Talk:The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket article.

Article policies
Novels 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the 19th century task force. (with unknown importance)
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia.


Contents

[edit] Richard Parker

Does anyone have to necessary information to add the coincidence of the cabin boy Richard Parker in the story to the real life cabin boy Richard Parker that was cannibalized many years later?

What necessary information do you need? That's pretty much of the gist of the story right there. If you're looking for a source, the comparisons between the Poe story and the real-life event are detailed in Incredible Coincidence by Alan Vaughn. Minaker 11:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Why is it in the section titled "Major Themes," there is only information concerning coincidences between reality and the novel? This isn't anything I would remotely associate with the major themes of The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym.

Well, Minaker, it seems you've responded to a very old post. My assumption is that since this message was posted, further information was added as well as a source. So, I doubt there's still an issue here. --Midnightdreary 13:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hollow Earth

I've read this work and I don't see how the ideas of a Hollow Earth are tied into the novel.

I think that you can learn more about this ideas, and the way it implicitly appears in Poe's novel at this adress

Loudon dodd (french user), 15 november

[edit] Major revision

This article is in need of an urgent revision and edition. Actually it should be rewritten completely. The "Major Themes" is nothing but a collection of trivia, and there is not any plot resume, public acceptance or critical assessment. Nazroon 19:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

This is sadly true of most literature articles on Wikipedia. They are among some of the most difficult types of articles to do well. Welcome any and all help. -- Stbalbach 14:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cover image

The cover image on this article does not appear to be original, but some kind of modern recreation. I could be wrong, but it just doesn't have that 19th century feel to it. Midnightdreary 23:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fake title page

Image:Poe TheNarrativeOfArthurGordonPymOfNantucket title.jpg I deleted it. --Sergey Romanov 14:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure that this image is a "fake" ? And if it is, does it really matter ?--Loudon dodd 22:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
It was definitely a fake. It was basically a Word document and someone used an oldstyle typeface. I'd say that matters. -Midnightdreary 23:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, if you click on the image to see the full-sized version, it's pretty clear that it's not a scan -- it's a replica someone typed out and put on a yellowish background. I asked the uploader to elaborate on the source a while back, but his responce on the image's talk page didn't really clarify anything. ~CS 03:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • It's currently being used on the French version of this page. --evrik (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parker story

The source is some crank website. For such kind of claims hard evidence is needed. Is there any such evidence? If not, I will remove this claim. --Sergey Romanov 14:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I used another source, more credible, and corrected some facts, and moved the whole thing to trivia. --Sergey Romanov 15:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The Parker story is well sourced in a number of articles on Wikipedia, see Richard Parker for the beginning of it, also covered in Life of Pi article. Also trivia should be deleted from Wikipedia per WP:NOT - I don't consider this trivia but an allusion to/from historical events. -- Stbalbach 01:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem with the story of this Parker is that it has absolutely nothing to do with Poe's novel.--Loudon dodd 22:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC) (P.S. I don't really know what you call "major themes" in english, but there's nothing in this section who is in relation with the novel's themes--Loudon dodd 23:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC).)

Is there anybody in there ? No ? Well, I think I can delete the false informations in this article.--Loudon dodd 22:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
No arguments here. Midnightdreary 17:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, just read the book (and if you know french the article I wrote for the french wikipedia, or the links that I gave.)--Loudon dodd 19:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
(EC) I do not disagree either, and have removed yet a third section on the real-life Richard Parker. Namesake coincidences aren't notable enough to dominate this article so much. For the purposes of this page, only the section on the Yann Martel novel is relevant -- and it seems to address the entire issue on its own. There was no need for 3 sections repeating the same material, especially when much of it was speculative. Someday when I have the time to re-read this novel, I'll try to expand this article with more relevent material. ~CS 19:38, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
And I would add that cannibalism isn't a major theme of the novel.
If you can find them, I think that this books can help you in doing something of this article :
  • Daniel Hoffman, Poe, Poe, Poe, Poe, Poe, Poe, Poe, Louisiana University Press, Baton Rouge, 1972 (a chapter is called "journey through the body of the earth, and is about Pym)
  • Patrick Quinn, The French face of Poe, Southern Illinois University Press, 1957 (the chaprter on Pym has been used as a source for a lot of things in the french article)
  • Sidney Kaplan (intro.), The narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym, American Century Series, Hill and Wang, New York, 1960. (the best introduction according to the franch critics)
Good luck for the rewriting of this article.--Loudon dodd 19:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More info needed

This article could use some help... The French version is a featured article. If anyone can translate some of that info into here, that might be a good start - their references are great, too. --Midnightdreary 14:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Great work on building this up! It's definitely getting there... is this enough plot summary or should there be more? I think the Critical reception and impact section should really go further, as well as the Analysis section. Great job to Malkinann and the anonymous IPs who have been working on it. --Midnightdreary 03:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not near finished with the plot translation.. we're only up to about chapter 14... That's not been my priority, as I figure it'd be easier for someone to read it themselves and write a summary. -Malkinann 04:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
This plot has been found too long in the french version of the article : we kept it only because it was already written.--Loudon dodd 21:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
A special thanks to our ambassador to the French version! That's certainly worth knowing! I've never actually read Pym beyond the first few pages so I'm nowhere near an expert myself! --Midnightdreary 21:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The use of the racist idea of the noble savage ?

It is written in the article that "Some reviewers have noted Poe's use of the racist idea of the Noble Savage." I don't know if this idea is racist or not, but I'm sure I haven't seen any "noble" savages in Pym : the inhabitants of Tsalal (and the black cook of the Grampus) are only evil.--Loudon dodd 21:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I was suspicious when I saw that added, but far be it from me from discouraging editors from working on this article when it needs some serious help. :) I would support its removal. --Midnightdreary 21:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
If you remember, Peters is classified as being 'partially Native American' -- a mongrel. Perhaps it is there from whence such mention came. -- 4.159.77.118 (talk) 08:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps. But say it's reference to a "noble savage" is still original research unless there's a source attached to it... though I haven't found that reference in the text myself. Way to respond to old posts, by the way. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plot Introduction

The plot introduction seems quite wordy for just an introduction. It's also too short for a full plot summary, as it seems to drop off in what I believe might be the middle of the novel. 69.95.234.130 (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the editors who watch this page would unanimously agree that the entire article is in need of serious work and attention. The method in which the plot is presented is something we've chatted about before, so if you'd like to help out, jump right in. --Midnightdreary (talk) 03:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I've completed the storyline to include the end of the novel. Hope it helps! --Syzygy (talk) 07:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vive la France!

Gentlemen, the French have successfully put this article to shame. I believe that we should delete it -- replacing it with a .gif of a dithering white flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.159.77.118 (talk) 09:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

That sounds incredibly productive. I didn't realize it was a competition between different language versions of Wikipedia... so if they get an article to featured status, we're not allowed to have our own version? I never knew... --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Analysis

Midnightdreary, I'm surprised I got reverted since the "Hoffman argues" form of description seems the most neutral way of handling it. The views expressed are hardly self-evident. Some of them I'd call far-fetched. It's distorting to claim that the book is about "establishing a national American identity," for example. I just read it and in my view, that's not a major theme. Deception, the falsity of appearances, inner corruption, suffering, powerlessness, the dreadful strength and mystery of nature --- these are things the book is about. But establishing a national American identity? If I were bolder I'd feel like deleting that entirely; I think it's likewise too bold to claim flatly that that's what the book is about; the proper course is just to note that such-and-such scholar has argued this, or that, and so with the rest. Professional surveys of literary analysis, when not presenting the writer's own views, generally do the same. The second paragraph of the analysis section, in fact, tries to follow that format, though it could use better citations and some of the same problems apply: if Poe used the "racist idea" of the Noble Savage it was only ironically, as events later prove. 69.224.222.27 (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey, now, don't address this to me. The point of these talk pages is to open up discussion to any and all interested parties. The trick with literary analysis here on Wikipedia is to try and find what the general scholarly consensus is, regardless of our own personal opinions or whether or not we agree (i.e. "in my view, that's not a major theme"). My experience with literary analysis here has not been to use the names of the analysts unless they themselves are notable for their claims. I think everyone knows that analysis is subjective and, obviously, subject to interpretation; not sure we need to beat them over the head with disclaimer-like clarifications as to who said what. Consider the featured article I put together on "The Raven". Maybe the best thing to do, rather than name-dropping (so to speak), is to add in slightly weasel-y words like "it has been suggested" or "might indicate" et al. Thoughts? --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
IMHO, the difference lies in the question whether any one interpretation is generally accepted, or whether there is no scholarly consensus. As long as things are clear-cut, the interpretation can be stated matter-of-factly, with perhaps a link to a more detailed reference. But as long as the work remains puzzling and mysterious (for which AGP qualifies mightily, from my point of view), different candidates of theories should be presented with their respective authors and champions. So, I think the qualifiers "Hoffman said" etc. should stay. Tallyho! --Syzygy (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree. I think it's more important to start listing these interpretations, with footnotes. I'm not sure if it's as important to attribute them within the text of the article; readers can easily check the footnotes to see who has made the claim. We can try weasel words like "some say..." or "it has been suggested" to keep it from sounding so absolute. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Included weasel qualifiers. ;-) --Syzygy (talk) 06:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)