condo to prevent unecessary redirects 2004 04 10t01 00z Not sure the recent edit changing Tyler from Anarchist to Nihilist is accurate Tyler certainly does have a ethos and creed where as a nihilist does not His creed can certainly be said to be destruction of the current culture and certainly retrograde in many respects seeking to return to a simpler subsistence level of existence i e hunter gatherer but he definitely has an established ethos and world view It is simply contrary to much of modern society I posit that the edit should be reverted back to anarchist 17 56 Apr 9 2004 UTC Reader s Digest Jack Joe Hey a few years ago I was reading a really old Reader s Digest and I swear I actually read an article written first person from an organ s point of view I don t remember which and the guy s name was Joe This was before I read the book so I just thought it was a really odd coincidence at the time I can t seem to find the article anymore though Does anyone else have any info on this Was Joe changed to Jack to avoid legal troubles with the original Joe s XXXXXX author The author of the book was talking about real stories from Reader s Digest so you probably did read the same ones he refered to Joe is changed to Jack in the movie because Reader s Digest wasn t willing to allow them to mention it in the film LGagnon I have a copy of John Pekkanen s article I am John s Brain Tumour from Reader s Digest South Africa 1990 12 volume 137 number 824 Chapter 7 of my copy of Palahniuk s Fight club has I am Jane s Uterus I am Joe s Prostate I am totally Joe s Gallbladder ISBN 0 099 28333 6 Vintage 1997 UK Random House The English RD sites I searched came up empty The earliet Joe s I found were two 1974 videos from Pyramid Films I found that Pyramid Media credits it to RD Does anyone have a source of an actual Reader s Digest article with Joe 2004 04 15t22 37z It is mentioned on the commentary for the DVD that Reader s Digest told them not to use Joe Apperantely they own the copyright somehow Either way the narrator in the book does use Joe rather than Jack And given that the book is the original story I believe that Joe should be used more often in the article than Jack though the narrator fits the character s name more accurately The article seems to lean too much towards being about the movie which makes it seem as if it was the original source material instead of the book It would be best that we keep the article based mainly on the book with details on the movie where applicable Otherwise what we would be doing would be the equivelent of someone making the Lord of the Rings article more about the Peter Jackson movie than JRR Tolkien s work LGagnon Tyler section We should merge the Tyler Durden section into the characters section There isn t a need for 2 separate sections on him As it is it looks redundant and a bit sloppy Any details that don t fit that section can go into a different one LGagnon Backstory of the novel I just recently updated the article on Chuck Palahniuk with info on how Fight Club came to be This is in the first paragraph of the Biography section I was wondering if anyone thought we should include that info in this article since it gives the backstory of how it was written Talk 12 00 27 Jul 2004 UTC Musical This this for real I ve never heard such a thing can anyone offer proof User KneeLess 4 59 05 Aug 2004 UTC See for more details Also a recent Guardian interview 11 17 5 Aug 2004 UTC Movie Book Balance As I mentioned above at the end of the Reader s Digest Jack Joe section the article is biased towards the movie that is the info for the film is treated as being the primary source instead of the book and needs to be balanced equally for the book I have fixed a recent re write of the plot section which made it even more biased in favor of the film but more work could be done to balance the article I think that fixing this is the most important o