Talk:The Bear and the Dragon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Criticism
Changed minor to large. And who removed the entire criticism section???
This was one of the more controversal Tom clancy's novels I dont think the entire section on criticisms of should have been removed.
cool book bad idea.
I think that there should be a responce to the criticism in the article to make it less point of view. However the statement " which Clancy used only as a means of making the characters belivable and not to slur Asians." ignores the main criticism, which is not only does Clancy makes his characters use racist terms, he also characterices Asians in an extremely negative light through their characterisations and actions. If someone has a source link perhaps we could put a modified version of the statement back in.--Gary123 02:00, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I was a little suprised to see that the criticism section was all 'external' - the world's reaction to the book, with little or no commentary on the internal logic of the story. If nothing else, Chester Nomura's technical scheme should raise at least two questions; instead, people only seem to care that he got laid. Wyvern 10:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I decaps-locked the title of this section. Dappled Sage 22:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Needs Rewriting
The whole section on criticisms needs rewriting. It's hardly encyclopedic at this juncture, more of an informal commentary with no sources cited or rebuttals included. We need reviews that discuss each of these criticisms, statements from those Asian-American groups that were offended, and sources for other material in the criticism section, or it's just a rant and not true criticism.
Furthermore, the writing isn't very clear. One sentence in particular reads that "Moderates and liberals were made uneasy by the intense amount of right wing influence in the novel including condemnation of abortion, a flat tax, and a negative portrayal of liberals."
We need reviews and sources for this grand sweeping statement (I'm a moderate-to-liberal and I wasn't "made uneasy" by any of that), but it also needs serious rewriting. The way it reads now, the novel condemns abortion, a flat tax, and negative portrayal of liberals. That doesn't make any sense. Someone needs to do some serious work on this - I'll put it on my list. -Xinoph 21:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Simply look at 1) the book itself 2) the reasons given for negative reviews at amazon 3) abd several of the links and I think and objective person would see a clear antiasian and conservative bias. But I agree that perhaps the criticisms should be better worder and perhaps qualified. --Gary123 02:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I think you should specify that most of the racial slurs in the book were used against the Chinese specifically. Also citiations are needed for the military inaccuracies.
[edit] Military Buffs
I added more critisisms of the book based on the inaccuracies on the PLA, can be verified here: www.sinodefence.com and www.sinodefenceforum.com
toping the ny times best seller list? I don't think so. And Clancy isnt exactly a liberty spreading humanitarian.--Gary123 00:37, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Plot summary
The section starts off good, but about halfway through suddenly takes a nosedive. It needs some work. BioTube 03:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)