Talk:Rabbit, Run/Archive 1

Archive 1

Provisioning

I've provided a plot synopsis and a couple of comments on the theme. Just read the book tonight & feel a bit hammered by it. Will quote a couple of passages later (within fair use, natch). --Andersonblog

Thank you. Although I haven't read the book, I was vexed that there was such a tichy write-up. Nedlum 23:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

ISBN?

No ISBN #? --Diogenes00 03:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

expand

Should there be a subsection with the characters, another subsection with the main themes, another section on onomastics perhaps? I am not sure what the guidelines from the Wikiproject Novels are - nor do I know where they can be found...Zigzig20s 17:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/ArticleTemplate. Be careful where you tread with the themes/onomastics, however; this article already has issues with correct citations/reliable sources. I've been meaning to tag it as such. María: (habla conmigo) 18:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...Nearly everything is referenced though? (Well, the plot wouldn't be.) I could add more - which I partly tried to do - but my notes from lectures are not necessarily referenced, so it's too bad...Zigzig20s 18:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Nearly everything is referenced, yes, and I've just semi-formatted the refs so that the titles are displayed. I think it's just a matter of research in context of the novel, and backing up claims. I'd love to see the article expanded, though, so if you feel you're up to it, I'll help in the technical area if you need it. María: (habla conmigo) 18:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I suppose we could add a subsection on characters. But I couldn't tell on which page they first appear, and I may not remember all the characters...Basically I could add a list of the main characters - but that may look slightly shoddy - still, that could be a start...Ideally we would need a couple of quotes with page references to back up a short description of who they are...As for onomastics and the main themes, I couldn't tell you the references so I guess that's too bad - well, I do have the list of books from which I found the info, but I don't know which specific book I took the info from, etc...Also, I wish you put back the link to the New York Times review in the 'external links' subhead, as it was - people might not want to look at the references, but they might want to read this review - the only review on this specific book that I found online.Zigzig20s 18:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:External links: "Sites that have been used as references in the creation of an article should be linked in a references section, not an external links section." Also, character descriptions do not usually require sources because the source material should be the novel itself. Something general like "Bob is the husband of Anne who hates the next door neighbors" is fine, but if it were "Bob is the husband of Anne who hates the next door neighbors, which some critics interpret as being a result of their bad sex life," then that would require a source. See what I'm saying? It may help to look at other novel articles, especially ones that are rated B and higher. María: (habla conmigo) 18:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Mid Importance?

This is a key twentieth century novel and deserves a higher importance ranking than that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.68.36.119 (talk) 08:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Film

Should anyone know where the film can be found, I would be very grateful to hear from them.Zigzig20s 19:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The film is impossible to find. Even mentions of it on the Internet are scarce. Therefore, I don't know if I'd call it "successful." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.30.81.2 (talk) 15:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Present Tense

One of the first written in the present tense? Faulkner's As I Lay Dying was in the present tense and was written thirty years earlier. Especially for such a young art form, thirty years is a good chunk of time. And I'd guess I could find plenty of even earlier examples, too. Hm. But that quote on the present tense is still useful. Someone wanna incorporate it without the additional, false claim? It's too late and I'm tired. Chicopac (talk) 07:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC) Much, much earlier (about 100 years) is Dickens'- The Mystery of Edwin Drood . As this work is unfinished it cannot be certain whether the author intended to publish it as it stands in the present tense or to change it, but the former seems convincing. ChrisH 17 September 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.43.154 (talk) 13:46, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Plot Summary Revision

Anyone mind if I revise a few points in the plot summary? I just finished it last night and found the plot summary adequate, but not completely accurate. For example,

"When he tries to initiate, she slams the door on him in apparent disgust."

I didn't feel Harry was trying to initiate sex with the reverend's wife (although he wanted to). In the book, he actually tells her that he can't come in (after church) because, "I have this wife." The book itself even points out Harry's doubt in whether the reverend's wife was angry because she wanted Harry to pursue, or because she didn't. I propose rephrasing it this way:

"When he declines the invitation for coffee, stating that he has a wife, she angrily slams the door on him."

I feel that the above is less editorial and more factual.

Next, the line, "Harry dry humps her, punches her, then leaves her, yet again, for Ruth" is true, but it seems to imply that he actually found Ruth and reestablished relations (which he didn't at that time). I propose rephrasing it this way:

"...then leaves, yet again, in an attempt to resume his relationship with Ruth. Finding her apartment empty, he spends the night at a hotel."

Then, I would recommend adding to the beginning of the next paragraph:

"The next day, Harry calls Reverend Eccles to see if his return home would be welcome. Reverend Eccles shares the news of his daughter's death, and Harry returns home immediately."

I realize that brevity is good, but I felt that the summary was a bit choppy and could be improved by the above editions (or additions). Ha. I will wait a few days for any input/suggestions/objections. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingsfold (talk • contribs) 02:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

(Done.) Kingsfold (Quack quack!) 03:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Addition of ISBN from Wikidata

Please note that this article's infobox is retrieving an ISBN from Wikidata currently. This is the result of a change made to {{Infobox book}} as a result of this RfC. It would be appreciated if an editor took some time to review this ISBN to ensure it is appropriate for the infobox. If it is not, you could consider either correcting the ISBN on Wikidata (preferred) or introducing a blank ISBN parameter in the infobox to block the retrieval from Wikidata. If you do review the ISBN, please respond here so other editors don't duplicate your work. This is an automated message to address concerns that this change did not show up on watchlists. ~ Rob^Talk 01:25, 15 May 2016 (UTC)