Talk:Psychoanalytic literary criticism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Psychoanalytic literary criticism is part of WikiProject Literature, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
The links to examples at the John Hopkins University require an $80 pre-paid subscription to be viewed. It doesn't seem to make much sense to include links to information only a certain few people can access.
The links at the bottom of this article are USELESS for probably 99% of the people who view this article, so I agree with the person above.
- I don't see what it hurts to include the links -- many academic institutions have subscriptions, and so many readers (who will tend to be students for an article like this) will be able to read the JHU Guide articles, which are much longer and more detailed than this one. For other readers, it's just like providing a reference to the book: you can decide whether to pursue it by buying the book, buying the web subscription, or finding the book in a library. -- Rbellin|Talk 05:35, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mauron should have his own page and not be here
By placing one theorist in his/her own heading, you are presenting this person as a major theorist in the field. If you really believe that Mauron is important, than he should have his own page, with a link to it. But to suggest that his argument is more important than those of Peter Brooks, Freud, Lacan, Harold Bloom, Zizek, Elizabeth Wright and others would be difficult considering the current literature on the subject. I see that there is a French page about him, but no English page. This information should be moved to an English page.
Also, historical facts should be written in the past tense! Arguments that continue to exist in the form or a text should be in the present.
ComicbooksR4children 03:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)ComicbooksR4children
[edit] Content Removed
I removed a long section about Psychoanalysis in the middle of the paragraph. It was a duplication of information appropriate to the main article on Psychoanalysis without any explanation of its relevance in literary criticism. I think further information about Psy. should only be added if its immediate relevance for literary criticism is included. Dozenthey (talk) 00:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
