Talk:Bloomsbury Group
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
 |
This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. The citation is in:
|
Contents |
[edit] A bit preachy
I thought that
"but he remained reticent about the sexual lives of the members, as had the excerpts from Virginia’s diary. Subsequent biographies of Strachey then Virginia Woolf, Forster, Keynes, Fry, Vanessa Bell, and Grant removed all veils. Indeed much of the interest in Bloomsbury has become biographically driven, yet it was their achievements as writers, artists, and thinkers that made their lives notable."
sounded a bit preachy, so I replaced it by
"he remained reticent about the sexual lives of the members, as had the excerpts from Virginia’s diary. Subsequent biographies of Strachey then Virginia Woolf, Forster, Keynes, Fry, Vanessa Bell, and Grant removed all veils. Indeed much of the interest in Bloomsbury has become biographically driven, as compared to scholarly interest."
Rodrigo de Salvo Braz (talk) 05:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Strachey a critic
Small point, but it seems strange that Lytton Strachey is referred to as being in the literary realm, while Desmond MacCarthy is specifically referred to as a critic. Obviously Strachey was primarily a critic. - Makrugaik.
[edit] Re-write
I am not remotely knowledgeable about this group but the article seems to me to be rather haphazard in organization, and could use a serious rewrite to improve things... --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 15:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
- If you re-write the article, please be so kind to add George Edward Moore, one of the more famous members of the group. (Wasn't Bertrand Russell a member as well?) --83.134.82.243 16:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- G.E. Moore certainly deserves mention in this article, but he was NOT a member of the Bloomsbury Group itself. He was a member of the Cambridge Apostles, and his book Principia Ethica was an enormous influence on the group, but he did not spend much social time with Strachey, Woolf, etc. The same is true of Bertrand Russell.--JLeland 23:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- I believe that Maynard Keynes' contributions to the group are decidedly understated in this entry. It would seem fitting that his contributions to modern macroeconomics (ie. he invented it!) as well as his funding of many of Bloomsbury's artistic pursuits, and his role as editor of Nation should receive mention.(MK) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.76.213.5 (talk) 21:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
- G.E. Moore certainly deserves mention in this article, but he was NOT a member of the Bloomsbury Group itself. He was a member of the Cambridge Apostles, and his book Principia Ethica was an enormous influence on the group, but he did not spend much social time with Strachey, Woolf, etc. The same is true of Bertrand Russell.--JLeland 23:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
E. M. Forster was NOT a member of the Bloomsbury group (which is curiously capitalized as "Group" in the article), at least as Bloomsbury biographer Leon Edel has it -- and I trust his judgment far more than I do Wikipedians. Indeed, in the many volumes of Virginia Woolf's letters, published in the 1970s and 1980s, letters to Forster are few and far between. Forster was well acquainted with the Bloomsburies, but he was a peripheral figure. The core group consisted of: Virginia Woolf, Leonard Woolf, Clive Bell, Vanessa Bell, Roger Fry, Duncan Grant, Maynard Keynes, Lytton Strachey, and Desmond McCarthy.
[edit] Notable influence
Patti Smith is certainly notable, the influence should be sourced. 'Most' is opinion. Jude Rawlins is not notable, certainly in the company of either the Bloomsbury set or Patti Smith. The sentence requires multiple influenced artists. Any obvious replacements to keep this sentence, with relevant reference? Millichip 17:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sources
this page could use some citations. I don't know enough about the issue to say when, where, what. but I heard a ph.d in vicorian lit present the bloomsbury group very differently i.e. that the group themselves never used the phrase, and that much of the "information" about the group is p.c. myth. just what i heard.
[edit] The other side
Why is there nothing about the other side of the Bloomsbury set? Although they paid lip service to the left, most were of very posh origins, and also acted in an elitist manner. While some worship at their altar, others just think of them as a gallivanting bunch of upper class brats.--MacRusgail 15:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- Find some sources, phrase it well and add it in. Methulah 14:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] New Article
An entirely new article on the Bloomsbury Group has been added.
