Talk:Molloy (novel)

message: :Image:Beckett Molloy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Beckett Molloy.jpg

message: I would argue that the allusion to Ulysses is not necessarily a reference to JJ's novel, but rather a more direct allusion to the Greek Ulysses. Thoughts?-FM (talk) 00:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the statement concerned.-FM (talk) 21:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allusions to Joyce? 

message: Without a citation or two, that "generally considered" to be one of the 20th century's literary highlights seems like a peacock term. Can it be verified that most critics (not just one or two) would agree with this statement? It's pretty bold. Khazar (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Added some citations Theadorerex (talk) 17:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greatest of 20th Century 

message: I don't think the plot summary section should have as much 'interpretation' as this.  I would expect that to be in a separate section with reliable sources to back it up.  Dropping it here to save and maybe provide further discussion:
 The ending is also powerful because Beckett's manner of writing creates an eerie, creeping suspicion that the events of the book are somehow unreal. Because there are often vague details and oddly pointless scenes, and as is also the case in his theatre works, the reader becomes acutely aware of the text as just that, a text that someone has written which may not have the "window onto reality" effect of ordinary, realist literature, but which may, on the contrary, be fragmented, incohesive, contradictory, or anything else which goes against or is abrasive to the conventional intention of having the elements of a story in harmony with each other, aesthetically. His texts "break the fourth wall" by being self-aware, in ways, and sometimes explicitly refer to themselves. Thus, Moran's explicit confession at the end of the story is a kind of shocking climax to the plodding sense, throughout the book, that something is suspicious and amiss in the telling of this story, the unmistakableness that the characters do not seem particularly real or well-defined. At the end, Moran shocks the reader by admitting plainly that, since he was the one telling the story, the entire story may have been made up. It is worth thinking about this aspect of literary craft in light of two of Beckett's major influences, Proust and Joyce. Joyce wrote a circular novel with Finnegans Wake; Proust wrote a book which is the documenting of its own coming into being, as the narrator at the end draws conclusions which influence the writing of the book which the reader understands they have just read. Beckett extended these potential relationships between the writing of a book and its reading by creating another option, a book which is being written while it is being read, but which the author admits may be misleading.
--John (User:Jwy/talk) 04:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretation?