Talk:Carrie (novel)

Novels C‑class Mid‑importance

	Novels portal 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, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Horror C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media 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.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WPKING

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Carrie (novel) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

^^ If you mean it's a scary book, yeah I guess so. Anyway...regarding "false documents", I have a rough idea what this means, but how is it demonstrated in Carrie (I haven't read it for about 8 years)..? pomegranate 23:59, Aug 4, 2004 (UTC)

Carrie, the movie, is definately one of the better film adaptations of King's work. Directed by Brian De Palma and starring Sissy Spacek, it is a truly terrifying movie.

I expanded the plot synopsis a little — it barely described what happens in the story line. Leroi henri christophe 20:50, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Should this be in the Fantasy film category?

should this (and Carrie 2) really come in the Fantasy category, otherwise every Horror film that involves the supernatural would (which is a lot) and I wouldn't think of a lot of those as my idea of a Fantasy movie? Arnie587 00:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Remake

So where is the section on the remake of the film? There are obvious differences here. Alyeska 19:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Necessary?

I don't know if anyone's noticed, but there is an article called Carrie (1976 film), which basically includes all of the info in this plus a bit more. The silly thing is that, if you search for "Carrie", it comes to this one. I would recommend this page for deletion.

moved this page to Carrie (novel) with the original disambiguation moved to Carrie. Hbdragon88 04:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

King's attitude to adaptions of his work

The statement in the opening paragraph of this article, describing how the film version of Carrie is one of the few adaptions of King's work that he appreciates, is in direct conflict with the following quote from the main article on Stephen King:

Unlike some authors, King is not at all troubled when a movie based on his work differs from the derivative work itself, and is often pleased with film adaptations of his work. He has contrasted his books and its film adaptations as "apples and oranges; both delicious, but very different."

I'm not sure which of these concepts is accurate, since neither of them are backed up by relevant sources.

According to Harlan Ellison in Harlan Ellison's Watching, it's a lot more complicated than that; King has apparently not approved at all of a lot of the changes when film versions are made, but at least at first (Carrie, The Shining, Cujo) would say nothing, or try to keep things positive. I'll look up the exact quotes. --Bluejay Young (talk) 03:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Desjardin

Does it ever specify if Miss Desjardin made it out of the prom alive? JackOfHearts 10:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Desjardin does survive; I added this information. Miss Tabitha (talk) 22:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Similarity to Cho's Plays?

Is there any similarity between the VA Tech shooter's plays and this story? --Zeckalpha 12:42, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. You can see Cho's plays at thesmokinggun.com; as far as I can remember they are mostly family dramas where sons stand up to or kill abusive fathers. Much more like Abel Harlingen in The Tommyknockers. However, the ambience of Carrie foreshadows Westboro, Columbine, VTech and all the rest. Some of the most famous school arsons may have had similar origins. --Bluejay Young (talk) 03:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Carrienovel.jpg

Image:Carrienovel.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 05:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Carrienovel.jpg

Image:Carrienovel.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) 19:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sue's Miscarriage?

I don't think that the book says that Sue miscarries as the synopsis in this article does. That seems to be taking it a step beyond what is actually said in the book. In fact, Tabitha King's introduction in the Collector's Edition seems to insinuate that Sue was not actually pregnant. I think that should be changed in this article. (75.14.218.208 (talk) 08:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I have taken it out several times, and someone always puts it back in. They want for there to be an abortion there where there wasn't one, I guess. There is no indication that Carrie had anything to do with Sue getting her period that night, and Sue only fantasizes that she might be pregnant because her period is a few days late. --Bluejay Young (talk)

Marital rape

"Revealing that Carrie's conception was a result of what may have been marital rape (although she admits she enjoyed the sex) ..."

This just sounds ridiculous. (I didn't read the book. But the concept is weird. ) --Zslevi (talk) 14:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps try reading the book before saying it's "weird." That is what is described in the book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.0.11.205 (talk) 01:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Linked Review

The link to the "review" should be removed--the review is dreadful, amateurish, not-even-high-school-level writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.218.4 (talk) 16:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carrie doesn't forgive Sue?

It's been a lifetime since I read this book, but don't Carrie and Sue connect mentally, and doesn't Carrie make Sue get her period? I got from that that Sue was pregnant, and Carrie ended the pregnancy because Sue didn't want it. Either that, or when the entire hellish episode was all over, Sue just menstruated as a bookend to the beginning of the story with Carrie's nightmare intro to womanhood.

Seriously, am I hallucinating that part of the story? Haven't been able to get ahold of this book for YEARS. Helenabucket (talk) 04:50, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

After reading that the paperback rights sold for 400,000, as compared to 2,500 for the first edition hardcover, I became curious as to how much of a blockbuster this book was, and when exactly it became a blockbuster, because if, as the article states, the first edition only sold 13,000 copies, why would the paperback be bought for so much? A reception section should be in order. Thank you. Renfield (talk) 14:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]