Talk:Invisible Man
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope 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. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] Light Bulbs
I seem to recall that he had 1369 light bulbs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.200.70 03:43, 7 November 2005 (talk • contribs)
For those of you who are unsure, he actually is shocked by an electric carpet after the "Battle Royale". The observers put metal coins on an electric rug and as the black "contenders" touch the coins, they are electrocuted. The Battle Royale scene is not a hallucination.
[edit] Primary result?
Speaking from an international viewpoint, is this really the best result for a search of "Invisible Man"? The result should, at the very least, report to a disambiguation page listing options, given that people (such as myself) came here searching for an article on the Wells story. The various possible responses on the subject as a whole would warrant more than a disambiguation link at the top.
Whilst this might be an important matter for race relations in the USA, international users of Wikipedia (given that the USA makes up a fairly small percentage of the world) are unlikely to be seeking this response, or indeed consider it notable enough to supercede the far better known Wells story. - Berym 01:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
The H.G. Wells story is called "The Invisible Man" - different title, you see - and I don't see any evidence that it's better known than Ellison's , which is incredibly significant and influential. (I'm Australian btw.) Sills bend 07:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, this book is widely considered one of the most significant pieces of 20th century literature, and at least according to The Guardian (UK) it is one of the top 100 books of all time ([[1]]). Finally, issues of race are also of significance for people outside of the U.S.A. dr. yesterday 23:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Still, disambiguition seems reasonable. Real readers aren't likely to think about whether the title begins with "The" or not. But I'm new here, so maybe I'm out of line with policies.AngelaVietto (talk) 16:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ISBN? Art and design?
What edition has the ISBN that is listed in the infobox? If the page count is listed from the second edition, shouldn't there be an ISBN from the second edition as well? Maybe with the edition of whatever ISBN is currently in the box listed in parentheses beside it, followed by the ISBN of the other edition. On the back of my "Second Vintage International Edition," the ISBN-13 is 978-0-679-73276-1 (while the ISBN-10 is 0-679-73276-4). On a different note, the back cover of the book lists "Art direction: Susan Mitchell" and "Design: Marc J. Cohen." On the publication information page, in small italics, "Book design by Cathryn S. Aison" is listed. I don't know how much of this information is warranted or wanted, but there it is. Monkeyfett 16:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Moved comment from assessment comments
I do believe that the narrator literally received shock treatmentOgecirtnecc 05:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC) Ras the Liberator is a Metaphor for Marcus Garvey, Black NationalistOgecirtnecc 05:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV tag
I added it manly because of the "Historical context" section. The few statements that got me were:
"...Invisible Man revealed a new way of looking at racial tensions within America..."
...The novel left a lasting effect on society..."
And the one that got me the most, which was:
"Actually. Invisible Man should not be viewed as being a transition between the Black Arts Movement and the Harlem Renaissance. If anything, it owes more to the tradition of the great American novel."
re-writing large sections of articles is not really my forte, so I placed the tag in hopes that someone more experienced could come along and help. Tesfan 03:53, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] comment on "the Acually ... line"
I am the author of this line and I am really not sure why you feel that this is inaccurate. If you think that it is, then please explain why. I have since rewrote the whole historic section because neither the Black Arts movement nor the Harlem Renaissance has any place in this section to characterize a novel written by Ralph Ellison. If you don't believe me, then maybe you should consult Amiri Baraka. I am sure he will tell you that Ellison wasn't even read during the black arts movement, much less be considered part of the movement. Ellison has said on occasion disparaging words against the Harlem Renaissance. Saying that his novel was a transition between the two, is like putting the novel in a box that should not have been created in the first place. It is more accurate to place his novel in the tradition of the great American novel, like Huck Finn, Light in August, Moby Dick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 14u2ponder (talk • contribs) 18:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- I suggest you read Wikipedia's policy on no original research to help guide your editing and contributions. I'll put the text I redacted here so that it can be reintroduced into the main article space when it is properly sourced. Also please keep discussions about the article on the talk page (where it belongs). Pericles899 (talk) 07:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] TO Pericles899
What makes this information quote unquote original research. I just think that most people have only a passing knowledge of Ralph Ellison's work and never venture beyond the hollowed walls of Invisible Man. I am going to let this information stay here, because I am sick of arguing with people with limited knowledge of Ralph Ellison. Even if I was a good enough at citing people would still come along with their limited knowledge and opinions and say this is opinion.
I suggest you read more about Ralph Ellison before you call yourself authority enough to edit someone else's work. If you had read Arnold Rampersad's biography on Ralph Ellison, you'd know that I know what I am talking about when it comes to Kenneth Burke. It is common knowledge that Ellison borrowed from Burke at will, that they were friends and that Invisible Man and Juneteenth both benefited from Kenneth Burke thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.0.20 (talk) 05:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] toward burke
When you have to tell people that if they had read Rampersad's biography, they'd know this stuff, that's a pretty good indication that it's not common knowledge. But citing Rampersad would be a great idea.AngelaVietto (talk) 16:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] angelavietto
I knew about Kenneth Burke before Rampersad's biography. I just find it funny that Rampersad is immediately accepted as an authority on such matters, where I am called into question. The bottom line is that it would take far more laborious citing than I am willing to do to convince ill-informed readers about the stuff I know about Ellison. Rampersad's book is far more imperfect than perfect and so I wouldn't recommend it to anybody. If you want to know about Ellison all you have to do is read what Ellison read, he tells you everything in his essays.
[edit] Section edited out from main article:
"Though Ellison has a laundry list of influences, one person who is often not mentioned in the conversation about Ellison is Kenneth Burke. Kenneth Burke could rightly be called Ellison's muse.[Citation needed]Though any artist of Ellison's stature cannot really be limited as such, and it may be that I am overstating the influence a bit, Burke's work was a constant in Ellison's writing. [Personal conjecture] In fact, Ellison has stated that he used Kenneth Burke's terms Purpose, Passion to Perception to organize Invisible Man in a three-part division. Burke was called a speculative thinker and I think that that is right. His main concern was to connect art with life. Other of Ellison's influences include Melville, Faulkner, Dostoevsky, Twain, T. S. Eliot and to a greater or less extent, Du Bois and Washington. In fact, one way of looking at Invisible Man is to view it in terms of the debate between Washington and Du Bois concerning the idea of uplift.
Toward the "Citation needed," I must say that Kenneth Burke was a muse of Ralph Ellison; this, from deeply reading Ralph Ellison, which is only to say that I read many of the books that he mentions time and again in his essays. One of those books was called "Permanence and Change" by Kenneth Burke. In this book, Burke has a whole section devoted to something called "Perspective by Incongruity." He also mentions terms like "Trained Incapacity." After you familiarize yourself with these terms, go back and read all of Ellison's work and you will see that Burke could be called Ellison's muse. Not only because Ellison mentions terms like these so much in his work, but because Burke was no ordinary writer himself, but dealt with ideas in a very sophisticated way.
Here is one example of Ellison using Kenneth Burke. Excerpt from Juneteenth, notes section page 352:
The sermon of Hickman and Bliss which takes place on juneteenth must be related to later speeches made by the senator while in Washington....The rhythms of all of this should feed back one upon the other proving not only perspectives by incongruity, but ironies, and some measure of comedy.
I cannot help the fact that very few people know of Kenneth Burke or that so-called experts on Ellison never mention him as an influence. I only know that Burke WAS an important writer to Ralph Ellison. He was as important as Faulkner, Dostoevsky, Twain and the rest. In fact, there is a section in Burke's "A Grammar of Motives" called the Representative Antidote, which is nearly a blueprint of how Ellison approached a scene. All of this knowledge is there for the taking."
[edit] Invisible...?=
Wait a second...so he's not really invisible? 208.107.3.50 (talk) 15:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
