Talk:Mrs. Dalloway
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Category:LGBT literature?
Can someone please explain the sense in which this belongs in Category:LGBT literature. Yes, the author was a lesbian gay (or bi, depending on one's construction of these words), but that clearly doesn't suffice to put the work in that category any more than a random Patricia Highsmith novel. I don't know the work, I know it only from the film The Hours, but I don't remember any explicitly gay themes. At a quick look, the other works in the category have explicitly gay themes (except The Importance of Being Earnest, about which I have the same issue, only with more confidence, since I know the play well.
Is this category well-defined? And if so what are the criteria for including this novel? -- Jmabel | Talk 21:01, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Themes
Clarissa's relationship with Sally, who like her has 'grown up' to be a matron, is the most explicit. It contrasts with the marital relationship which it is suggested is sexually cold and unemotional (she sleeps in a single bed in a room the critic Elaine Showalter has described as "tomblike").
However while Clarissa's sexual attraction to women is important perhaps it isn't enough to classify it as LGBT.
What then, would meet such requirements? Perhaps a taxonomy to determine such qualification? Keep in mind, contemporary literary analysis of both Virginia Woolf and her works might prove in disagreement with the idea of such disclusion. -Vinegartom 13:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
Shouldn't Mrs. Dalloway redirect to Mrs Dalloway (without the period), instead of the other way around? This is an English novel, written by an English author, and it was originally published without the period. I would change the redirect myself, but don't know how. 203.173.35.197 06:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Support. In case anyone's in doubt, here's the original cover, as published by Hogarth Press back in the 20s (I want one...). Convention seems to indicate that moving it is, in fact, the thing to do. Cantara 07:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
- Support: if information provided above is correct. Tutmosis 22:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Done. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 07:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to go ahead and be bold, moving this back to "Mrs. Dalloway", with the period. Even though the original title may not have contained the period, the vast majority of references to the title, in both America and England, are with the period, and the commonly-accepted (and encyclopedic) method would be with the period. However, I'll add in a footnote noting the original spelling of the novel's title without the period. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 03:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Parable1991, would you mind clarifying why you reverted this move? I've gone ahead and moved it back, pending an explanation from you. (See my comment above for why I believe the article should be located at Mrs. Dalloway.) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not stream of consciousness
A stream-of-consciousness narrative implies a single protagonist, and this doesnt apply to Mrs Dalloway.
Dictionary definitions concerning stream-of-consciousness narrative describe it merely as a literary technique with the thoughts of characters being espoused, as does the Wikipedia entry for stream of consciousness. The only reference found citing individual as a requirement is the psychology definition for stream-of-consciousness [1]. Therefore above statement is not applicable. -Vinegartom 12:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)