Talk:The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket

message: Does anyone have to necessary information to add the coincidence of the cabin boy Richard Parker in the story to the real life cabin boy Richard Parker that was cannibalized many years later?
What necessary information do you need?  That's pretty much of the gist of the story right there.  If you're looking for a source, the comparisons between the Poe story and the real-life event are detailed in Incredible Coincidence by Alan Vaughn.  Minaker 11:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Minaker, it seems you've responded to a very old post. My assumption is that since this message was posted, further information was added as well as a source. So, I doubt there's still an issue here. --Midnightdreary 13:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Richard Parker

message: This article is in need of an urgent revision and edition. Actually it should be rewritten completely. The "Major Themes" is nothing but a collection of trivia, and there is not any plot resume, public acceptance or critical assessment. Nazroon 19:14, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is sadly true of most literature articles on Wikipedia. They are among some of the most difficult types of articles to do well. Welcome any and all help. -- Stbalbach 14:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major revision 

message: The cover image on this article does not appear to be original, but some kind of modern recreation. I could be wrong, but it just doesn't have that 19th century feel to it. Midnightdreary 23:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover image 

message: :Image:Poe TheNarrativeOfArthurGordonPymOfNantucket title.jpg
I deleted it. --Sergey Romanov 14:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure that this image is a "fake" ? And if it is, does it really matter ?--Loudon dodd 22:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was definitely a fake. It was basically a Word document and someone used an oldstyle typeface. I'd say that matters. -Midnightdreary 23:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

text:  Yeah, if you click on the image to see the full-sized version, it's pretty clear that it's not a scan -- it's a replica someone typed out and put on a yellowish background.  I asked the uploader to elaborate on the source a while back, but his responce on the image's talk page didn't really clarify anything. ~CS 03:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake title page 

message: This article could use some help... The French version is a featured article. If anyone can translate some of that info into here, that might be a good start - their references are great, too. --Midnightdreary 14:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not near finished with the plot translation.. we're only up to about chapter 14...  That's not been my priority, as I figure it'd be easier for someone to read it themselves and write a summary. -Malkinann 04:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This plot has been found too long in the french version of the article : we kept it only because it was already written.--Loudon dodd 21:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A special thanks to our ambassador to the French version! That's certainly worth knowing! I've never actually read Pym beyond the first few pages so I'm nowhere near an expert myself! --Midnightdreary 21:40, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More info needed 

message: It is written in the article that "Some reviewers have noted Poe's use of the racist idea of the Noble Savage." I don't know if this idea is racist or not, but I'm sure I haven't seen any "noble" savages in Pym : the inhabitants of Tsalal (and the black cook of the Grampus) are only evil.--Loudon dodd 21:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out. I was suspicious when I saw that added, but far be it from me from discouraging editors from working on this article when it needs some serious help. :) I would support its removal. --Midnightdreary 21:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

text: If you remember, Peters is classified as being 'partially Native American' -- a mongrel. Perhaps it is there from whence such mention came. -- 4.159.77.118 (talk) 08:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps. But say it's reference to a "noble savage" is still original research unless there's a source attached to it... though I haven't found that reference in the text myself. Way to respond to old posts, by the way. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The use of the racist idea of the noble savage ? 

message: The plot introduction seems quite wordy for just an introduction. It's also too short for a full plot summary, as it seems to drop off in what I believe might be the middle of the novel. 69.95.234.130 (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the editors who watch this page would unanimously agree that the entire article is in need of serious work and attention. The method in which the plot is presented is something we've chatted about before, so if you'd like to help out, jump right in. --Midnightdreary (talk) 03:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've completed the storyline to include the end of the novel. Hope it helps! --Syzygy (talk) 07:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Introduction 

message: Gentlemen, the French have successfully put this article to shame. I believe that we should delete it -- replacing it with a .gif of a dithering white flag.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.159.77.118 (talk) 09:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds incredibly productive. I didn't realize it was a competition between different language versions of Wikipedia... so if they get an article to featured status, we're not allowed to have our own version? I never knew... --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vive la France! 

message: Midnightdreary, I'm surprised I got reverted since the "Hoffman argues" form of description seems the most neutral way of handling it.  The views expressed are hardly self-evident.  Some of them I'd call far-fetched.   It's distorting to claim that the book is about "establishing a national American identity," for example.  I just read it and in my view, that's not a major theme.  Deception, the falsity of appearances, inner corruption, suffering, powerlessness, the dreadful strength and mystery of nature --- these are things the book is about.  But establishing a national American identity?  If I were bolder I'd feel like deleting that entirely; I think it's likewise too bold to claim flatly that that's what the book is about; the proper course is just to note that such-and-such scholar has argued this, or that, and so with the rest.  Professional surveys of literary analysis, when not presenting the writer's own views, generally do the same. The second paragraph of the analysis section, in fact, tries to follow that format, though it could use better citations and some of the same problems apply: if Poe used the "racist idea" of the Noble Savage it was only ironically, as events later prove. 69.224.222.27 (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, now, don't address this to me. The point of these talk pages is to open up discussion to any and all interested parties. The trick with literary analysis here on Wikipedia is to try and find what the general scholarly consensus is, regardless of our own personal opinions or whether or not we agree (i.e. "in my view, that's not a major theme"). My experience with literary analysis here has not been to use the names of the analysts unless they themselves are notable for their claims. I think everyone knows that analysis is subjective and, obviously, subject to interpretation; not sure we need to beat them over the head with disclaimer-like clarifications as to who said what. Consider the featured article I put together on "The Raven". Maybe the best thing to do, rather than name-dropping (so to speak), is to add in slightly weasel-y words like "it has been suggested" or "might indicate" et al. Thoughts? --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  IMHO, the difference lies in the question whether any one interpretation is generally accepted, or whether there is no scholarly consensus. As long as things are clear-cut, the interpretation can be stated matter-of-factly, with perhaps a link to a more detailed reference. But as long as the work remains puzzling and mysterious (for which AGP qualifies mightily, from my point of view), different candidates of theories should be presented with their respective authors and champions. So, I think the qualifiers "Hoffman said" etc. should stay. Tallyho! --Syzygy (talk) 14:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I think it's more important to start listing these interpretations, with footnotes. I'm not sure if it's as important to attribute them within the text of the article; readers can easily check the footnotes to see who has made the claim. We can try weasel words like "some say..." or "it has been suggested" to keep it from sounding so absolute. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Included weasel qualifiers. ;-) --Syzygy (talk) 06:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis 

message: Sorry, what does it mean to say, in On Board the Grampus, that Pym "does not realize when his provisions arrive to their term"?TrevorX (talk) 00:33, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure, to tell you the truth. It may have been lost in translation (which is how this summary came to be, as I understand it). --Midnightdreary (talk) 02:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think it's supposed to say "doesn't wake up when food is brought to him, according to the plan they had agreed upon before." I'll fix it. --Syzygy (talk) 07:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Provisions arrive to their term"...? 

message: I've reverted an edit about a different Richard Parker being cannibalized decades after the book was written, because I felt it was going into too much detail. If so many Richard Parkers "have to mean something" (although personally I think it's a statistical oddity, nothing more), perhaps RP would merit an article in his own right, but here it would bloat the AGP unncessarily.  --Syzygy (talk) 08:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitely don't disagree! If the plot summary was half as long, we might be able to squeeze this sort of info in. As it is, though, it's messy enough without the added distraction.  --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, I did it... since the RP coincidences came up again here, I tried to clarify: Richard Parker (shipwrecked) --Syzygy (talk) 09:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

text: That's good news. Until an editor finds reputable sources making the connection that Poe deliberately used the historical incident as inspiration, it should probably remain not mentioned in this article. --Midnightdreary (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Richard Parkers 

message: I'm adding the word "possibly", as in "possibly reflecting" to the following sentence:  "It is unclear if Poe and Reynolds had ever met, but legend says that shortly before Poe's mysterious death, in his delirium he called out the name "Reynolds", reflecting his influence on him."  This adverbial addition allows for the other possibility that Poe was referring to Judge Henry R. Reynolds, who was overseeing the Fourth Ward Polls at Ryan's Tavern, where Poe had been found in his final delirious state, as told in this narrative.  I also added a reference.   .`^) Painediss`cuss (^`.  20:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's literally the opposite of what we do here. You're asking us to perform original research. Unless Philbrick or another author makes the same connection in a reliable published source, we cannot include it here. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  In "Sources" 

message: Hi Midnight & Paine,
As a devoted reader of Poe, just let me say Thank You for the work you did on AGP lately. It's coming together to build a really, really good article, both entertaining and elucidating. Party on! --Syzygy (talk) 07:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the encouragement, Syzygy! If you think the article is missing anything, let me know. I've nominated it for GA and then, eventually, I hope to get this to featured article status! --Midnightdreary (talk) 12:39, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only thing I'm really missing is... a compelling conclusion what this conundrum of a novel is really all about. :-) But I guess this is asking a little too much. I did some refactoring of the plot (the only thing I feel at least a bit competent about); hoping the GA will work out! Fingers crossed, --Syzygy (talk) 08:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's great work! I barely touched the plot summary section because I'm not so good at those. This one was a bit bulky, but I think you've tidied it up nicely - thanks! --Midnightdreary (talk) 12:45, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

text: You're welcome, Syzygy!  Glad to help.   .`^) Painediss`cuss (^`.  02:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thank you! 

message: I have Edgar Allen Poe Complete Tales & Poems by Barnes and Noble Books.  My ending seems to be a little different.  While Arthur Gordon Pym's narrative ends with the white figure, a note is written after it that is about two pages long.  This note says that Pym did indeed die suddenly.  It says that Peter's was still alive, but not speaking about the narrative.  It also talks in length about Tsalal and particularly the heiroglyphics.  The heiroglyphics, according to the note, were from different languages and it gives translations and such.  
It says that Pym died in an accident and the remaining pages of the story perished with him.  Sounds like a fire or something.  Maybe he spontaneously combusted or something.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 7th guest (talk • contribs) 01:16, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a shame if you have an edition with such a terrible typo in the author's name! However, to answer your question, the "novel" has an ending, and then Poe added a sort of "post script" that explains that Pym has since died. That postscript is written in Poe's voice and is not presented as part of the main narrative. As for the hieroglyphics, this article already talks about them (and the postscript in general) - didn't you see? --Midnightdreary (talk) 02:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

text: So I'm not sure what your purpose was for posting here on the discussion page, which is meant to talk about how to improve the article. Everything you've pointed out is already in the article. Could you be clearer what you are saying? --Midnightdreary (talk) 00:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I guess 7th guest's point is that in the current article version, it's not 100% clear that the final note is still part of the novel, rather than the "extraneous" material added later which it pretends to be? Although I'm unsure how to include this without going into too much detail. (I loath inflated synopses...) BTW, I noted that the Wikisource version of the book  has the end note immediately after the preface, just before chapter I. Is that a common arrangement? I think this spoils the ending... --Syzygy (talk) 06:48, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, so the "tongue in cheek" nature is confusing? I think that was purposeful on Poe's part, of course. I did fix the Wikisource version, by the way. I hadn't noticed that. --Midnightdreary (talk) 02:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Ending 

message: LawyerGreg -- You just introduced the episode with the Dutch ghost ship into the plot summary. While I agree it's probably the most grisly and gruesome incident in the story, it doesn't really propel the main plot.
I tend to advocate lean summaries in general (you have to leave some motivation for people to read the book ;-); what do you think of trimming or omitting the episode...? --Syzygy (talk) 07:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleaned it up a little bit. I don't think it does much harm to keep it as it is a very memorable part of the plot. Nevertheless, we should definitely be careful from here on: this plot summary is already quite long for such a short novel. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fine with me! --Syzygy (talk) 18:00, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Dutch episode? 

message: Editor WongLee found this section to contain unreliable sources and libelous accusations, etc.  I reverted WongLee's deletion of the section; however, perhaps this possible WP:NPOV issue should be discussed?   .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`.  05:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't understand WongLee's deletions. It's pretty obvious that there are racist tendencies (to call it mildly) in AGP, and the section was/is well written and referenced. Explaining the existance of racist notions is surely not the same as embracing a racist attitude, so I don't see what's POV in the section... Would WongLee care to comment? -- Syzygy (talk) 09:22, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: How would anything here be libelous? Against whom? --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

text: And, as far as the question of unreliable sources. J. Gerald Kennedy is one of the accused sources; he's considered among the most important living Poe scholars today. A search on Amazon will reveal that he has edited many collections of Poe studies and authored a couple books solo. Another source is Toni Morrison, a Pulitzer Prize-winner who needs no defense. The last was Scott Peeples, the current president of the Poe Studies Association and editor of the Edgar Allan Poe Review. Care to explain why these are unreliable? --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:05, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis/Race 

message: A detailed description of a real life event in which a cabin boy named Richard Parker is cannibalized on the high seas many years after the publication of Poe's novel can be found at http://perdurabo10.tripod.com/warehousea/id42.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.33.114.221 (talk) 01:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That was in this article some time ago, before it achieved good article status. The coincidence has nothing to do with Poe's novel. --Midnightdreary (talk) 01:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coincidence 

message: Also inspired "The Hollow Earth: The Narrative of Mason Algiers Reynolds of Virginia" by Rudy Rucker.
(July 1990 ISBN: 0688094139) And "Pym: A Novel" by Mat Johnson. (March 1, 2011 ISBN: 0812981588)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.249.180.127 (talk) 19:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  books also inspired by The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym 

message: This book appears in Rene Magrittes forbidden reproduction  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.97.232.233 (talk) 12:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  influence/inspiration 

message: The very first sentence of this article states that "The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket" was Edgar Allan Poe's only completed novel.  Then toward the bottom of the article, in the section entitled "Literary significance and reception," it states that "Tales of the Grotesque and Arabesque" was his only completed novel.  Which is it?  Obviously, they are not both right.  How has this been overlooked or allowed to remain unchallenged in the article?  I've been pondering this till I was weak and weary.  HaarFager (talk) 06:28, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You are reading the sentence incorrectly, although I agree it's poorly written. "Poe's next published book after this, his only completed novel"... "This" is described in the clause "his only completed novel". The clause does not describe Tales of the Grotesque and Arabesque. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:29, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I see.  Thanks for pointing that out!  HaarFager (talk) 03:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only Completed Novel?