Talk:Evelyn Waugh

message: Pfortuny, maybe you could give us a few more details about this anti-catholic purge? It would certainly reassure people who are of a skeptic disposition. DJ Clayworth 18:42, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: comments

message: I've made some edits that I'm sure will be attracting flack. I didn't do this merely to attract the flack, but because I honestly take issue with the literary judgements I changed. The real point, however, is that if there can be such widely divergent judgements as this, then the article is not NPOV. Somehow it must be possible to accommodate all these POVs without becoming merely anodyne.
Also, I think the article would be much improived by the addition of brief treatments of each of the major works - I've done a little of this for two or three novels in the very last section.
*I have edited EW's name to Arthur Evelyn St. John Waugh, which is how EW gives his christening name in _A Little Learning_. Presumably he was and is commonly called Evelyn to distinguish him from his father, Arthur Waugh.
::The page currently seems to say "Evelyn Arthur", and because Brianboulton is working on a major upgrade I'm not going to mess with it right now. However, in the external links, two of the references (Evelyn Waugh Society and UT Austin) both give the name as "Arthur Evelyn". Doubting Hall has it "Evelyn Arthur", but the other two sites seem more authoritative to me, not to mention the reference above to Waugh's own work. It is also more common, when naming a child, to use the father's name as the first name and use the names of uncles and grandfathers for middle names, thus starting with Arthur seems more likely.Vanhorn (talk) 20:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: When the upgrade is complete I will add a footnote concerning the ordering of forenames. It is true that Waugh gives the "Arthur Evelyn" form in his autobiography, and one can therefore assume this to be authoritative. Of his biographers, only Douglas Lane Patey mentions the "Arthur Evelyn" format; the others are evasive. In later life Waugh often signed "Evelyn Arthur", and this form has acquired more general circulation. There is no doubt, however, that he was known universally as Evelyn. Brianboulton (talk) 11:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Editing Evelyn 

message: I've tagged the second part of the Thirties section as POV. It is full of gushing praise in defence of Waugh, and is not even handed or presents it in a manner that summarises the current consensus of literary criticism. It is not the place of Wikipedia to defend or promote pieces of fiction - if they're considered good, or if a particular argument is seen to be prevalent, then it should be made clear and sourced. JF Mephisto 13:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: This article needs, in my opinion, a top-to-bottom rewrite which I have neither the expertise nor the interest to produce.  Much of it reads like the introduction to a norton edition of his work rather than an encyclopedia article about him, and virtually nothing is sourced.  --Dmz5 07:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major rewrite 

message: Just out of curiosity, why is he listed as a "Banned Writer" ?? 
Hugo999 12:50, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Banned Writer??

message: I want to put in a writer infobox but not until I know what his Literary Movement is, does anybody know?  04:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does every writer or painter or artist have to belong to a particular "movement"?  Some do, some don't.  Waugh simply wrote clean, unadorned prose in a relatively old-fashioned way and plotted his books similarly. Hayford Peirce 04:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know whether Waugh did or didn't, but I do know that -- especially  posthumously -- artists may be deemed to belong to a given movement by virtue of the critics' judgement. BrainyBabe 17:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No movement, so no infobox. Thank God for that. Johnbod 17:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literary Movement 

message: Back in March, 201.246.161.141 inserted the following comment:  {I would question if this is right. Auberon Waugh's autobiography "Will this do?" makes it clear that Combe Florey was owned by Laura Waugh (Evelyn's wife), and bought from her by Auberon's wife. Can this be checked please?}.  I have no issue with its contents, but it needs to be here, not in the Wikticle.  Does anyone know anything about this?  Cheers, Lindsay 14:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Corrected & refed - p206 "The money enabled Teresa to buy CF from my mother..."   The other cite tags are all wrong/unecessary, except regarding Helena as his best book should perhaps be taken with a pinch of salt - but he did write so.  Johnbod 17:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Later Years

message: I understood that he died on the toilet, unless this is what is meant by 'at prayer'.  Would have to check Stannard to confirm.
Then look it up. He died on the toilet. Waikatopakeha (talk) 02:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Death

message: Waugh was famous not just for his writing but also for his execrable character. After being told by and American fan how much she loved his work he told her that in that case the work could not be of any value. He was also highly insulting to the upper classes and they seem to have loved him for it (an experience similar to that of Rousseau's). Too little attention is given to his huge dependency on alcohol. By most standards today he would be considered an alcoholic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.7.77 (talk) 13:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't read about his military "career" without wondering how hard he was really trying, and whether he was receiving some form of special treatment. Can't ship out because of family affairs? Requested, and granted, leave to work on a novel? Promoted and demoted again? A biographer would have to deal with this somehow. SelectSplat (talk) 01:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Absence of discussion of Waugh's character

message: Removed this section from the article.  These references are mildly interesting at best and do not rise above the threshold of importance necessary for inclusion here.
*'Evelyn Waugh' is used as a pseudonym for an American actress staying at a hotel in Tokyo in the film Lost in Translation, 2003. (Kelly (Anna Faris): "I'm under Evelyn Waugh." Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson): "Evelyn Waugh was a man.")
*In one episode of the comic strip Pearls Before Swine, by Stephan Pastis, Pig is writing a love letter to an authoress who has captivated him. In the last panel, a letter beginning "Dear Evelyn Waugh" is shown.
*Whether either of the writers involved were aware that a London reviewer of Waugh's first book Dante Gabriel Rossetti had described him as "Miss Waugh" throughout his review  is uncertain.
*In Alan Bennett's play, Kafka's Dick, Kafka's father looks at the bookcase and says "Vile Bodies, Evelyn Waugh.  I bet she knew how to treat a man!"
*In Kingsley Amis' novel, Lucky Jim, one of Jim's "faces" is the Evelyn Waugh face.
Victorianist (talk) 16:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cultural references

message: Besides a number of statements sorely needing citations (his men in the war wanted to frag him?), passages like this are just not encyclopedic by any stretch of the word:
'''
This sounds like it's been lifted from somewhere else. Either cite it or get rid of it. Daniel Case (talk) 07:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tone concerns 

message: I think that the categories of this page  should be revised and cleaned up. In order to enable the to gain information, this section of the article should also be readable. At the current state, this is not the case at all. I wouldn't be surprised if someone were to add [Category:People who have gone through alcohol hallucinosis] or something similar. --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 12:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories?

message: The RP pronunciation of the name "Waugh" is ˈwoː . The pronunciation ˈwɔː is the Standard US one. Waugh is a British writer, not an American one!
:The opposite is true: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RP_English_monophthongs_chart.svg. There's no such phoneme as o: in RP. --Miacek (t) 20:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What you refer to as o: might be allophone. See the article Received Pronunciation, it doesn't mention closed o: as a separate phoneme. --Miacek (t) 15:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

text: That's Somerset Maugham not Maughan. --Sylvia A (talk) 23:36, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: This article has been reverted by a bot to  as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 14:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can only assume this is some mistake. User:Accotink2 has not edited this article. I have indeed reverted the bot; I am very well aware of the need to avoid copyvios and I strenuously object to having months of work vandalised by a bot in this way. Someone better come up with an explanation, or apology, or both. Brianboulton (talk) 18:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems this was indeed a false alarm. Not nice, though.  Brianboulton (talk) 00:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem 

message: Madresfield Court has several on commons. You are probably wise to avoid most of the "character based on" stuff, but there is a nice Spy caricature of a younger Earl Beauchamp. Otherwise some of the places he visited must have period shots.  The Cima St Helena is a nice work, but not really right for illustrating Waugh. The NG :File:The Vision of Saint Helena veronese.jpg or Vatican :File:The Vision of St Helena veronese2.jpg Veroneses, or the Gaddi :File:Agnolo Gaddi True Cross Detail 1380.jpg seem more in keeping. Or this one is in keeping with the horsey theme. Or this very early one. There is a free shot of Randolph churchill, which could be cropped :File:Levi Eshkol-Vera Weizmann-Randolph Churchil1955.jpg. 
*Patrick Balfour old
Johnbod (talk) 03:12, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible new pictures (free) 

message: The pronunciation was removed in this edit, apparently per a commment in the FAC. While I'm not one to step on FA reviewers' toes, I think that was a terrible idea. The pronunciation of neither "Evelyn" nor "Waugh" is obvious and so I think it most certainly belongs in the article. 68.35.40.154 (talk) 04:13, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation II 

message: I think it'd be a good idea to have another picture or two of Waugh himself in this article. Perhaps from his younger days? I'd never heard of this guy before, and have read most of this article. Somehow -- probably from the lack of pictures of Waugh himself -- I got it my mind that the Emperor Haile Selassie was Waugh! And I still can't shake the impression entirely. So... how 'bout it? Bobnorwal (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Finding pics of Waugh that are in the public domain is very difficult. Pretty well all the published images of him are copyrighted in the US and so can't be used - much as I would liked to have done so. The lead image is just about the only one that is free for use. Brianboulton (talk) 10:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  More pictures 

message: I want to read a biography on EW. The article mentions Sykes, Christopher (1975). Evelyn Waugh: A biography. London: Collins.  - Is this the best one? What is another good biography - the Martin Stannard? Please email me at kinsmanivan@gmail.com Ivankinsman (talk) 19:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography 

message: I have removed a lengthy section that was awkwardly posted into this article from the C. R. M. F. Cruttwell article, verbatim, in October 2011. The essence of Waugh's relationship with Cruttwell is covered in the "Oxford" section. This was a major factor in Cruttwell's restricted life, but relatively inconsequential in Waugh's. It is in no way worthy of a whole main section, which completely unbalances the article. Those interested in this particular aspect of Waugh's life will use the link and readv the Crutwell article. Brianboulton (talk) 12:01, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Cruttwell

message: I have moved the short paragraph about Waugh's antisemitism from the Second World War section, where it was misplaced, to "Character and opinions". Wording such as "This is later understood as deriving from his upper-class British snobbery..." tends to generalise the opinion of one particular source, so I have rephrased this.  The source in question appears to be a student thesis, though the present link is unhelpful; this is better. The question of Waugh's antisemitism (and racism) is valid, and should be mentioned. There are plenty of higher-quality sources than a student thesis to confirm this, and I am working on a revision that will incorporate such sources. Brianboulton (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. See also my talk page. -- Honorsteem (talk) 10:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I was surprised to find little overt racism in A Tourist in Africa, his late-1950s travel book. He was actually quite disgusted by apartheid.24.69.174.26 (talk) 17:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Antisemitism

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Evelyn Waugh signature.svg Nominated for Deletion

message: Waugh was essentially Anglo-Scots - hence the Scottish surname. Now he appears to have suddenly acquired Irish ancestry and, quelle surprise, no evidence is given to validate this claim. Unless such evidence is provided and sourced, I shall be removing all references to Irish ancestry in this article. And the definition for Irish ethnicity should NOT be extended to include Ulster-Scots which is a separate ethnic group and those belonging to this group are no more Irish than the English are German. It is also unacceptable to use tenuous links, such as distant ancestry, to define an individual's ethnic make-up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.255.154 (talk) 18:06, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  ETHNICITY 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Evelyn Waugh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140820151307/http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/discover/blue-plaques/search/waugh-evelyn-1903-1966 to http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/discover/blue-plaques/search/waugh-evelyn-1903-1966
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Evelyn Waugh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110610021305/http://www.abbotshill.freeserve.co.uk/EWN5-1.htm to http://www.abbotshill.freeserve.co.uk/EWN5-1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040407111756/http://www.abbotshill.freeserve.co.uk/home2.htm to http://www.abbotshill.freeserve.co.uk/home2.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Evelyn Waugh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915021346/http://www.evelynwaughsociety.org/index.php to http://www.evelynwaughsociety.org/index.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ...worked with some of his fellow Hypocrites on a film, The Scarlet Woman, which was shot partly in the gardens at Underhill
:Did this feature Waugh and his friends? Was it the same one that showed them walking in The Parks, and hosting a silly tea-party tea in their college? Does this footage still exist? Valetude (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: All 43 minutes here. Elsa Lanchester first appears, guzzling cocaine, around 12:45.  Johnbod (talk) 02:12, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film 

message: Hello there, this is Allenjambalaya an amateur Wikipedian. I read the lede and the last paragraph is like telling that Vatican II contributed to Evelyn Waugh's death. Well, I don't know if this quote from him will help but he once wrote a letter to archbishop of Westminster about the liturgical reform: "Every attendance at Mass leaves me without comfort or edification. I shall never, pray God, apostatize but church-going is now a bitter trial." (Source: A Bitter Trial)
--Allenjambalaya (talk) 08:49, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vatican II contributed to Evelyn Waugh's death? 

message: The original referenced Waugh writing with a quill pen, based on the character description from Charles J. Rolo's piece in the Atlantic. However, Rolo only mentions that "He writes with a pen which has to be continually dipped in the inkwell." This is much more likely to be a nib pen than a quill pen - I have amended it accordingly to match the reference.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.114.133.210 (talk) 11:29, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, but I think it could be simplified further with a link to dip pen, which I will now do. It would also be good if you could let us have (either in the article or here) a full reference to Rolo's article. GrindtXX (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Quill pen

message: A visiting editor has just made the good faith addition of the template (see right) to the Waugh article. I have reverted it for the moment, pending consensus here. Waugh was not, unless I misread the article, a member of the Conservative Party (and indeed seemed to have disliked it) and played no part in conservative politics or philosophy, and though we know he was right-wing in his outlook, I'm not persuaded that the template is appropriate here. Thoughts from others who watch this page are earnestly invited. Tim riley talk 16:19, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I entirely agree. Waugh was a (small-c) conservative in outlook, but he was a journalist and novelist: he was in no sense a "philosopher", and in no sense an architect, or even a major proponent,  of conservative values. His name was in fact only added to the sidebar yesterday (here), by the same editor (Trakking), apparently as a replacement for Auberon Waugh (who wasn't a philosopher either, but was more overtly right-wing in his journalism than his father). Trakking writes in his edit summary, "If you have written serious works of philosophy, ... you are, almost per definition, a philosopher": fine, but I don't think either Evelyn or Auberon can be said to have written any "serious works of philosophy" (titles, please). The sidebar doesn't belong in this article; and Waugh's name should be removed from the sidebar. GrindtXX (talk) 17:12, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Gosh! I hadn't spotted that Waugh had been added to the template as – if you please – a 'philosopher' of conservatism. That seems to me plainly wrong, and I will support any proposal to remove him from the template, if User:GrindtXX likes to set that in motion on the appropriate page. Tim riley talk 17:49, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with all above.  I think both Waughs were pretty uninterested in philosophy.  Johnbod (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for the edit; it was a mistake on my part. Evelyn's son had been included on the list for quite some time, and then he was excluded among a few others (who definitely were conservative philosophers.) I thought they might have added/deleted the wrong Waugh, but like GrindtXX suggested, maybe none of them truly qualify as a Philosopher, although they both embraced conservative stances and opinions. Let's keep them both off the list, though it surprises me that Auberon was on the list for so long without being taken down. - Trakking (talk) 18:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Trakking. That clarifies matters nicely. Tim riley talk 21:16, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waugh and conservatism 

message: Re recent quibbling over the introduction of the word "Welsh", and DoctorJoeE's query (here) "Cockburn's nationality is relevant, but Morgan's is not?", the answer is "Yes, that's correct". Lord Cockburn was a prominent advocate and judge in the Scottish law courts, spent most of his life in Edinburgh, and became Solicitor General for Scotland: calling him "a leading Scottish advocate and judge" is a reflection of his professional standing within the Scottish establishment (not of his personal ethnicity), and is defining and "relevant". William Morgan was Welsh-born, but spent much of his life and career in London, and is not particularly associated with Wales: insisting on defining him as "Welsh" at what is necessarily only a passing mention is tendentious and irrelevant. Anyone interested can click though to his article. GrindtXX (talk) 15:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, now that you have explained it, I understand. Cheers, DoctorJoeE review transgressions/talk to me! 16:21, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welsh 

message: The following was posted to my talk page, when here is obviously the more appropriate venue:
:The reason that I don't think that mentioning this in A Handful of Dust is adequate is that some readers may know "The Man Who Liked Dickens" but not know that Waugh used it again in A Handful of Dust. That was the case with me. I read "The Man Who Liked Dickens" and then googled to find commentary on it, and that's how I learned of its re-use in A Handful of Dust. Maurice Magnus (talk) 12:53, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said in my edit summary, this isn’t the right page to put the information. Put it on the A Handful of Dust page. If that’s not good enough, create a redirect page that goes to that page. SchroCat (talk) 13:42, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with SchroCat. This is an article about Waugh's entire life, career, reception of his works, etc.  Details about a particular work should go in the article(s) about the work(s).  Unless Waugh routinely re-used/re-published material, or unless this has been focused upon by the sources in their discussion of the reception of his works throughout his career, this is not important enough to mention in his bio article. See WP:DUE. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Handful of Dust 

message: I have deleted a recent addition to the article as I think it quotes Waugh selectively and out of context. He was asked the highly tendentious question: "Are you for, or against, the legal government and the People of Republican Spain? Are you for, or against, Franco and Fascism? For it is impossible any longer to take no side." His answer in full was: "I know Spain only as a tourist and a reader of the newspapers. I am no more impressed by the 'legality' of the Valencia Government than are English Communists by the legality of the Crown, Lords and Commons. I believe it was a bad government, rapidly deteriorating. If I were a Spaniard, I should be fighting for General Franco. As an Englishman I am not in the predicament of choosing between two evils. I am not a Fascist nor shall I become one unless it were the only alternative to Marxism. It is mischievous to suggest that such a choice is imminent." As a Roman Catholic, Waugh deplored the brutal anti-Catholic atheism on the Republican side: more than 4,000 priests were murdered during the civil war, and Waugh's feeling that Franco was the the lesser of Spain's two evils was shared by other British RC writers including Christopher Dawson, Christopher Hollis, Ronald Knox, Arnold Lunn, Alfred Noyes and J. R. R. Tolkien. (See here and here.) I  think that quoting the full question and answer would give the matter undue prominence: the Spanish civil war did not loom large in Waugh's life. What do other editors think? Tim riley talk 08:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: On balance I think it is probably best left out. As he says, "I know Spain only as a tourist”, which is telling. He was a writer (albeit one on a wide scale of subjects), not a politician or political influencer, so his views on the politics of a foreign country are only of very limited import, and would fall outside the purview of an encyclopaedia article. Definitely a topic left to the full-length biographies. - SchroCat (talk) 09:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I think the third to sixth paragraphs of the "Character and opinions" section cover Waugh's reactionary views satisfactorily. Tim riley talk 08:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish civil war