# Talk:The Old Man and the Sea

Should there be a mention of the illustrated edition?  With drawings by two notable illustrators, it seems to be notable enough that the article should at least mention 
its existence.  If the British Library catalog referenced from the Worldcat reference is still on the blink, here is the illustrated edition's catalog entry at the Bodleian Library.  Philh-591 (talk) 19:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Most of the article, especially the introduction and the reception segments, is written mostly without references and in a language that is biased and closer to an opinion than to an article. It must be revised and amended. 186.102.90.70 (talk) 20:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello. You need to be more specific. The lead section summarizes the body of the article and normally does not require references except for direct quotes. Reception sections for a literary work, by definition, are based on opinions by literary critics. Cullen328 (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29 Hello! I added this pic (twice) and you removed it (twice) [1]. I admit the MOS:IMAGEREL guideline doesn't give strong support here, and I'm doubtful the cite, though in-depth on the statue, makes it WP:PROPORTIONate to actually mention the statue in text. I also found this [2] by the National Sculpture Society, but it's pretty brief and not necessarily independent of the sculptor.
But I still think the pic is "relevant"  to the Legacy section as whole, not that many stories get statues made. That guideline also encourages us to "strive for variety" and IMO this pic adds some variety.
Consensus will be what it will be. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gråbergs Gråa Sång, the statue seems to have little relevance to the article subject, save for being a depiction of Hemingway, of which we have a large number. The only way The Old Man and the Sea seems to have actually inspired the statue is the name. If you want to add it again, I won't revert, but I really don't see how it is relevant to "Legacy", or indeed the article as a whole. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:19, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
@AirshipJungleman29 "Drawing inspiration from The Old Man and the Sea — one of Hemingway’s most noted works and the one for which he received both the Pulitzer and Nobel Prize (in 1953 and 1954, respectively) — Lundeen dug deep into the author’s past including his love of fishing, drinking and polydactyl (six-toed) cats which are all depicted in the sculpture."
This is good enough for me, so I'll take you up on re-inserting. We'll see if any other opinions appear. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:02, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
That was the sentence I referred to, yes. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Ah, and I just noticed the recent GA. Good job! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:06, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Hello. I do not have strong feelings about inclusion or removal of the photo. That said, I'm inclined to agree with AirshipJungleman29 that the statue seems unmeaningfully connected to the novel, aside from its homage in the title. Οἶδα (talk) 22:13, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

 11:58, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

So why did he dislike it? The article should specify this, I think. As should the main article about the film, where the impression is created that the dislike is actually far less well documented than what this article suggests, let alone the reasons for it. Hemingway's dislike is only inferred there indirectly from his statement that the only film adaptation of a story of his that he liked was Killers. In addition, the producer is quoted as claiming that Hemingway did like it. 62.73.72.101 (talk) 18:25, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

See the discussion in Meyers. The first problem was that Hemingway was contractually given final say on the script, but he had no idea how to make a good film–he wanted Spencer Tracy to read lengthy passages of prose as narration, effectively making it an audiobook with occasional visual representation. Then they couldn't actually manage to film a marlin, and after a month of very expensive trying and failing in Peru, Lester Hayward (the chap who gave the quotation in the film article) cancelled the expedition. Hemingway regarded this as a personal betrayal, never spoke to Hayward again (making that quote rather doubtful), and cut contact with the film. The final movie was made with an artificial fish, which Hemingway compared to a condom, and had very little of the footage that he and the original director Zinnemann shot—hence the dislike. That's all rather a lot to summarise in an article not directly about the film. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2025 (UTC)