Talk:Frankenstein/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

2008

Archiving, analysis, discussion

  • I have archived the previous discussion, which was quite long, and fairly old.
  • I have removed from the "analysis" section a number of unsourced and badly written stand alone essays. I encourage folks to expand the analysis section, but only with sourced information from recognized reliable sources. Please do not add your own essays and homework assignments, or stuff lifted from term-paper sites on the web, such material will be removed.
  • Please remember that this talk page is intended for discussion about the article, and is not a general forum for discussion about the book. Only conversation pertinent to improving the article should be held here. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 03:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The analysis section is plagued by broken sentences, and ideas. Most notable is "Hannah", whom people should just ignore; her input is very poor, as is her ability to write coherently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.34.234 (talk) 08:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Popular culture section

The criticism offered in this section is subpar, and does not match the ostensible topic. Statements indicating that the only thing Victor "does wrong" is neglect the creature indicate the text author does not grasp the moral complexity of the story, nor sees such writing as divergent from the "popular culture" topic. Move to delete and replace. Sterlingjones (talk) 20:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Minor brouhaha over spacing

A couple of people have attempted to remove the spacers in the article, and I'd like to explain to them why they are there. The spacers are there to correct a problem with the way Internet Explorer renders the page. Without them, the lede section butts right up against the table of contents, making it look unpleasant and causing it to be difficult to read. The same is true at the bottom of the page where the external links butt up against the navbox. This problem is not seen by people using other browsers.

I have looked at this page using Firefox and Safari, and the extra space, which is not necessary for these browsers, is not a real problem -- it's not like it creates an acre of whitespace, it's just an extra line. Since an awful lot of the people who casually drop in on Wikipedia to find some piece of information (the people whom we should be catering to, as they are the ones who will make us the first-choice for quick information on the net) will be using Internet Explorer to do so, and since the extra lines will help make the page more accessible and usable for them, without unduly hurting those who use other browsers, it would be best for the spacing to stay. Thank you. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 22:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Incidentally, if anyone is using a browser other than IE, Firefox or Safari, let me know and I'll look at the page using it. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 22:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Characters

I see a redirect of some of t he characters in this novel has been boldly attempted, and reverted, so i will discus at this more central place. all named characters in classic novels with any significant role in the story are notable. There is invariably published criticism of such novels which will discuss them all, so a redirect is totally inappropriate. For Frankenstein in particular there is an enormous literature, to due both its iconic position, the multiple popular cultural adaptations, and the interest in the author. This is not a function of any particular privileged aesthetic position the classic novels may have to any individual, but rather the time available for discussion, and the academic interest in particular to them over the last century or two. . Personally, I've never been a man of this, so i hope someone else will do the work of adding them.. DGG (talk) 02:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

1st paragraph analysis

“I am by birth a Genevese, and my family is one of the most distinguished of that republic.” (Shelly) The first sentence begins very fluid and informs us of the narrator’s family stature of their birth origin. The first sentence gives the reader a fact statement. The narrator is from Geneva, which I had to research, is a nation of Switzerland. The narrator also writes that they are from a high political prominence in that nation. This does not give the reader any indication where the story’s direction of a plot will proceed, but it does give the reader the basis of the knowledge of the narrator’s place in society. I may expect the story to follow with a more in depth detailed perspective of his/her life growing up in a high statured Genevese family. This sentence leaves the reader with wanting to discover more about this family and how this person is going to develop, and allow us to explore into the tale of Frankenstein. -Unsigned

A couple of links

Could perhaps these links contain some interesting info worth mentioning in the article?; [1], [2], or [3]? (talk) 07:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Usually for literature articles, we use scholarship published by literary critics (see the list of books in the article). No one has really delved into these sources for this article yet, however, which is why the article is so deficient. Would you like to help? Awadewit (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Maybe, but either way, maybe a new section of this article is required. When it comes to influence, it is mostly literary influences that is mentioned, and very little about the scientific and social influences. The novel is in this regard a product of its time, in an era that stood on the brink of a whole new world of science and discoveries. And even if the influences on the story are known, personally I wouldn't mind reading some of the influence the book itself had on others. I'm not referring to the stage plays, movie and comic versions and so on, but if and how it influenced other writers back then in their own work. 80.202.40.85 (talk) 08:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Sadly, every section of this article is deficient! If you want, I can guide you to some specific sources that discuss the scientific and cultural influences behind Frankenstein as well as its impact on nineteenth-century literature. Awadewit (talk) 14:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if I'm the right one to rewrite the whole article, but you could post the links you have in mind so that at least some parts of it can be updated. And even if I can't promise anything for sure, other could might have in interest in doing some edits as well. 80.202.40.85 (talk) 05:50, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

2009

Significant plot holes

The plot overview/synopsis leaves out a number of events very central to the plot and some of its most significant examples of social commentary. For example, the being's stay with the cottagers only receives a few lines, as does his story to Frankenstein as a whole. Also, I just revamped the synopsis into the literary present, but it's still pretty poorly written. Would someone mind taking some time editing that section for language? Tserton (talk) 23:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Elizabeth: cousin or sister?

Regarding this recent edit which changed the description of Elizabeth from "adopted cousin" to "adopted sister": if this University of Pennsylvania site is anything to go by, then Elizabeth is both Victor's cousin and his adoptive sister (in the first edition, that is). In the third edition, she is no longer his cousin. Perhaps the plot summary needs tweaking to reflect this? – The Parting Glass 23:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I believe the 1818 edition says "sister" and the 1831 edition says "cousin". There are other differences between the two editions. I would suggest we use the 1818 edition to write the plot summary, as it is the one used by most scholars. Awadewit (talk) 00:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)