Talk:Truddi Chase

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Women writers  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject United States  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Vandalism[edit]

First, I object to my previous edit being labeled vandalism. It was not vandalism. The paragraph as written was out-of-place (but the re-written paragraph is somewhat more acceptable).

Second, surely there is some controversy whether Chase (or anyone else) actually suffers from multiple personalities. The article as written is overly credulous, apparently POV. Surely some mention of the controversy is in order. Phiwum 09:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Not on this article. It is linked to other articles which fully explore current beliefs about multiple personalities, MPD, and DID. To begin a discussion of the controversy in this article would be a digression. --Bluejay Young 18:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree, especially as the current article includes a list of MPD autobiographies and a brief history of the genre. Therefore at least one sentence should be included stating that the diagnosis is controversial and often considered iatrogenic.Bobbee.girl (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Date of Birth[edit]

I'd like to talk to whoever at 220.237.49.69 (Asia Pacific Network, Australia) put in Truddi's date of birth. I want to thank them, I am very glad to have it and I will work it into the article in the appropriate place. I won't ask where you got it, but I would like to know if you have other appropriate information that could go into the article. --Bluejay Young 18:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

According to Category_talk:Year_of_birth_missing, Truddi does not want her date of birth in the public domain. ("As long as I have known of her, Ms. Chase wouldn't give her exact date of birth.") Therefore, I am removing it. I have removed the day and month of birth and will remove the year of birth in 1 week's time unless someone can come up with a strong reason why it should remain.Tmrussell 10:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
The fact that Chase doesn't want it published is irrelevant. She became a public figure the moment she published that book, much less circulated the talk shows. However, the accuracy of the source is iffy, so leave it out. Doczilla 18:31, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd say if they don't want their info published, even if the correct and verified information becomes available, leave it off and state that explicitly in the article. --Bluejay Young 04:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not her publicity department, so her desires on the topic are not our concern. We also list the info, so we'll list the info. DreamGuy (talk) 15:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Birthdates are public information and are extremely useful as identification markers (in the even that 2 people have similar names, they rarely have the same birthday). 124.138.185.194 (talk) 05:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC) [sorry, proper sig here: Darkpoet (talk) 05:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)]

It is really not necessary to list the names of group members on pages referring to multiples. It looks sloppy and it gives the impression of a cast of characters like in a play. If you wish to write information detracting Truddi's life story and claims, it should be specifically about things that have been discovered about her that render her story non-credible. --Bluejay Young (talk) 04:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Dead?[edit]

This article is in Category:2010 deaths, but her alleged death isn't mentioned in the article or any of the sources. Can anyone provide a source for it? If not, we must treat this article as a BLP and assume she is still alive. Robofish (talk) 11:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I have included her obituary from the Washington Post in the past and it was removed on the grounds that there's no proof this is the same Truddi Chase as in the article. However, the inclusion of her daughter's name (Kari Iddings Ainsworth) leaves no doubt that this is she. Truddi's daughter appeared on the Oprah interview with her mother as "Kari Iddings". That's an unusual enough name. A look at the obituary guestbook for the Truddi Chase listed in the Post shows dozens of entries from people who at least believe this to be the author of When Rabbit Howls. I suspect that Ms Ainsworth is the person who initially edited the article to include the death date and "died of COPD after a long illness", but that's beside the point. Ms Chase's obit should be included in this article. --Bluejay Young (talk) 08:35, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm new to this, just wanted to point something out[edit]

I may be nit-picking, but technically, is the book really an autobiography? The book was written by The Troop, Truddi's personalities, for Truddi, not by Truddi herself. Strictly speaking, this fact would make it a biography and out of respect for Ms. Chase and her co-authors I think there should be credit where credit is due. I have no way of citing this other than to point out that it was on the book cover, and other pictures of the book posted on the internet.74.177.169.196 (talk) 16:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)Angie Mendez

The book was written by her hand. I don't think WP ought to give such deference to Trudi's story that we list these personalities as authors. Phiwum (talk) 12:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree with Phiwum, because the Troop members are the authors. They are writing about themselves (even when they use third person narrative) and "Truddi Chase" is a collective name. Autobiography is fine, it is the story of their collective lives. --Bluejay Young (talk) 00:56, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

A bit credulous, surely?[edit]

Nothing in the text even hints at the fact that many reviewers are skeptical of the authenticity of this book, not to mention the controversy surrounding claims of multiple personalities to begin with. See, for example, this Kirkus review, which says, in part, "A suspect narration of the therapeutic process of recalling blocked memories. purportedly written by a woman described as having a multiple-personality disorder as the result of childhood abuse by her stepfather. ... Hints of ESP, mysticism and heightened energy fields hardly strengthen claims of authenticity. If, indeed, Chase is an actual person who developed multiple personalities as the result of years of abuse, a forthright documentation of the experiences would have done much more justice to the declared purpose of raising consciousness on the issue."

I'm not at all an expert on this topic, but it seems to me that we oughtn't be presenting this book as if it is uncontroversial non-fiction. We should acknowledge that there are those who doubt its veracity (and not just book reviewers, I think), and that parts of this story are literally fantastic (I have in mind claims of ESP here). Phiwum (talk) 15:34, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

A similarly skeptical review from the New York Times, with some details of the fantastic claims: "Putting aside that the 'troops' maintain that they are able to dim light bulbs, blow fuses, impede electrical circuits and read Mr. Phillips's mind, there is a serious flaw in the logic of the narrative." Phiwum (talk) 15:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)