Talk:Stream of consciousness

message: __TOC__
Someone please, please, PLEASE rewrite the stream of consciousness article in SOC. That would make my day. What's SOC?
-----  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.192.133.87 (talk) 19:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

message: Would the reveries in Titus Groan be classed as stream of conciousness? --^pirate 20:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gormenghast 

message: Hello. I've dug through all the pages I could think of and there doesn't appear to be any article on the concept of Stream of consciousness. I would like to propose that this article be moved to, e.g. to Stream of consciousness writing, to make room for an article on the concept. Any thoughts? *ba-dum-ching* Ewlyahoocom 08:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move this page? 

message: Krudy is mentioned associated with SOC in the following link.
http://www.frankfurt.matav.hu/angol/irok/krudy/elet.htm
Non lo so. 18:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source on Krudy 

message: Otherwise, unproven sources will be removed. 121.6.97.208 11:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Please quote

message: The article seems itself to be written as stream of consciousness.  (/me posits that Wikipedia's true stream of consciousness is #wikipedia.) I'll add section headers.  Thanks, GChriss <always listening><c> 16:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking of which... 

message: It says on the The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock that it is stream of consciousness.  This is referenced as: "Perrine, Laurence. Literature: Structure, Sound, and Sense, 1st edition. Harcourt, Brace & World, 1956. pg 798."  I know that on this talk page it says that prufrock is definitely not stream of consciousness, so could someone take a side and fix one of the two articles? - Im.a.lumberjack 23:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prufrock 

message: There aren't any citations for these, but they are interesting when you think about blogs and forums. If the essence of the literary style/movement is to reveal thought processes and emotions without inhibition, then the internet seems to be a bastion for such writing. 
--Gautam3 19:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-Traditional Stream-of-Consciousness 

message: Stephen King's The Shining definitely contains elements of stream-of-consciousness.  The thought processes, which are italicized and in their own separate paragraphs, are very much s-o-c.  Should this be included in the article? Im.a.lumberjack 16:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stephen King's ''The Shining'' 

message: I’ve copied below a quote from Andre Breton’s essay “On Surrealism and Its Living Works” because automatism and stream of consciousness are not the same thing, yet it seems to be a common mistake made here on Wikipedia (see for example Surrealist humor).  I believe it should be addressed somewhere in this article.  This might help to clear up some of the discussion here on the talk page.  For example, I’d say Dylan writing a song in one day suggests that he was using automatism, not stream of consciousness(and from what little I know of Dylan, I believe composition process of "Like a Rolling Stone" was more like automatism than stream of consciousness).  As I see it, the term “stream of consciousness” is used in both the broad and the narrow sense.  People commonly use “stream of consciousness” in the broad sense to refer to things that aren’t “stream of consciousness” in the narrower, more accurate sense.  This is a similar sort of problem I faced when editing the beat generation page (see specifically the “meaning and usage” section).  People use it to refer to a time period and to a specific group.  I think it would be useful on this page to make it very clear that the term “stream of consciousness” is commonly used in a very broad, uninformative/uninformed way, but then make clear what it more precisely means.  Also, I think it’s imperative to make the difference between stream of consciousness and automatism clear.  The main distinction is that stream of consciousness is a thoroughly crafted imitation of the flow of the conscious mind.  Automatism is automatic writing, free association, purposefully outside of conscious control, purposefully guided by associations of the subconscious.  It’s easy to get the two confused, and determining who is using automatism and who is using stream of consciousness is tricky.  For example, Jack Kerouac practiced automatic writing in an attempt to simulate the flow of the conscious mind, not necessarily the subconscious.  He’s occasionally accused of using stream of consciousness, but the purposeful focus on spontaneity and dismissal of editing makes his status as a stream of consciousness writer questionable.  Still, I wouldn’t say he’s exactly practicing automatism either.  Anyway, here’s the quote by Breton (specifically responding to suggestions that James Joyce is practicing Surrealism):
:“Although [these works] are evidence of common desire to take up arms against the tyranny of a thoroughly debased language, procedures such as the ‘automatic writing’ that began Surrealism and the ‘inner monologue’ in Joyce’s system are radically different at base.  That is to say, underlying them are two modes of apprehension of the world that are different in every particular.  In opposition to the illusory stream of consciousness association, Joyce will present a flux and try to make it gush forth from all directions, a flux that in the last analysis tends to be the closest possible imitation of life (by means of which he keeps himself within the framework of art, falls once again into novelistic illusion, and fails to avoid being placed in the long line of naturalists and expressionists).  Much more modestly when one first looks at it, over rand against this some conscious current “pure psychic automatism,” which is the guiding principle of Surrealism, will set the flow from a spring that once need only go search for fairly deep down within oneself, a flow whose course one cannot try to direct, for if one does it is sure to dry up immediately.” <Breton, Andre. “On Surrealism and Its Living Works.” Manifestoes of Surrealism. Trans. Richard Seaver and Helen R. Lane. Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1972.</ref>
F. Simon Grant 16:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Automatism vs. Stream of Consciousness

message: Holden Caufield uses this a lot. However, its not been mentioned, and as such I'm jubious to add it in. I'm also rubbish with references, so any suggestions?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon909 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Catcher in the Rye 

message: I decided to add Mark Z. Danielewski's "House of Leaves" to the literature section in the article. I believe that the book properly fits and is a good source to this page. Please correct me if I am wrong, though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.212.167 (talk) 04:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  House of Leaves 

message: The song Insitutionalized by Suicidal Tendencies certainly seems to be SOC  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.85.75 (talk) 05:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Institutionalized 

message: I removed Kerouac's books from stream of consciousness, as they are not.--Loodog (talk) 05:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kerouac 

message: :the wind a wind is blowing from the vents if they're vents they are someone's whose really, and when she sings I sing in coinhibition until cohabitation but my god there's a bullet shot out the window who would ever have expected such a thing i think these wikipedians are comedians are not knowing the way to define what is written as thought and not and really really it's not really it's not right to delete delete everything is it all being deleted, when will they stop, stop please when tell me will they stop, it's not what's needed is more journalists telling me yes or telling No all they really know is maybe  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chicopac (talk • contribs) 05:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  what is lost time searchable 

message: There was a link at the bottom to "newsbisuit.com," and I assumed that was complete vandalism since I see nothing to do with that in the article, so I removed it. If for some strange reason it actually does have anything to do with it, let me know. Experimental Hobo Infiltration Droid (talk) 21:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: link at bottom?

message: fight club and anumber of chuck's other works are stream of conciousness right?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.208.100.21 (talk) 20:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fight club 

message: It occurs to me that Free writing should be merged with this article, but I'm not an expert on the subject.  Any thoughts?  LinguistAtLarge • Msg  16:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  Stream of conciousness is used to demonstrate the thoughts of a character; free writing is used to demonstrate the thoughts of the author. Nave.notnilc (talk) 18:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. well said. 68.5.229.58 (talk) 04:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

text: No. Free writing is a strategy for writing, a technique used by some people to help their creativity and overcome writers block.  The writing that comes out of it is completely normal writing; you can't tell it was "free written".  Stream-of-consciousness is a style of writing; there's no way to know how something was written (and a lot of things that seem like an arbitrary torrent of stuff were in fact put together meticulously). That some authors use the former technique to generate the latter doesn't make the two the same, or even (in general) related to one another. 87.114.147.43 (talk) 12:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Free writing be merged here? 

message: This sounds like personal opinion to me and does seem to violate NPOV. Or is this general consensus in scientific literature on this topic? Unless a citation is given, this valuation should be deleted.Google Earth
Stony74 (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is SOC "mostly a dead metaphor"? 

message: I myself don't currently have time to do much work on this page, since I'm studying for my Ph.D. in Anglo-American modernism.  However, for those interested in editing it with recent scholarship in mind, I recommend consulting the following source:
Fernihough, Anne. "Consciousness as a Stream." The Cambridge Companion to the Modernist Novel. Ed. Morag Shiach. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. 65-81.
You'll also likely find success in books in a field of literary studies called narratology, which attempts to create a taxonomy of narrative techniques and analyze their deployment in literature on a detailed, technical level.  JCGTU (talk) 22:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommended Scholarly Reference 

message: whole lotta discussion 'bout a whole lotta nothin; cat'n mouse chatter 'bout don't-really-matter. notable-works-list lengthier than the topic at hand and wasted words ain't worth being heard; p.h.d's should watch their p's & q's and spend some time on the article if their so smarticle. and ain't no SOB said a word about SOC art...>pfffft< Penwatchdog (talk) 16:19, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: whole 'nother approach maybe please?

message: hey sports fans, i've just spent a lengthy amoount of time changing a very UN-scholarly LIST of so-called "notable works" into more of a categorized, encyclopedic format. one of the first things i've come to understand about wikipedia is; it's NOT a list about EVERYTHING... i'm no scholar, folks, but, the the list of notables as it appeared until now, seemed to me to be an embarrassing display of encyclopediometry! i'm so tired i can't even finish it today but left it in acceptable form and will come back to it tomorrow. everyone is invited to ammend what i've ammended (i'm no scholar as i've said) AND: anyone interested in sending me a check: i usually get $300.00 per-day for doing similar work!Penwatchdog (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: *i've now completed the work of transforming a LIST into a readable account of stream of consciousness writing through the Centuries... Someone out there with more specific literary knowledge than me (i haven't read half those books) may want to go over my work and maybe move some names around, but i've provided the groundwork for future editors to expand upon. I've used the most basic descriptive terms for-starters. those terms may be out of place depending on the works described, so please cut-&-paste as necessary. I've also added a hidden "don't freely add new titles/authors without discussion" to the page. cheers.Penwatchdog (talk) 08:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  whole 'nuther approach Part 2 

message: The first part of this article relies heavily on the above -- see quotation below. If this isn't plagiarism it may well be exceeding the normal rules for fair use. I originally started to edit the opening sections but now wonder if that is appropriate?
"stream of consciousness:    The continuous flow of sense‐perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and memories in the human mind; or a literary method of representing such a blending of mental processes in fictional characters, usually in an unpunctuated or disjointed form of interior monologue . The term is often used as a synonym for interior monologue, but they can also be distinguished, in two ways. In the first (psychological) sense, the stream of consciousness is the subject‐matter while interior monologue is the technique for presenting it; thus Marcel Proust's novel A la recherche du temps perdu ( 1913 – 27 ) is about the stream of consciousness, especially the connection between sense‐impressions and memory, but it does not actually use interior monologue. In the second (literary) sense, stream of consciousness is a special style of interior monologue: while an interior monologue always presents a character's thoughts ‘directly’, without the apparent intervention of a summarizing and selecting narrator, it does not necessarily mingle them with impressions and perceptions, nor does it necessarily violate the norms of grammar, syntax, and logic; but the stream‐of‐consciousness technique also does one or both of these things. An important device of modernist fiction and its later imitators, the technique was pioneered by Dorothy Richardson in Pilgrimage ( 1915 – 35 ) and by James Joyce in Ulysses ( 1922 ), and further developed by Virginia Woolf in Mrs Dalloway ( 1925 ) and William Faulkner in The Sound and the Fury ( 1928 ). For a fuller account, consult Robert Humphrey , Stream of Consciousness in the Modern Novel ( 1968 )". Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, ed. Chris Baldick. Oxford: Oxford U.P.,  2009, p212.
Rwood128 (talk) 23:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unacknowledged quotations from Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms 

message: I'm puzzled by the note, at the head of the edit page for this section, that indicates that changes should be addressed on the talk pages, and that the entry is in good shape. The relevant discussion above is dated for one thing. Furthermore the entry has some obscure -- to me -- unverified references to very early examples of the use of the stream of consciousness technique. My -- somewhat dated -- glossaries and handbooks do not mention the very early writers that are included, but do include Laurence Sterne, Samuel Richardson, and Henry James as precursors. Surely this section needs revision and, unless there is objection, I plan to remove the debatable? examples, and add those mention in my reference texts. I will check further in more up to date reference works also.    Rwood128 (talk) 17:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable works 

message: This is entirely a quotation and should surely be deleted (I've edited to make this clearer). I will delete unless there are objections.  Rwood128 (talk) 18:31, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interior Monologue --see also item 26 

message: I don't know why the entry contains examples dates 2000 as coming from the 21st Century. Clearly, those of us that learned to count know that we start counting at one, not zero. Despite what others would have you believe, and the Y2K scare notwithstanding.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatchesMalone (talk • contribs) 18:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 21st Century started Jan. 1st, 2001 

message: Otherwise it seems too academic  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.95.179 (talk) 12:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately this page needs work -- I'll try and do something if I can find time. Rwood128 (talk) 11:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page obviously needs an example 

message: There are several interesting names that lack citation. I'd like to search for possible sources, but in the meantime they are irritating. I will delete these if no one objects -- though reluctantly. Rwood128 (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations needed 

message: Other possible examples from the 1920s are Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby (1925),[citation needed] Hermann Hesse's Steppenwolf (1927)[citation needed] and Italo Svevo's La coscienza di Zeno (1923
Well partly at least, I've not read Svevos work, but stream of consciousness narrative definitely is not used in Steppenwolf and Great Gatsby.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.16.157 (talk) 02:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the examples given for the 1950s and 1960s?  Rwood128 (talk) 17:23, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This needs to go: 

message: Because of the absence of citations, or supporting discussion, this section should be deleted: are there any objections?  Rwood128 (talk) 18:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting the 1950s and 1960s section 

message: Why is Toni Morrison not even mentioned? She is essentially the contemporary heir of the Joyce/Woolf/Faulkner school of literature. She is also (if I remember correctly) one of the only two stream of consciousness authors who won the Nobel Prize (with Faulkner). I will add her in it. Wandering Courier (talk) 18:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toni Morrison 

message: I cannot find suitable citations for the following: Will Christopher Baer; Mark Z. Danielewski; Dimitris Lyacos; Iimani David. Shouldn't they be deleted? I checked the Wikipedia articles and Google, but couldn't find any good sources.Rwood128 (talk) 15:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  21st Century -- deletions? 

message: (1) Can anyone add an explanation as to how how the stream of consciousness technique is used in Daniel Clowes' graphic novel Like a Velvet Glove Cast in Iron? 
(2) I can find little of substance on the contemporary Pakistani Urdu poet, columnist and playwright Mujtaba Haider Zaidi. Is he important enough to include? There's a mention in the Theatre of the absurd article but nothing in the articles on Urdu literature. Rwood128 (talk) 18:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queries Re: Daneil Clowes and Mujtaba Haider Zaidi 

message: Is the above banner heading still applicable to this article? Rwood128 (talk) 16:57, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs attention from an expert in Literature? 

message: There following needs to be explained: "Daniel Clowes' graphic novel "Like a Velvet Glove Cast in Iron" is an example of stream of consciousness writing in cartoon-form."Rwood128 (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stream of consciousness writing in cartoon-form. 

message: Re my recent deletions, see my various comments above, and especially re my reluctance to delete. I added numerous citations at one point in an effort to keep entries.Rwood128 (talk) 20:53, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of citations and deletions 

message: In literary criticism, stream of consciousness, also known as interior monologue, is a narrative mode or 
I am not expert in narrative theory or literature at all but due to learning for an exam I stumbled upon the mistake I marked as bold. 
German speaking sites and many other English ones separate between Interior monologue and S-o-C - so it is not the same but a different feature.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.24.149.253 (talk) 17:10, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: See the section d/w interior monologue! Rwood128 (talk) 19:55, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  I might have found a serious mistake