Talk:David Copperfield

remove statement

I removed the statement that DC is "orphaned by his father", since the mother is still alive. The subsequent reference to the step-father makes this and the father's death clear anyway. Markalexander100 10:31, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC) 205.200.193.210 03:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC) SPOILER WARNING N E 1? 205.200.193.210 03:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC) P. Stoff.

under characters

under where it lists the other characters, under uriah heep, it say "umble" is this a typo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.116.43 (talk) 06:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

No; this is a direct quotation from the book. Dickens intentionally used different spelling when quoting characters to portray speech mannerisms common to particular classes and dialects.ElrondPA (talk) 02:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Kafka's Amerika

There's a minor error on the article that states that Amerika was Franz Kafka's last novel when it was in fact his first. I'll just replace "last" with "first".

50+ characters

There are over 50 characters introduced in the novel. It is often difficult to keep them straight (although not as difficult as War and Peace which has over 500). This is known in literary parlance as a "crowded novel".

Our Wikipedia article would be of real value to the reader if it listed the characters (perhaps in order of appearance) along with a short contexual summary of who they are and where known from. I'm not sure I have the time or resources, but will consider it, but would be a wonderful project for someone so inclined. It may even allready be on the web somewhere. Stbalbach 21:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Found a list of characters online. Linked in the Resources section. Stbalbach 21:57, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Four or six movies

The David Copperfield disamb page lists six movies (and states they are all connected to the novel), while this article lists only four under the header Adaptations. These are clearly in contradiction to each other. – b_jonas

Too many people NEVER read the books because the movies have spoiled their interest. Dick Scalper (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

errors

This article contains numerous errors. As far as I can tell, Dora Spenlow never suffered a miscarriage, Dr. Strong was not a medical doctor, and did not attend to Dora during the supposed miscarriage. Someone who actually read this book should do a cleanup. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.26.188.246 (talk • contribs) .

Dora did suffer a miscarriage, from which she never recovered her health. Don't remember anything about Dr. Strong attending on Dora, but it's a large book and I may have forgotten. --Miczilla (talk) 04:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Animated Musical Version of David Copperfield?

I've been trying to find any information I can about an animated movie based on this novel that I recall watching when I was younger. All of the characters in it were anthropomorphized animals, and I remember that the version had songs throughout, in the same style as your typical Disney movie. I seem to recall that the main character was a feline of sorts, and other little bits and pieces, such as a cheese wheel factory, and a big flying bird, and some other weird things. Maybe I'm just way off on this, but I was absolutely certain it was based on this book.

I can't seem to find any mention of it on the IMDB or on Wikipedia. Does anyone know what I'm on about?

Silkweed 22:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Merging David Copperfield (character) into this article

• Oppose
  • Oppose. This fictional character is important enough to merit his own article in Wikipedia. The article on the character, however, should be cleaned up and dealt with by an expert. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 16:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose although such characters start their life in the novel the character takes a slightly independant life as further adaptations are created. The independant article is then able to discuss the subject beyond the confines of the originating novel. Not often done but there is reason for such articles. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 07:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. David Copperfield the character deserves his own character-based article. The Catcher in the Rye gives Holden Caulfield his standalone article, a novel which is also written from a first-person perspective. The character's own article can give useful information relating to emotions, thoughts and author construction of that particular character. -- Gbrading 21:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Support
  • Support. David Copperfield (character) refers to the main character of David Copperfield (novel). As the main character is fictional and the book acts as a biography, any information that is relevant to the main character is relevant to the book. As the article stands now, it is simply a rehash of the plot that already exists in the novel article. Allow me to draw parallels to other similar cases in the encyclopedia to better illustrate my point: neither Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre, nor Jane Austen's Pride and prejudice, have articles devoted to their main characters (Jane Eyre and Elizabeth Bennett). This is because everything that can be known about such characters is contained within the book they were created in. I would like to suggest that simply being the main character in a significant literary work is not sufficient to warrant that character their own article, they must have had some other form of existence, either being used in other works, or being based on historical figurer etc.Treesus 17:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Per Treesus. Further the "what links here" suggests the article is not being used much to justify a split - it is content that would be better served in the main article where more people would be likely to see it. -- Stbalbach 13:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Stbalbach's "what links here" argument is compelling along with other precedents such as Jane Eyre.
  • Support. As per above Windymilla 21:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per Treesus--*Kat* 06:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per Treesus -- Itsmejudith 18:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per Treesus. The character article has only 5 articles linking to it, one of which is the novel article, the other WP:PM (where I found this). Content would be more useful here. xC | ☎ 15:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed the merge suggestion tag (October 2, 2007). There was no new discussion created by the September 4, 2007 tag addition, and this discussion is extremely old. Please don't add merge tags unless you start/add to the discussion, and please remove the tag (merge or no) within some reasonable period of time. In this case, it looks like there was enough support for a merge if someone had cared to do it. Doctormatt 01:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Title

Is the end of the title really "on my account" or should it be "on any account"? 172.145.98.230 15:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)Mapjc

I just added a footnote on the title problem. -- Stbalbach 23:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It clearly says "meant to be published," not "meant to publish." Look at the word count. --Muna (talk) 01:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Interpretive text

Removed the following text as it is too interpretive. Not allowable under "no original research".

As a bildungsroman, it has one major theme throughout, the disciplining of the hero's emotional and moral life. We learn to go against "the first mistaken impulse of the undisciplined heart", a theme which is repeated throughout all the relationships and characters in the novel.

Characters in the novel generally belong to one of three categories: Those who have disciplined hearts, those who lack disciplined hearts, or those who develop disciplined hearts over time. Characters who fall into the first category include the mature and caring Agnes Wickfield and the selfless and forgiving Mr. Peggotty. The greedy, scheming Uriah Heep and the egotistic and inconsiderate James Steerforth are examples of characters who belong in the second category. Members of the third category include David Copperfield himself, who learns to make wiser choices in his relationships through personal experience, and his aunt Betsey Trotwood, who lacks consideration for others early on, but becomes less inconsiderate over time. Dickens uses characters and events throughout the novel as comparisons and contrasts for each other in terms of wisdom and discipline. A good comparison is Agnes Wickfield and Dora Spenlow: Dora lacks maturity and is unable to handle stressful situations, often breaking out in tears, while Agnes remains calm and collected even when troubled, yielding to her emotions only rarely. Another good comparison is Ham and Mr. Peggotty, and Mrs. Steerforth and Miss Dartle: The latter two become distraught at the loss of Steerforth, allowing it to trouble them their whole lives, while the former two bear the loss of Emily with dignity and reservation.

Victorianist (talk) 17:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Links

I added a link to dora spenlow on wikipedia seeing as it wasn't linked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.149.71 (talk) 10:52, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

mOuZa

Bold text —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.233.136.75 (talk) 20:33, 13 March 2010 (UTC)