely used fairly frequently at the time - Lord John Russell, for instance, was often just called "Lord John," even in French diplomatic correspondence! Oddly, the French incorrectly call Lord Augustus Loftus "Lord Loftus." john k 17:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

FYI, the dedication page of the 1894 first English edition of Wilde's Salome read thus:

TO MY FRIEND LORD ALFRED BRUCE DOUGLAS THE TRANSLATOR OF MY PLAY

[1] (my bolding) --Francis Schonken 18:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Tbh I don't have any doubt you can find both forms with a little effort as it is one of those usages that has drifted with fashon. I prefer the use without the 'the' as it strictly refers to holders of substantive titles in law. However it's not an issue I can really get too worked up about. Alci12 21:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest to avoid "the" because it is a bit pretentious. john k 04:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Pretentious, perhaps, but that opinion is POV, no? I say the whole point is for the articles to be scrupulously correct. Mowens35 21:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Scrupulous correctness, I believe, omits "the" in this context, although protocol would allow it if he were alive and one were being introduced as he entered a room. - Jmabel | Talk 00:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

If this is correct, then it should be cited on usage of titles page for future reference. Mowens35 21:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

---

I wonder why Douglas in the introduction is called a 'minor Uranian' poet. I think 'minor' is condescending, especially if you compare with the other poets called 'minor' in Wikipedia. There are dozens of editions of Douglas' poetry, he is still in print and admired as a poet by many a critic. Also, whereas he certainly has written Uranian poetry, and his work has been included in books about Uranian poetry, Douglas' work certainly was not limited to that epithet, as you probably will concede when reading his poems (even if they may not be to your poetical taste). Moreover, he was not only a poet but also a translator and a prose writer. So, I would suggest to change the introduction to: 'was a writer and translator who is best remembered as the intimate friend of the writer Oscar Wilde.' Soczyczi 13:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

From my perspective, the dub 'minor' has less to do with the quality of his writing and more to do with his standing. Douglas rightly appears in any consideration of the Uranian writers, but his standing has never warranted (and probably will never warrant) the label 'major'. He is a fascination and an appreciated figure by many readers, but even Timothy d'Arch Smith would consider him 'minor' (as opposed to 'major'), as he does all those he considers in Love in Earnest. Perhaps it could be phrased better as 'Douglas was a minor poet specializing in Uranian verse'. Gerard Manley Hopkins is a 'major' poet (and retains that standing); but, Douglas just does not warrant that dub, no matter how much you and I might appreciate him, biographically and literarily. Welland R 20:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I never said Douglas is a major poet, nor a major Uranian poet. I don’t know what you mean with his ‘standing’. Of course Douglas is a Uranian poet. But not in the first place. Certainly Douglas is not to be introduced as a 'minor poet specializing in Uranian verse'. Why do you want to designate him like that? I think that’s condescending. It’s a value judgment, your value judgment. Alfred Douglas was a poet, a translator and a prose writer, better known as the intimate friend of Oscar Wilde. When you describe his poetry, you can say that he composed Uranian verse, among other subjects. Maybe you can cite a choir of critics or literary historians (Smith for instance).

But just look at the ‘minor poets’ in Wikipedia: [Chandos Leigh] was Lord Byron's fag at Harrow School and 'inherited some of his master's poetical talent'. He was an author and minor poet. He dined together with Lord Byron on the evening before Byron left England for Europe in April 1816. Henry Bellamann. Miles Coverdale, Plotius Tucca… That’s quite another level I think. And if you are using the Latin designation of a ‘minor poeta’, I’d like a definition first. Soczyczi 01:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not suggesting that Douglas should be labeled either 'a minor Uranian poet' or 'a minor poet specializing in Uranian verse' (I was only attempting to find a way of making the first more palatable). As for 'standing', I only meant that a 'major' poet is one who is likely to appear in general poetry anthologies, to be critically engaged, and to be taught in university lessons. A poet like Auden or Hopkins, etc., are 'major' in this way, and have been so for a length of time which suggests that this is no mere literary fashion. Douglas's poetry is unlikely to appear in a general poetry anthology, to be analyzed in literary criticism, or to be taught in an academic setting -- hence, he does not have sufficient 'standing' to be considered anything other than 'minor'. Personally, I do not believe he warrants this lack of critical attention, but you and I do not constitute a sufficient voice to change this. Perhaps someday he will be frequently reproduced, studied, and taught. Personally, I think your phrasing is judicious, and I will change the entry to the following, which I hope you find agreeable: 'Alfred Douglas was a poet, a translator and a prose writer, better known as the intimate friend of Oscar Wilde. Much of his early poetry was Uranian in theme, though he tended, later in life, to distance himself from both Wilde's influence and his Uranian verse'. Welland R 21:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)