Talk:The Tell-Tale Heart

Works inspired

A huge portion from the "Works inspired" section was removed - though I understand the basic reasoning for it, I disagree and would recommend those lines be put back in (incidentally, I do agree with the removal of the entire "Analysis" section, which was clearly original research). Maybe some clean up is required on those works that reference "The Tell-Tale Heart," but I'm not sure why an episode of the Simpsons, which clearly does reference the story, should be removed as "speculative" - how do you cite something like that? I do agree, however, that sometimes people really stretch it to add to this list. Thoughts? -Midnightdreary 15:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Here is most of what I removed and why:

• "The 1953 animated short is featured on the two disc version of the DVD Hellboy." - well, not really notable, its like saying its available at wal-mart really.
• "Also, the song "Who Am I? (Tripitena's Song)" has the line: "I'd like to solve the mysteries of life by cutting someone's throat or removing their heart. You'd like to see it beat."" - again not really needed because we already mentioned Lou Read, we don't really need that much detail.
• "In 1995, Mojo Press and artist Bill Fountain published a collection of graphic versions of Poe stories under the title The Tell Tale Heart, featuring a female character as the tortured narrator of the title story." - who? not-notable, doesn't have a wiki article
• "An episode of The Simpsons ("Lisa's Rival," September 11, 1994) featured a "Tell-Tale Heart"-inspired act of revenge between Lisa and a new student (voiced by Winona Ryder)." - Well, who says it was in the episode and who says that it is inspired by the Tell-Tale Heart?
• "The season 1 episode titled "The Telltale Head" is a reference to "The Tell-Tale Heart." - again, says who?
• "An episode of SpongeBob SquarePants, Squeaky Boots, has Mr. Krabs burying a pair of squeaky boots underneath the floorboards, only to begin hearing the noise more and more before snapping and digging up, boiling, and eating the boots." - again, these are really loose correlations here. People don't come to this article looking for sponge bob episodes that have some really loose correlation to the story
• "On the Insane Clown Posse's 1995 LP, The Riddle Box, the song "Ol' Evil Eye" is based on the story, and even has quotes of the story read aloud." - Unsourced
• "A portion of the 1995 computer game The Dark Eye requires the player to enact the plot of "The Tell-Tale Heart" from the point of view of either the story's narrator or the old man." - unsourced
• "A Tiny Toons Halloween special had a "kiddie" version of the story. Plucky Duck destroys Hamton's vacuum cleaner to stop the sound it makes." - unsourced, loose connection

So, while I understand what you are saying, most 'pop culture' sections I see for anything are like this. People constantly add stuff that they personally feel is an important pop reference to something when it is not or even can not be proven to be. NOW, that being said, if an episode of something is a remake of the tell-tale heart or there is an interview with someone that says it was based on TTTH then it could be cited and added. Just my two cents, but I would like to see cites before adding stuff to these types of lists. --Chuck Sirloin 16:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, so looking at the wiki article for "Lisa's Rival," I can see the connection, so I am cool putting that one back in. --Chuck Sirloin 16:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I thought I already responded to this, but apparently I must have just previewed. ;) My concern is that legitimate references in pop culture are hard to cite; the sources are self-reflexive (i.e. to find why the Simpsons episode mentioned refers to Tell-Tale Heart, just watch that episode... it's not in a textbook or anything). But, with that said, and based on the most recent edit to the page, these pop references are going to keep pouring in. PLEASE, people, at least give us some context to these references! Was it a joke? Was there dialogue? Was it clearly marked as a reference or are you just making an assumption? etc. -Midnightdreary 21:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Adaptations

Umm... this list of adaptations looks to have spiraled out of control. Are all of these 15-minute adaptations notable? Are the 78-minute films really adaptations or are they more appropriate under "Works inspired"? My suggestion is to only pick out the ones that are worth mentioning and gut the rest. Remember that this shouldn't be an indiscriminate list, like Pokemon trying to catch 'em all. ;) --Midnightdreary 12:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Your points are well taken. Does current revision address all concerns? Conrad T. Pino 13:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

This is good because it doesn't give excessive weight to adaptations in an article about the story. But, I think more text is needed, and less referencing. Is there an equivalent of a "disambiguation page" on IMDB that lists all the adaptations on the same page? I'm a big fan of having some kind of prose discussion about these sorts of things too, maybe discussing the varying relevance of the adaptations. If nothing else, it's worth noting that some are faithful and short adaptations while others are expanded to full-length feature films (which, really, the original story text would not support). I know, for example, the one by Mark Redfield (the last on the list, I think), re-imagines the story in the Civil War (a time Poe never witnessed) and involves a love triangle of some sort. I'm going to grab a copy of the Poe Cinema book tomorrow and see if there is any information in there discussing any "Tell-Tale Heart" adaptations. --Midnightdreary 13:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Continuing to add text is beyond me as I'm relatively ignorant on both the story and adaptations. The closest page IMDB has is the title search page which is now the 21 count citation source. I've parked the IMDB 21 count enumeration in External links for now. I'd like to keep the enumeration but will defer to your opinion. Conrad T. Pino 14:35, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The Simpsons

I was told that there was a Simpsons version of the Telltale Heart in a Treehouse of Horror, but it's not noted. Can anyone verify this, or at least let me know what Treehouse of Horror this was so I can look it up on Youtube. --24.192.224.242 23:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Hermesscholar

Err... the reference made in the Simpsons is already in the article already, it's just not a Treehouse of Horror episode. --Midnightdreary 00:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems that Midnightdreary has removed all the Simpsons references from this article as "unsourced, less than relevant cruft" in this edit 81.197.72.46 (talk) 20:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I know, I'm a terrible person. How dare I try to develop an encyclopedia here and not just an indiscriminate collection of information. However, feel free to check out Edgar Allan Poe in television and film and you'll see all is well with the world. --Midnightdreary (talk) 22:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Is the book good?

Many people find the book weird... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.107.128 (talk) 19:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

What book? --Midnightdreary 00:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I happen to think that this short story is excellent. As for abnormality . . . If it's not weird, then it wasn't written by Poe, I say. Czar Baldy Bald IV (talk) 15:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Assumed Male Narrator

The story does not implicitly state that the narrator/protagonist is male. I think at the very least this should be stated in the intro before reverting to masculine possessives and descriptors in the plot synopsis. Patrolmanno9 (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

(Shrug) It's a masculine language. This was an agreed-upon compromise from our peer review. No offense is meant. Certainly, anonymity makes pronouns ambiguous, but we'd have to do the same for every other anonymous narrator from every other work in literature that's ever been written. That's a lot of work. I wonder why people jump on the gender situation on this work so much more than most every other work of Poe's (very few have named narrators). --Midnightdreary (talk) 21:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I think your shrug is exactly why the ambiguous gender should be mentioned- people don't know. People jump on the gender situation on this work so much because it's exceptional among Poe's works in that it has an anonymous narrator that isn't identifiable as male, or at least in his works that are well known. Even if you can prove me wrong on that point with your expertise, if so many people make issue with it on this work, then obviously it has some merit for mention and/or discussion. And English is not nearly masculine enough to use that as an excuse for laziness. 'It' doesn't take much time to throw in 'a' sentence or two to add to 'the' quality of 'this' article.Patrolmanno9 (talk) 22:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for coming across as lazy (Please note WP:NPA. As I said before, the previous version of this article made sure to point out that the character was genderless. After a discussion in a peer review, a decision was made to remove it and stick with the (typical) masculine pronouns. If you disagree, feel free to add it in - especially if you can find an analytical source that discusses the gender (even moreso if you can find a source that doesn't use "he" in reference to the narrator). --Midnightdreary (talk) 02:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I've inserted a little note at the beginning of the plot summary section that deals with the issue of ambiguous gender and the use of masculine pronouns for ease of description. I'm not sure if it's in the correct wikipedia format or not, so please feel free to correct it if it isn't. --Patrolmanno9 (talk) 01:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you're on to something... but I wonder if it's easier as a footnote after the first instance of "he" in reference to the narrator? Also, saying "the majority of Poe's narrators" is original research, so we might as well leave that out. I'm going to flip through some publications I have regarding Poe and gender (and similar themes) and see if I can find a deeper discussion of "The Tell-Tale Heart" in particular. --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Cool. I'll take the sweeping generalization out but I'll leave it to you to change it to a footnote if you think that's best. --Patrolmanno9 (talk) 04:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Publication History

Already mentioned in introductory paragraph, so it seems redundant to me. Maisma gardens (talk) 17:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

As per WP:LEAD, the introduction summarizes the article to follow. So, most of that information will seem redundant. --Midnightdreary (talk) 18:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Never killed anyone?

My professor spent an entire period breaking it down for us that the narrator couldn't have possibly killed anyone because with the time period this story is based in, it was unlikely he had indoor plumbing, and there's no way he drained the bathtub full of blood within the four hours before the police showed up. That there's no way he had drained the blood and cleaned the tub before they got there, and since they didn't freak out because a bloodspattered house, there's no way the body ever even existed.

I'm kind of new to adding things to Wiki, so I figured I'd bounce this here before just adding it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.216.40.246 (talk) 09:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

You'd need a reliable published source for something like that, otherwise it's original research. Your professor is wrong anyway; for one thing, there's no indication what time period the story is based. If you assume it's contemporary to when it was written, indoor plumbing or not, people could still own tubs. The Walt Whitman House in Camden, New Jersey has two of them: one looks like a contemporary tub (made of copper or brass, I believe) and the other looks like one of those outdoor kiddie pools you buy at a toy store. I should say, though, it's an interesting theory. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It is possible I have read a different version than you--there are many, no doubt--but in mine, there is no tub. Mine says he pulled the bed over the body, and then id the corpse under the floorboards. No tub was ever mentioned.

 Jake  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.169.45.99 (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC) 

The body was cut up in A tub. It did not specifically say a bathtub nor did it mention any draining. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.72.113.24 (talk) 03:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Written in 1843

Sorry to nitpick but it seems unlikely to me that it was written in 1843 if it appeared in the January 1843 edition of a journal. Surely the January edition would have been printed towards the end of December 1842. Or did journals work differently in those days? --Thehalfone (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not nitpicking at all - you make a very good point. I will make a quick edit that should be clearer. --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Include SpongeBob episode in adaptations?

There was that one episode, with the squeaky boots, that is very, very similar to The Tell-Tale Heart, and I thought it was worth mentioning. CheezerRox4502 (talk) 23:09, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't agree. It's been added and removed several times as WP:TRIVIA. I don't think a Spongebob Squarepants really adds to the understanding of Poe's story. --Midnightdreary (talk) 02:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Horror Comic pastiche

A horror comic in the 1950's, before such publications were banned, has a pastiche in which the heart is reallyeating and making noise. Anybody know anything more about this? Das Baz, aka Erudil 18:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Merger

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

I have decided to withdraw the merge proposal of remaining articles to The Tell-Tale Heart. Thank you for your discussions and contributions to these articles, and I will look forward to them for some time. --Gh87 (talk) 23:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

---

• Strong oppose Each film article stands up on its own for notability (esp. the Jules Dassin version), and should not be mergered. Lots of other adaptations have their standalone articles (compare films based on Shakespeare's plays, for example). Lugnuts (talk) 08:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose I think the article on the story is far too important to have all that other stuff stuck in it as more than just a quick mention. --Midnightdreary (talk) 11:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
• Comment I see two opposing comments for some reason; however, I proposed the merge because those articles are way too short and less notable for everybody, even with information that almost no one bothers to care. If opposing the merge, then each of them must be expanded. --Gh87 (talk) 01:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure how opposing a merge forces a required expansion. However, I agree that if the other articles are not strong, they should be expanded (if not already, they should be marked stubs, if such is applicable; I haven't looked at them). If the concern is that the film articles lack notability, that is impetus for deletion, not merging. --Midnightdreary (talk) 03:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I tagged those articles with {{notability}} within or without {{article issues}}, just in case. They still looked too short, even with {{infobox film}}. --Gh87 (talk) 06:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I've ref'd the 1941 film. I'll bring them all to the attention of the film project to see if anyone can expand the others. Thanks! Lugnuts (talk) 08:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose I feel I've expanded the article for the 1953 animated adaptation to the point it is entitled to remain as a separate article. I question Gh87's observation that the articles are "less notable for everybody, even with information that almost no one bothers to care," which seems to express a subjective POV. Surely anyone interested in animation will find the information in this particular article, however limited, to be both notable and interesting. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 14:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for making The Tell-Tale Heart (1953 film) more informative and notable than its previous versions; I removed {{merge}} from and ended a merge proposal for that page. I still left two to propose a merge with this article because both of them are not notable and informative enough for me, although I see one reference improvement toward the director's debut in The Tell-Tale Heart (1941 film). --Gh87 (talk) 16:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Give these articles time. See WP:DEADLINE and WP:DEMOLISH. I'd just hate to see this article watered down with information that only has a vague connection to it. --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Eye

Could it be that it is a cataract? Coolio 226 (talk) 17:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)