Talk:Make Room! Make Room!

Novels Start‑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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has an infobox template in need of a 1st Edition Cover!

Tip: #section links are case-sensitive on most browsers

Links from this article with broken #section links :
[[Informant#Terms for informants|stool pigeon]]

You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem

Novel vs. Movie

"The novella focusses on social commentary, pushing the importance of birth control and sustainable development to avoid social disorganisation, but in the movie a hero cop uncovers a fascistic use of a euthanasia program to provide cheap protein."

Not totally clear, but isn't this a bit POV? I get the impression that the novel is considered better, or at least more intelligent, than the movie. Could be the hero cop line, but I'll leave it for others to change if it seems necessary.

I think POV is difficult to avoid when contrasting between the book and the movie in a meaningful way, but I would disagree with the author's POV that the cannibalism conspiracy in Soylent Green make it "less intellectual" than the book. I'm not sure what "less intellectual" means when comparing a film and a book, and furthermore the charge that overpopulation is merely a backdrop in the movie seems strange since the cannibalism conspiracy in Soylent Green requires food shortages and overpopulation as a precursor.

Infobox

I added an Infobox, hope I did that right. Also just want to mention that the copy of this book currently in my possession was a later (1973) reprint, basically shilling for Soylent Green, and it doesn't have that sweet, sweet cover art. The pagecount is based on this copy, if anyone has the first edition pagecount handy it'd probably be better to use that one. Antepenultimate 04:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of the sweet cover art, is the frontmost figure lifted from H.R. Giger's "Birth Machine"? - 124.168.42.52 (talk) 16:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Improbable. In 1967 when the book was published Aldridge was an established graphic artist, and it's very much in his style. According to the timeline downloadable from H. R. Giger's site, the "Birth Machine" was made in the same year: it's not clear if it was exhibited before the book was published, and this appears to have been at an early stage in Giger's rise to fame. Most likely great minds thinking alike. . . dave souza, talk 18:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too much detail

I updated the plot description of the book but fear I may have overdone it. Everything is correct but I'm not sure what level of detail is expected/desired. Checking other book entries seems to show a wide range of levels of detail. So from one of you pedians, how much is too much? Ozlucien 10:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Population counts

Is it worth mentioning the actual 2000 World and U.S. population figures in comparison with the novel's projections? The novel states a world population of 7 billion and a U.S. population of 344 million, compared to the real figures of just under 6 billion and 281 million, respectively. (In contrast, the movie depicts the population of New York City in 2022 to be 40 million.) — Loadmaster (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? Netrat (talk) 12:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Why not? Besides, the US population is 314 million and growing. Will reach the Novel's numbers very soon. 99.6.4.126 (talk) 10:23, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Based on short story

The article currently says "Originally expanded by Harry Harrison from his own short story 'Roommates,'". This is incorrect. In the introduction to to "Roommates" in The Best of Harry Harrison, Harrison states that he was asked for an excerpt from Make Room! Make Room! for the collection The Ruins of Earth, but no simple extract would, he felt, work well, so he extracted several scenes, and wrote connecting passages to create "Roommates". The ISFDB supports this, showing that "Roommates" was first published in 1971 in The Ruins of Earth, while MRMR dates from 1966. This should be corrected in the article. 129.42.208.186 (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]