Wikipedia:Peer review/The Sun Also Rises/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Sun Also Rises[edit]

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to take it to FAC soonish. This July is the 50th anniversary of Ernest Hemingway's suicide, and I am hoping to nominate this page for TFA if it is finished in time. Any comments are welcome. Thanks, Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I'm sorry I'm not able to contribute an in-depth review, but a quick glance made me wonder why the publication history section was so low in the article. It seems that a book should be published before it is analyzed, etc. See The Open Boat, for example. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A very good point. That section has been bothering me and I didn't know why exactly but probably because it was in the wrong place. I'll work on shifting it around. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:47, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the article briefly (try to make everything more concise):

  • maybe merge Background and Publication history somehow - the article is about the book, not the person so...
  • add info on how widespread the book was if that info is attainable
  • integrate "8 notes" into the article - i don't think most FA have those but you should check
  • "words—if only because there are so few of them—are" -- not sure what grammar rules you're using but it's pretty common to have a space after and before the "--" though i have seem them without the spaces; it's just unusual for me
  • "However Frederic Svoboda writes that, although written in a journalistic style, the striking thing about the novel is "how quickly it moves away" -- ok, this is just awful, in my opinion. it's choppy, with the dependent clause breaking the flow of the sentence. im guessing the rest of the article has phrasing problems; either get rid of the dependent clause if it's trivial and isn't significant, or rework the entire article.

After that last opinionated concern, I just stopped reading.rm2dance (talk)

    • Sorry, I just noticed this. Emdashes are not spaced; endashes are spaced. Not sure what you mean by 8 notes. Will work on the prose. Thanks for the comments. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I've read some Hemingway, but not this. Not sure if this makes me a better reviewer, or just a more ignorant one. Anyway, this looks overall pretty good, so here are some suggestions for improvement, mostly language related. Thanks for your work on this!

Lead

  • Would the current first sentence be better as something like The Sun Also Rises, a 1926 novel written by Ernest Hemingway, is considered a treatise on the post-World War I generation, which was dubbed the Lost Generation. Still not perfect, but maybe this gives an idea? I spelled out World War I (instead of WWI). At FAC people might ask who considers it a treatise. I also wonder if "post-World War I generation" is accurate - sounds almost like the people born right after the war. What about something like The Sun Also Rises, a 1926 novel by Ernest Hemingway, is considered by many to be a treatise on the "Lost Generation", those who had lived through World War I. Ehhh - not sure if that is better or not.
    • I've reworked and removed treatise for now, but will check the sources again. Might be able to cite it as it was written. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again might need attribution for FAC Arguably the best modernist novel of the period by an American...
    • I've removed this. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just to note, I was / am OK with keeping it, just think it owuld be better as something like "According to noted critic X, it is arguably the best modernist novel... Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I need to find the reference for it, but honestly might be better to keep a statement like that out of the lead for various reasons. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Smoother with "and" instead of (or just after) the second comma? The setting was considered unique and memorable, presenting the seedy café life of Paris, [and] the Pamplona festival, with a middle section devoted to fishing in the Pyrenees.
  • Another one to tweak. First off can something be "equally startling" if nothing has explicitly been startling before? Equally startling was Hemingway's spare writing style, combined with his restrained use of description to convey characterizations and action, which [reflected what later] became known as the [his??] iceberg theory. Second I tried tweaking the iceber theory phrase - did he have the theory fully developed back when he wrote the novel?
    • He had written about the iceberg theory in letters, etc., this early but I've tweaked to be clear, and removed the "equally startling". Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought at first Jonathan Cape was a pseudonym - perhaps The novel was published by Charles Scribner's Sons in the US in October 1926, and by Jonathan Cape in the UK in 1927, as Fiesta. (Perhaps the last phrase could be "in 1927 under the title Fiesta.") Plus this way it is a parallel construction.
  • Lead says Jake is the hero, but plot says he is narrator (hero not mentioned there) and then in Writing style there is a paragraph which seems to say the novel has no hero, or only a weak and negative one.
  • I had to read this several times the first time through to understand it and it still trips me up each time. Perhaps it would be best split up into two sentences on themes? The primary themes are the notion that the post-WWI generation was a 'lost generation', decadent and dissolute, irretrievably damaged by the war; death; renewal in nature; and living life purely, to the best of one's ability in an authentic manner. So split as something like The primary theme is the notion that the post-WWI generation was a 'lost generation', decadent and dissolute, irretrievably damaged by the war. Other themes include death; renewal in nature; and living life purely, to the best of one's ability in an authentic manner.
    • Honestly, it tripped me up too. Split into two sentences and reworked. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • MOS says not to use 'single quotes' unless they are for a quote within a quote - use "double quotes" instead (here and elsewhere in the article).

Background

  • I don't like pronouns as the subject of the first sentence of a paragraph - not sure if the antecedent is clear. So He first visited the Festival of San Fermín in Pamplona in 1923 where he became fascinated by bullfighting.[3] might be better starting out as Hemingway first visited...
    • I've fixed this, but can you look to at. Now I have three paragraphs beginning with "Hemingway ... " Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:55, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Did Hemingway and Hadley both visit in 1923? If so, it could be "The Hemingways first visited the Festival..." The sentence "Hemingway and Hadley went to Schruns, Austria in December 1925 for the winter..." could instead be "hadley and Hemingway went to Schruns..." for variety too. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does Donald Odgen Stewart need to be spelled out in two sentences in a row?
  • I would clarify what / where the Irati is in Outside of Pamplona, the fishing trip to the Irati was marred by polluted water.[5]
    • Fixed. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I added River just now (I am a creek geek). Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • It's funny about that, I always assume people know and say, without thinking, the Ohio, the Mon, the Colorado, the Salmon. But of course people don't know, so thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does this section need to give the completion date twice? Could this be trimmed A few days after the fiesta ended, on his birthday (21 July), he began writing, finishing two months later on 21 September.[6]
  • Last paragraph - he leaves Hadley to go to NYC, is alone in Paris afterwards, but then the last sentence says By November they had separated ... - seems like they already had?

Publication history

  • Publisher (singular) instead of publishers? Hemingway likely broke the contract with his publishers for the opportunity to have The Sun Also Rises published by Scribner's.
  • Problem sentence A first edition of the first printing, with dust-jacket and inscription by Hemingway, now sells at auction for between $80,000 and $120,000.[19] First off the ref is from 2004, so it is 7 years ago (not now). The ref needs the year added as well. Second the source was written as a preview and says that the book is expected to sell for this amount, but does not say what it actually did sell for. Perhaps something like In 2004 a first edition of the first printing, with dust-jacket and inscription by Hemingway, was expected to sell at auction for between $80,000 and $120,000.[19] Also, should this be its own paragraph or could it be combined with the preceding paragraph?

Plot summary

  • Tighten? In the opening scenes, Jake plays tennis with his college friend Robert Cohn, picks up a prostitute in one scene, and escapes with Brett from a gathering at a nightclub.
  • The MOS says to use full names at first mention, then just last names thereafter unless there are two or more persons or characters with the same last name. The plot summary does not follow this in several places - I am OK with calling Jake and Brett by their first names as this is done pretty consistently, but why are full names repeated in The jealous tension between the men builds; Mike Campbell, Jake, Robert Cohn, and Romero each love Brett. and why are just first names used in Cohn, a champion boxer in college, has fistfights with Jake, Mike, and Romero, whom he injures.? As someone who has not read the book, it is easier to keep track of characters if they are referred to by just one name. I think either first or last os OK as long as it is consistent (and perhaps if it follows the book's preference - i.e. Jake and Brett)
    • Changed to last names because Robert Cohn is almost always referred to as Cohn by the critics, but causes a problem because Brett and Jake are always Brett and Jake. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think when writing about characters it is OK to use first names, as long as it is done consistently and especially if the novel refers to them by their first names most of the time. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Okay, then I'll switch back to first names except Cohn who is always Cohn or Robert Cohn, rarely Robert. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Writing style

  • Will people know that "blue-ink" means to edit?
    • No link for this. I have it in several articles. Will think about how to clarify.Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not on Wiktionary either. I've clarified a bit. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:55, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps a different order would be clearer in Hemingway admitted that he learned from the Kansas City Star style-sheet, where he worked as cub reporter, what he needed as a foundation for his writing.[note 2][36] so something like Hemingway admitted that he learned what he needed as a foundation for his writing from the style-sheet for the Kansas City Star, where he worked as cub reporter.[note 2][36]
  • Assume that recibiendo is allowing the bull to impale itself - can this be made clearer? Perhaps add the name to the earlier description?
  • I would put the Masculinity paragraph and the second paragraph of Anti-semitisim and gender together as they both address similar themes. This would leave a one paragraph Anti-semitism section. If that is too short, maybe have one section for all three paragraphs called "Masculinity, gender, and anti-semitisim"? Not sure these three go together that well.
    • I've switched and will play with it. I've switched the organization a few times, but this seems to work fairly well. Truthkeeper88 (talk)

Reception and Legacy

  • Is dislikeable the best word choice?
  • Why is there no mention of the movie in Legacy?
  • Ditto for stage adaptations
    • I dislike popular culture sections, but will add these. Would like to add from the biographies, I think, so need to read a bit more. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I do not think the movie or play need a section of their own, but a sentence on the movie and another on stage adpatations in Legacy would be useful. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Got completely sidetracked researching this - it's actually vaguely interesting that in those days a novel went to stage and then to Hollywood. At any rate, there never was a Broadway adaptation and I'm still struggling with the movie information, separating out what to put in this page and what in the movie page. Almost there. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General

  • Note 5 seems superfluous since Background already mentions the divorce.
  • Should the year of publication for Death in the Afternoon be mentioned in the textbox?
  • Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot - I'll start working my way through these this weekend and post questions and comments here as they come up. Very thorough, very good! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed some typos and clarified a bit above. A few more thoughts.
  • Does the ongoing popularity of the running of the bulls stem from this? I once was briefly in Pamplona (not during the festival) and knew of it for this reason only.
    • Apparently yes, and I think I need to do something in the legacy about that, but want to think about how to do it & find sources. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the order of the novels needs to be made clearer - was The Sun also Rises his first novel or was The Torrents of Spring written first?
    • The Torrents of Spring is considered a novella and not at all in the Hemingway canon. I need to do something about that in the Torrents page and link there and probably add a note in the Sun page.
  • I keep thinking of the episode of the TV show Cheers where Sam the bartender is reading a first edition of this in the tub and comes to the part where he learns of Jake's war wond and drops the book into the tub water in shock. Nothing to do with this article, but just thought I'd mention it.
    • The Cheers writers were smart and good writers; I'm not surprised they added something like that. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ping me on my talk page when you want me to look at this again, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I just reread this and responded to some of the comments - only repsonded where it seemed it was needed, but if you have more questions, please ask. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS Please let me know when it is at FAC. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by llywrch

Some random thoughts:

  • There's a redlink to "Boni & Liveright". Is this the same publishing house later known as Liveright? Odd that there is no article about this influential publisher.
    • It is odd and I have redlinks all over for it, but plan to turn them blue. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:56, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In note 1, you appear to break format by quoting sources without the year -- e.g. "See Mellow 338-340".
  • There's a mention of a 1983 New York Times article which states this is one of the most translated books in publishing history. Any idea of what languages it has been translated into? (A list of selected languages would make the "Legacy & reception" section stronger.)
    • That is a very good question but sadly the source doesn't list the languages. I haven't found another source that lists the languages, but I think this is a good point and will keep digging. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Has any secondary source explored a possible relationship between the protagonist of this novel, Jake Barnes, with Nick Adams the protagonist of some of Hemingway's short stories? these studies might deepen this article's coverage.
    • Nothing that I've found. But it's a good question and worth exploring. Jake seems to be very much his own character and at this stage of Hemingway's writing Nick Adams was still a boy, so my sense, and from what I've read, there isn't really a link. Will look into it though. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:56, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Under "Major themes", I notice that Max Perkins name was not linked. Since he is a notable figure for early 20th century literature, I added a link to his article.
    • Yes, thanks for that. I've been moving things around and sometimes the links are lost. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:56, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the sub-section "The corrida, nature, and the fiesta", you indirectly quote Harold Bloom about the theme of "escaping into the wilderness". While Bloom is an influential literary critic -- far more than I ever will be -- he still represents one opinion on this work. Any chance you could express some of this in a direct quote from him?
    • I will trawl through the history to see whether I had a quote at one point that I ended up paraphrasing to avoid a quote farm. That nature and wilderness presents a place of escape in Hemingway's writing is widely accepted. I simply chose Bloom to mix things up a bit. Would it be better to quote Bloom or to say "critics" and add multiple cites? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:56, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • IMHO, simply quote Bloom. The sense I would like to see conveyed in this passage is that this is an opinion -- albeit a very expert opinion -- not a fact. Unfortunately, some Wikipedia users don't understand the difference. -- llywrch (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • This was conflated from a fairly longish passage so I've sprinkled in quotes and removed a sentence. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some things I like about this include the opinions his family had about the novel, & the fact this article does draw freely on the secondary literature. I suspect that many Wikipedians don't know about such tools as the MLA International Bibiliography; did you happen to know about this reference work?
    • Unfortunately I'm no longer a member of MLA and don't have access, but I do have access to other databases. Because there is simply so much written about this book I decided to lean on essays from compilations edited by well-known Hemingway scholars as well as papers from The Hemingway Review.Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:56, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Is the MLA Bibliography only available electronically now? Years ago, it was published annually & available at reference libraries to anyone who knew it existed. (In other words, grad students, present & past MLA members, & a few people like me who'd been told about it.) -- llywrch (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • The electronic version is here. Apparently they partner with Jstor, to which I do have access, with some of the sources coming from there. I don't know whether they still publish the annual hardcopy (but I do remember it well) and unfortunately am not close to a university library to visit. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-- llywrch (talk) 21:22, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Very good comments and suggestions. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 12:20, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/The_Sun_Also_Rises/archive1&oldid=1143114789"