Talk:Narrator

message: Would it be apropiate to add examples of well known works of fiction to each of these definitions?  I don't know if it would help any, or if it would be superfluous.  Just an idea to think about.
Whatcanuexpect 00:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples

message: How can Stream of Consciousness be forgotten? Certainly this style has more to do with a narrator than the other styles. Some mention of Stream in this article would be nice.--Secret Agent Man 03:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The vast majority of the film is told by one character to another. I think Verbal Kint qualifies as the narrator for ~90% of the film--the fact that he's telling the story to another character doesn't change that fact. -Sean 06:18, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: Exactly--90% of the film is told through his flashbacks. -Sean 07:12, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: This makes a lot of sense. Best example of a footnote narrator is in Vladimir Nabokov's "Pale Fire," in which over 3/4 of the text is the narrator commenting on his involvement with the poem of the book's title. Still, does it merit its own category of narrator? If a translator adds context or explains a term, I believe that is part of the work of a translator, and belongs on that page. "Narrator" is much more about the creation of a story. "Pale Fire," here, seems an absolute anomaly in that the footnotes truly are the story, while the poem of the book's title is a vehicle for those extensive footnotes.
-----
Thoughts on adding more examples from different texts?
------
This entry does not allow for narrators of film documentaries. I was going to link the Robert Palmer (author/producer) page to it because he narrated two documentaries (besides serving as screen writer and music director for the films), but this entry seems confined to narrators of fiction. Any thoughts? User:Bebop (my page is linked in the history file if you need to go there) 16:38, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stream of Consciousness 

message: If these articles aren't merged (at least the PoV and Narrator), then something should at least be done to further differentiate the two.  I read the PoV article first, then found that the Narrator article was largely the same information.  If it deserves its own article, then it should definitely bring something new to the table. Antemeridian 15:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem here is that there is a lot of point-of-view material on the Narrator page that belongs on the Point of View page. This can be cleaned up. It seems to me that the merge tag can be removed once this is done. If I don't see an objection, I'll likely proceed on that basis.Avt tor 06:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  If not merged then . . . 

message: I noticed that Keyser Soze from The Usual Suspects was listed as a unreliable narrator. A bit of a spoiler, don't you think? I changed it back to Verbal Kint. Nqnpipnr 12:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoiler for "The Usual Suspects" Removed

message: Just a quick question with regard to the introduction: I'm not sure that "literary criticism" as an "academic exercise" even existed up to the 1800s. If I'm not mistaken, Terry Eagleton writes about the historical development of the academic discipline of 'English literature' (though I don't have the book in which he does so); I'm fairly certain it's a modern phenomenon. It might be a safer bet to re-word along the lines of "criticism of literature dealt almost exclusively with poetry" and avoid the problem of the development of the academic discipline; but even this, according to Raymond Williams' account of the development of the word 'literature', might be suspect (in Keywords [1983], 183-188). He says that in the eighteenth century the term referred to "the whole body of books and writing"--that is, fiction and non-fiction, or learning in general. Literature used in this sense was a new meaning at this point in history; up until then and for a while concurrently, it meant 'literacy' or the ability to read. Hazlitt, writing in 1825, uses it in the following way: "I suppose the two first persons you would chose to see would be the two greatest names in English literature, Sir Isaac Newton and Mr Locke" (quoted by Williams, 185); not men who we would think of as having wrote 'literature'. Williams goes on to discuss the meaning of the word 'poetry' in the same article, which reveals both the familiar observation that 'poetry' referred to 'plays' as well as poems, and reveals that it also referred to what we now call 'prose'. So to say that literary criticism concentrated on poetry rather than literature is to miss the far broader meaning of 'poetry' during this period. I don't, I'm afraid, have any easy solution to this Gordian knot. DionysosProteus 02:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academic literary criticism? 

message: What are the real basic concept about this page or title called marration or narrator!!!
Is it gonna help the students to improve their grades? Is it gonna help them learn ?
Give me the real definition io this title.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.32.206.238 (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concerns 

message: "immersive" describes the aim or characteristic of a narrative to provide a realistic world in which the reader can "immerse" him
or herself. How is that a "peacock term" as labelled here? Norman Marshall (talk) 17:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with Norman's perspective on "immersive" here.  Though I am not entirely certain that all novels are necessarily immersive, it does not seem at all to be an example of "puffery" as described by Wikipedia.  If the objective is to dispute "immersive" as a universal descriptor of novels, that should probably be done in some other way.  The tag seems inaccurate.  LUxlii (talk) 02:05, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am removing the tag since no one seems willing to step up to argue for keeping it.  If there is a counter-argument for keeping it or if the objection is with "immersive" as a descriptor of all novels, I hope someone will step up with appropriate edits. LUxlii (talk) 23:03, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immersive as "peacock term"