Talk:Emma (novel)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Novels / 19th century (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by 19th century task force.
 
WikiProject Women writers (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Comments[edit]

"Also, it really should be noted that the father-figure is a particularly villanous version of the generally inept fathers portrayed in Austen's novels."

How so? Mr. Woodhouse is ailing and dependent, but I can't remember him being anything other than kind hearted. He seems to be going senile. Emma's devotion to his welfare is consistent proof of her good nature. Durova 07:02, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think Mr Woodhouse could fairly be described as "particularly villainous", but one does have to wonder if he uses is valetudinarianism as a way of manipulating the people and events around him — whether subconsciously or consciously. Ondewelle (talk) 22:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Mr. Woodhouse is a particularly toxic parent. --85.222.86.59 (talk) 02:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

external link[edit]

There's something wrong with the External Link to Ye Olde Library or the site seems to have been hacked...

Zee rocks 02:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


Does anyone have a problem adding the following link of a hypertext version of Emma, http://www.thefinalclub.org/work-overview.php?work_id=10, to the external links section of this page? There are several other wikipedia links to other content on this site, which is a great resource for academic content and literary commentary. The site also allows any visitors to log in and contribute his or her own commentary. Sorry if I stepped on any toes by just adding the link, but I've posted to talk pages before an no one has ever responded. In fact, I'd be surprised if anyone responded to this. Andrewmagliozzi 02:57, 10 March 2008

Your site has been reviewed several times by editors from the various pages you have posted to, per the comments on your talk page. The general consensus seem to be that the site does not meet the external links guideline. --Ckatzchatspy 18:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

principal characters[edit]

Why aren't Emmas sister Isabella, her husband John Knightley (and their 5 children) not under "principal characters" ? John has to put up with Mr Woodhouse as a father-in-law Hugo999 21:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

So what? Whether or not a character has to put up with another character does not make that charater a principal character. Mr. and Mrs. John Knightly (and their 5 children) are minor characters. Prtwhitley (talk) 03:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

location of Highbury[edit]

if Highbury from the novel is indeed in Surrey, it cannot be the Highbury, Greater London, linked in this article. Furthermore, the novel, 'Emma', states that Emma's sister is settled 16 miles away in Brunswick Square, London, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/158/158-h/158-h.htm#chap01. I think it more likely that Austen's Highbury is fictional in the neighborhood of Weybridge, Surrey, which is approximately 16 miles from Brunswick Square, London.74.245.201.60 (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, so I've removed the link. -Sketchmoose (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

'deals with' for 'treats with'[edit]

Ondewelle, please explain your reasoning why the phrase 'deals with', exchanged for 'treats with', improves this passage, particularly in the context given. Thank you.--Jbeans (talk) 08:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

A very late response: because 'treats with' didn't seem to me to make sense here. Ondewelle (talk)

Elizabeth attracted to Wickham?[edit]

Isn't it a bit too much to state there was an attraction? It's made clear in the novel that she was never in love with him, and that her partiality wasn't an effect of her feelings for him but his flattering her vanity wounded by Darcy. She’s much more similar to Emma in that than to Marianne. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.222.86.59 (talk) 02:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

character of emma[edit]

emma to me seems to be wilful as we read JANE AUSTEN'S novel. the way how she persistantly continues to do what she does even George Knightly advises her to stop especially when she plans to contiue with her match making habbit.Please am i right when i say so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.199.19.150 (talk) 13:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

"Emma and the Werewolves, a mashup novel by Jane Austen.. ??"[edit]

1. This terminology is confusing to a typical reader. Even if one is cool to the latest vibes of "mashup", this choice of words --seeming to declare the willing collaboration of a long-dead and defenseless author-- is deceptive or confusing to the rest of the world.

2. I urge our Wikipedia community: clarify to our readers when it reports a mashup title that depicts the original author as a collaborator to the mashup of his/her own creative work.

3. My edit shows one way to explain it neutrally.--Jbeans (talk) 11:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC) (Spacing/separation by --Jbeans (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC))

Emma is a common name —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.19.16 (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Excellent rewrite of Plot summary[edit]

Thank you Anon...110; your rewrite greatly improves this article; an excellent example of reporting the story of the novel--rather than re-telling the story (while wool-gathering and repeating all the maximum details; reader be-damned.). Your economical and skilled writing reported the gist of the plot while cutting the verbiage word-count over ten percent. Welcome aboard and stay with us!--Jbeans (talk) 07:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Page for Emma Woodhouse [the character]?[edit]

First off, I'll just ask: Does Emma Woodhouse have a page of her own that I'm just missing? Let me know, if so. But I haven't been able to find one and so I think it doesn't exist. If that is the case, then I think one should be created. Her importance, as the protagonist of a Jane Austen novel, is such that a page is deserved. Mr. Knightley has a page, after all. I'd be willing to help out, at least some, in making the page--but I have little experience. Not at all sure if this the right place to propose such a thing, so go ahead and tell me if I'm doing this wrong. Alex60466176 (talk) 01:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you! I went ahead and created one, though it needs a lot of work. Emma Woodhouse Cabbers (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Someone needs to point out all the oblique evidence that Emma is a lesbian at heart: her attraction to a pretty young girl, he indifference to marriage, her strong father fixation up until he dies, etc. She marries at the end, but more to comply with custom and avoid being left an "old maid" than from real love. She seems simply resigned to marriage as a social necessity.98.225.109.243 (talk) 22:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

2010 Film Version?[edit]

Does this really exist? From the article: 2010: Emma, starring Sarah Cotton as Emma.

I can't find any reference to it anywhere! Not on imdb, as far as I can tell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.173.78.131 (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Plot Summary similar to sparknotes.com[edit]

The plot summary in this article appears to be very similar to the Plot Overview for Emma on sparknotes.com. I thought maybe there should be at least a citation, or maybe the section should be re-written? I don't really have a good understanding of the way these things work (like maybe the author on sparknotes.com also wrote the wikipedia section, so it doesn't need a citation...?) so I figured I'd pose the question here on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.177.225.180 (talk) 09:08, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

It's not just similar, it's identical. Needs to be changed IMO. Anyone up to the task?

Blckmgc (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

The current version of the plot summary was inserted on 2 April 2010 by 70.71.217.110 and praised above in section #Excellent rewrite of Plot summary. I think the SparkNotes text dates from August 2002. The plot summary ought to be reverted to the version from 28 March 2010. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

naming[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. At the suggestion of several commenters, I will move the disambiguation page to the base title. Xoloz (talk) 18:20, 16 March 2014 (UTC)



EmmaEmma (novel) – too confusing 76.120.175.135 (talk) 18:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Support, I once dated an Emma, and that is indubitably the first meaning to come to my mind. DeistCosmos (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support highly ambiguous. It should be replaced by the disambiguation page at this location. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 00:58, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, as well as agree that Emma (disambiguation) should be moved to Emma in the event that the proposed move occurs. Steel1943 (talk) 07:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • No support - In the English language, this is by and far the most prominent use of the name by itself. Austen simply adds a signfican amount of visibility to this novel. As long as the DAB is linked at the top of the page, there is no reason to redirect to focus people onto that confusing list, Sadads (talk) 17:39, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support – or Emma: a novel as the book calls itself. 05:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, with (novel). Or even Emma (Austen novel) to distinguish from the unfinished Emma (Brontë novel) In ictu oculi (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Famous the book may be, but the name is just too generic for the novel to be the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.