Talk:Wanderungen durch die Mark Brandenburg

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Prussia'[edit]

It covers the history, architecture, and people of Prussia as well as its landscape....

Since Prussia can mean different things — the Kingdom of Brandenburg-Prussia, the Prussian state within Germany, East Prussia, Ducal Prussia, 'Royal' Prussia, etc. — and since Wanderungen covers mainly Brandenburg within a couple hundred km of Berlin, suggest the above be reworded:

"It covers the history, architecture, and people of Brandenburg as well as its landscape...."

Sca (talk) 13:45, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That would make sense except that it is in fact ill-defined. Part of his intent was to show the historic context of the sites - such as the site of the Battle of Fehrbellin and the seats of important historic figures. So the context reaches beyond the geographic area he actually walked through. I was unable to find appropriate links because our articles are more precisely delimited. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:56, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I don't quite follow your rationale. After all, the title itself translates as Wanderings through the March (or Margravate — an obscure word in English) of Brandenburg. As mentioned above, "Prussia" is in most cases a broader, though fluctuating, geographic concept than "Brandenburg." And Wanderungen certainly doesn't cover all of Prussia as it existed in 1880. The fact that in Fontane's time Brandenburg was part of the Kingdom of Prussia and after 1871 the German Reich doesn't change the situation. Sca (talk) 21:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right, the travelogue itself is confined to Brandenburg. But he sets the sites in the context of the history of Prussia - the Battle of Fehrbellin being a good example that he himself points to (saying it's easy to miss the significance when one looks at the patch of ground with an uninformed eye) - and the main criticism of the work was that it glorified Prussian aristocrats and the Prussian military. Since Prussia was built on militarism and grew out of Brandenburg, that's a large part of the book (although there are also architectural descriptions and stuff about the people). The thing is, our coverage of Brandenburg and Prussia both is a lot more focused and subdivided. But it would not be correct to say the book is just about Brandenburg - it's about Prussia illustrated by what happened where and who lived where in Brandenburg at least as much as it's about Brandenburg per se. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:36, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fehrbellin, as you doubtless know, is (and was) in Brandenburg. Sca (talk) 13:47, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If Fontane sought to put Brandenburg in perspective from the Prussian historical viewpoint, that's reasonable, since it was part of Prussia at the time. (Not that I personally endorse glorifying military history, as was all too common in the 19th C.) But if Wanderungen isn't mainly set in Brandenburg, why did he choose the title he did? Why didn't he call it Wanderungen durch dem Königreich Preußen? Sca (talk) 22:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because the Mark Brandenburg was the heart of Prussia. And the travelogue itself - the Wanderungen - is all Mark Brandenburg. I will try to make it clearer in the text, but there's a problem in using clarifying links in that our articles are too specific. Yngvadottir (talk) 03:53, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

... the Wanderungen - is all Mark Brandenburg.

Precisely my point. If one wrote something called,Wandering through the State of Iowa it wouldn't make sense to describe it in an encyclopedia article as covering "the history, architecture, and people of the United States, as well as its landscape...." Would it?

There's a disconnect here somewhere — I can see we're not going to agree. Oh well.... So ist das Leben eben. Sca (talk) 13:47, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've tried to explain, but mainly I hope my tweak to the article helps? Yngvadottir (talk) 15:40, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YES! — the region is fine since it refers to the March of Brandenburg. Why did it take us so long to get there? Danke. Sca (talk) 16:45, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Wanderungen has been on my wish list for some time. Is it worth reading? (I've read descriptions.) The only Fontane I've read is Effi Briest. Sca (talk) 16:45, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's better for dipping into - we have less leisure these days, and a lot has changed. (My local college library only has a one-volume collection of excerpts; it's also excerpted all over the place, including being quite freely cited on de.wikipedia.) I also tried to add a little context later in the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Various volumes are available in paperback from German Amazon. Sca (talk) 20:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]