Talk:Algernon Charles Swinburne
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Per Talk:Algernon Swinburne, I have moved Algernon Swinburne here, and placed a redirect at Algernon Swinburne, on the basis that A C Swinburne is not named "Algernon Swinburne," omitting "Charles," in any source I may locate (Library of Congress Catalogue, Oxford Encyclopedia of British Literature), nor in any of his own works, that I can recall --Yst 15:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Is rustication such a rare distinction? I rather thought it endemic during my time at Oxford. At least among my circle.
- There's no evidence in any printed source I can find for the assertion at everything2.com (not a reliable source that Swinburn was rusticated for his political opinions; the consensus is that it was for failing two examinations. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
"The most talented English language poets in history"? Would that be to say that there are poets, actual published poets in the English language, who were not very talented? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fixlein (talk • contribs) 20:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
If Swinburne is your example of the superiority of 19th century poets to those of the 20th/21st century, I'm afraid you've shown up to the battle empty-handed. Of course, that lit crit war was decided ages ago, and only those in the most secluded (neglected?) towers have yet to hear news of the surrender.
More on topic, however, I agree with what I believe Fixlein is implying: "[Swinburne's] mastery of vocabulary, rhyme and metre arguably put him among the most talented English language poets in history" is highly contested at best and certainly a strange statement to appear in an encyclopaedia entry.
- To whoever contributed this last unsigned bit of dribble: The "battle" is far from over, your bluster notwithstanding. There are still plenty who realize that the Emperors of modern "poetry" have no clothes. It's good to see that "unsigned's" comment stuck a nerve, though.
- More on topic, however: Why is it bothersome that Swinburne's mastery of prosody is praiseworthy, whereas Eliot's criticism of Swinburne's prose style is not? This entire article could use revision, actually, with the value-judgments of both camps excised, or at least balanced and qualified.Pernoctus (talk) 23:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Recently the file File:Algernon Charles Swinburne by Robert M.B. Paxton.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 01:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Recently the file File:Algernon Charles Swinburne with nine of his peers at Oxford from NPG.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 01:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
- As a true Wikipedian, you are to be commended for your attempt to further the agenda. There must be no rest until every Wikipedia biography contains assertions and claims that the person in the article possessed or possesses such tendencies and behavioral characteristics.220.127.116.11 (talk) 21:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)ProgressiveEvolutionary