Talk:Monster (novel)

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.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article needs an infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] Author

The author has strayed into mainstream horror with religious elements. I would have to disagree. The "mainstream horror" present in this novel is a lot less intense and horrifying than novels by authors such as Stephen King. Scorpionman 01:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, I would say it is EASILY as horifying as Stephen King (look at "IT" as an example). But still that does not make Peretti a mainstream SECULAR author. He still is awesome. There is nothing wrong with portraying evil as REALLY horrifyingly evil. That's what it IS after all! --Teenwriter 18:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
You're right, of course. It's not as weird as IT either. But the word "strayed" should be removed; Frank Peretti has not "strayed" into mainstream horror, he has written books such as these purposefully to display the faultiness of evolution. But man, I sure loved this book, and I want a lot more monster stories from Frank Peretti! Scorpionman 03:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clean up

The question has been raised by Teenwriter as to why the interview section has been removed from the article. The answer is simply to conform to better Wiki standards in an attempt to clean up the article as requested. The article, which is still available via a link in the External links section, is not necessary and strays away from the format of other Peretti title articles.

Aside from the question of being necessary or relevant, re-adding the material completely borked the layout of the page. - Cybjorg 10:42, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry for "borking" the layout of the page....(should I link to that verb? ;)), and your explanation was *somewhat* sufficient, although not completely. If the interview was formatted to be "cleaner" THEN would it be acceptable to article? After all, it is TOTALLY about the book...and inspirations are an important discussion... --Teenwriter 20:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree that the inspirations are an important aspect, which is why the interview is linked in the external links section. I just don't see the need to reprint the article here. Some of Peretti's inspirations for authoring the book are listed in the article's opening paragraph, which should suffice. - Cybjorg 04:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
      • Okay. That's fair enough. Thanks for explaining! :) --Teenwriter 16:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

The book information still needs to be put into an infobox, instead of the failed template language that seems to appear just above the information about the possible film version. --Orange Mike 20:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)