Talk:The Great Divorce
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. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article has an incomplete infobox template! - see Novels InfoboxCode or Short Story InfoboxCode for a pattern | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Fantasy task force. (with unknown importance) | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Science fiction task force. (with unknown importance) | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
Shouldn't the allusions to Dante's inferno be mentioned? Also, the science-fiction inspiration, with the hard water and the "travel in size" In his preface, Jack doesn't remember which SF-short story he got the ideas from, but perhaps we can help him? :-) -- Vintermann
- I added a section that references a few quotes in the book and the preface; unfortunately I have no idea what the title of the story in question is. piman 06:49, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] The summary of the story
Does anyone else think that the summary of The Great Divorce in this article is a bit colloquial and not very adult or scholarly? It seems like a fourth grader doing a book report. I don't think it gets at the message of the story (some people are simply not willing to let go of whatever it is that is taking them to hell, even if the face of Heaven; Heaven is far more "real" than hell; etc.). Perhaps this whole article needs to be cleaned up and "professionalized".
[edit] Cleanup
I tried to make the article more comprehensive, clear, and flowing; as well as to add more facts. I also felt a need not to completely trash the efforts of the person(s) who did the earlier versions, and tried hard not to revise or rearrange any more material than absolutely necessary.
I would have been much more comfortable omitting the suggestion of it's being a 'Christian' work at all: because first, because it is not theological, as pointed out in the article; and second, because we do not normally refer to classic works much more openly and specifically Christian, such as Shakespeare's "Measure for Measure" or even more so Malory's "Le Morte d'Arthur", as such; and indeed to most people the adjective "Christian" automatically implies that it's subject can not possibly be of any interest to them, which is certainly untrue of "The Great Divorce".
Finally the concept of an afterlife, it's circumstances varying with the moral quality of the individual, is common to almost all religions, and even some non-religions:
- "Traditional Spiritualists state that they are not necessarily Christians. While they view Jesus as a great teacher and likely a medium, they do not see belief in his teachings as required in order to enter the afterlife."
- -from the Wikipedia article "Spiritualism".
Cspalletta 19:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Lede
I've just changed the second sentence from:
- Although not one of Lewis' better-known works, many perceptive readers consider it to be one of his finest
to:
- Although less renowned than Narnia and the Space Trilogy, it is considered one of his finest works of fiction by many Lewis fans
which is less self-congratulatory (at least in my case), more encyclopedic and has subject-verb agreement. On the other hand, it's a bit weasel-wordy. I'm sure someone can improve on this.
Cheers, CWC(talk) 17:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg
Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Grey town"
I thought the 'grey town' Lewis first finds himself in represented more of a purgatory. Don't want to edit the article with this idea, though, because I'm not sure if I'm right about it.
- I'm not sure if your inquiry has been resolved or not yet; "The Grey Town" in this Novel is symbolic of Hell. And it remains as Hell unless the occupant leaves, should the occupant leave then "The Grey Town" was always Purgatory to that person. So if it represents Purgatory, it also represents Hell, as it was shown, some of the visitors simply returned home and likely didn't return.Sonalchagi (talk) 22:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg
Image:CSLewis TheGreatDivorce.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Primary and Secondary sources
I think that the sentence about primary and secondary sources should be changed to remove that distinction because a "secondary source" is material that is written to discuss the primary sources. For example, if I were to write a biography of C.S. Lewis, I would use his writings and correspondence as "primary sources." "Primary sources" would also be what people who knew him wrote about him as his contemporaries. Biographies and books written about him by scholars would be considered "secondary sources" like my own hypothetical biography. One could say that Dante, Milton, Bunyan, et al. had a direct relationship to Lewis's storyline because he used concepts and themes from them. In his preface he mentions an American sci-fi writer, whose work Lewis had read, who used the idea that the elements a time traveller encountered when he went back to the past would be dangerous to him (hard as Lewis makes the grass and the elements of the "Valley of the Shadow of Life"). Jeremy Taylor, Prudentius, and MacDonald are alluded to in the story, and may have also been direct sources. The point I am making is that the concept of primary and secondary sources here is misapplied.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
