Jump to content

Talk:Moreta: Dragonlady of Pern

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notes section

[edit]

This section seems to take a very real-world perspective on the themes of the book which could make the fantastic setting less clear to Wikipedia readers who haven't read the book. This part in particular troubles me: "and also describes how modern forms of transportation, especially air travel, can spread a disease worldwide during its incubation period, allowing the disease to spread far more widely before pathologists are able to recognize the magnitude of the outbreak." It seems odd to portray dragon-riding as 'modern' 'air travel', and certainly portraying the characters who work out the vaccine as pathologists is overstating the case. Any other thoughts?

LaPrecieuse (talk) 03:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section about the book's parallells with the AIDS virus and the positive representation of the homosexual characters in the book. For some reason, it was deleted. User: MichaelX90MichaelX90 (talk) 20:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any sources making the parallel? Garion96 (talk) 23:51, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ssources aren't needed. Read the book, think about what was happening in 1983 when it was published, and it's quite obvious that one way of interpretting it is as an AIDS parallel, with those characters included as an antihomophobia statement. And where're the sources that liken it to the Spanish Flu? MichaelX90 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelX90 (talkcontribs) 12:44, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why keep doing it?! I think homophobia, perhaps... MichaelX90 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelX90 (talkcontribs) 18:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that must be it. Or perhaps I removed it because it was unsourced original research you added to the article. Which the parallel to the Spanish Flu also might be. So both are removed. If it's so obvious it should be quite easy for you to find a reliable source for it. Garion96 (talk) 19:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like the rest of the article, the source is the book. Might as well remove the rest of the article, aswell... And no, there are no outside sources, seeing as it's such an obscure thing. MichaelX90 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelX90 (talkcontribs) 19:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]