Talk:Colin Wilson

Magnum Opus

Should this not be "The Outsider"?--KaptKos 07:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Have changed to The Outsider as I cannot find any refs to The Occult being his MO. Mind you I couldn't find many for the Outsider besides this one [1] --KaptKos 10:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I would hardly call his first book his magnum opus. NoVomit (talk) 08:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you could put his book titles in Google and see which gets the most hits :-) Also you can cross check this to see which one has the highest Amazon.com ranking. 129.127.28.3 09:43, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Philip Pullman

This seems a bit spurious, Pullman cites Wilson as someone who led him to others (who may have influenced him) here and here but where does he actually say he was influenced by Wilsons thinking? I'm going to revert this unless someone comes up with something concrete --KaptKos 09:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

done --KaptKos 15:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Angry Young Men

"Wilson was labelled as an Angry Young Man, though he had little in common with other members of the group." I think this is too simplistic. Wilson did publish a manifesto piece in the collection Declaration (ed T. Maschler, MacGibbon & Kee, 1957), along with just about every other writer labelled as an AYM - Amis, Wain, Osborne, etc. The collection also included pieces by Bill Hopkins and Stuart Holroyd who were friends, flatmates and collaborators of Wilson, and with whom he avowedly had a great deal in common. In his book on the AYM, Kenneth Alsop devoted a chapter to Wilson/Hopkins/Holroyd, calling them 'The Law Givers" ('The Angry Decade: A Survey of the Cultural Revolt of the Nineteen-Fifties' Owen, 1958).

Also, an excerpt from 'The Outsider' appeared in a popular anthology, 'The Beat Generation and the Angry Young Men' (ed. G. Feldman, Citadel Press, 1958).

Therefore, whatever his own views, Wilson was widely considered an AYM, especially by contemporary observers, and was involved in the milieu - which itself was, admittedly, riven by political differences. In any case, Hopkins and Holroyd should be mentioned in the article.

I can draft changes unless anyone strongly disagrees. KD

Done, with citations. KD Tries Again 17:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)KD

I remember reading one of his books and Wilson himself said he had nothing to do with that, and they had mistaken him. I forget which work I read it in. There is a lot of repetition, but it was in more than one. Can anyone remember? This should be mentioned, since now it only says what other have said about this, not what he himself has said, as appears in one of his works. I don't have access to the books now so I can't check. Ring a bell anyone?--Asdfg12345 01:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I am sure you're right, and Wilson's statement is worth including. However, the added material is justified by his public reception in the 1950s, when he happily shared platforms with other Angries, both in print and in person.KD Tries Again 16:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)KD

And he's just written a book called "The Rise and Fall of the Angry Young Men." (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Angry-Years-Rise-Fall-Young/dp/1861059728/sr=8-5/qid=1171992836/ref=pd_ka_5/026-2027377-0080444?ie=UTF8&s=books).

KD Tries Again 18:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)KD

His influence in Russia.

Colin Wilson was at one time profoundly respected and discussed in Moscow as an author. He was at one point described as, 'The most discussed foreign author in Moscow'.Johnwrd (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced info moved from BLP page to talk page

Life and works after The Outsider

Wilson's works after The Outsider focused on "positive" aspects of human psychology -- such as peak experiences -- and the narrowness of consciousness. He admired the humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow and corresponded with him. Wilson wrote The War Against Sleep: The Philosophy of Gurdjieff on the life, work and philosophy of G. I. Gurdjieff — an accessible introduction to the Greek-Armenian mystic - in 1980. He argues throughout his work that the existentialist focus on defeat or nausea provides only a partial representation of reality and that there is no particular reason for accepting it.^{[citation needed]} Wilson views normal, everyday consciousness buffeted by the moment as "blinkered", and argues that one should not accept it as showing us the truth about reality.^{[citation needed]} This blinkering has some evolutionary advantages in that it stops us from being completely immersed in wonder, or in the huge stream of events, and hence unable to act.^{[citation needed]} However, to live properly we need to access more than this everyday consciousness.^{[citation needed]} Wilson believes that our peak experiences of joy and meaningfulness are as real as our experiences of angst and, since we are more fully alive at these moments, they are more real. These experiences can be cultivated through concentration, paying attention, relaxation and certain types of work. Wilson argues that compulsive criminality is a manifestation of a pathological attempt to gain peak experiences through violence. This leads the criminal to greater extremes of violence or to a desire to be caught. ^{[citation needed]}

Fiction

Wilson disavowed the film as untrue to the spirit of his novel.^{[citation needed]}

---

Unsourced info moved from BLP page to talk page. Please do not add back into article, unless properly sourced to WP:RS sources. -- Cirt (talk) 21:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Reference 5 problem

Purports to be an article in the Guardian, but the link leads to an LRB piece which has nothing to do with Wilson. Any idea where the quote came from?KD Tries Again (talk) 18:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)KD Tries Again

Solved: it's from an article in the Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/humour--whizz-for-willans-molesworth-is-back-kevin-jackson-doffs-a-grubby-school-cap-to-the-genius-of-his-creators-1550901.html) and the quotation is from a fictional character. Go it must.KD Tries Again (talk) 18:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)KD Tries Again

Adaptations

Should first in the following section be changed to worst since the sentence after it refers to "a worse one"?

"…the film adaptation of Fowles' own novel The Magus was the first film adaptation of a novel ever. Wilson told Fowles there was now a worse one, the film adaption of his novel Lifeforce."

--77.3.152.115 (talk) 19:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Neutral POV

I love this article, but it is hilariously non-encyclopaedic in tone... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.166.189 (talk) 16:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree with the above poster, I mean QUOTE - "Most of Wilson's biggest critics are "self-satisfied". This is the sort of book that a true "Outsider" will read 2-3 times or more in a lifetime. It is not a book for someone who lives in the center of the latest pop-culture trend or gimmick, busily "fitting in"." - come on, this is massively biased! Sammatthews99 (talk) 00:38, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science

Colin Wilson in The Quest for Wilhelm Reich wrote some critical remarks about Martin Gardner's book Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science. The full quotation runs

(Gardner) writes about various kinds of cranks with the conscious superiority of the scientist, and in most cases one can share his sense of the victory of reason. But after half a dozen chapters this non-stop superiority begins to irritate; you begin to wonder about the standards that make him so certain he is always right. He asserts that the scientist, unlike the crank, does his best to remain open-minded. So how can he be so sure that no sane person has ever seen a flying saucer, or used a dowsing rod to locate water? And that all the people he disagrees with are unbalanced fanatics? A colleague of the positivist philospher A. J. Ayer once remarked wryly "I wish I was as certain of anything as he seems to be about everything". Martin Gardner produces the same feeling.

Discussion is going on in the Fads and Fallacies talk page about how to describe Wilson if that critique is used. Editors who know much about Wilson might wish to comment there. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that a big spider can´t be a normal spider

and all tarantulas are big.

I know that most spiders heve fur. And I know that spiders live everywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.17.245 (talk) 21:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC)