Talk:Winesburg, Ohio

Literary Significance and Criticism revision

I just added a (fully-sourced) provisional revision of this section in the article. I say provisional because I plan to add more, but need to do more research to properly compose and source the material. My current thinking is to add at least some of these ideas to that section:

Views of Early Critics:

• "Revolt of the Village" theme and its downfall (connection with other books of the same ilk)
• Psychoanalytic angle (or New Psychology as it was sometimes referred to)

Historical/Literary:

• Winesburg has been variously looked at as a precursor to the modern novel or a modern novel itself. I’ll have to look at some histories of the American Novel to fill out this section.
• Expressionism: Several critics (David Stouk in particular) have placed Winesburg within this movement. This is significant because it adds to an understanding of the novel’s place in the artistic/literary world, as well as its style.
• Innovations in Genre: should this be its own section or under Literary Criticism and Significance? (part of Winesburg’s significance is that it was a major precursor to the “short story cycle” genre, notably influencing cycles such as In Our Time, etc.)

Thoughts? Ideas? --Olegkagan (talk) 09:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Expressionism and Innovation in Genre added in various sections. Not sure where to stick "Revolt of the Village" and Psychoanalysis. I have my hands on Hoffman's chapter from Freudianism and the Literary Mind (1945) which has a chapter on Anderson -- will incorporate if there's something interesting in there that will fit. --Olegkagan (talk) 22:07, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Novel?

Why on Earth does the title of this article say it's a novel if the article then defines it (correctly) as a collection of short stories? Shouldn't the title be changed?--93.40.141.143 (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I added a "Genre" section to the article that addresses this issue. Since it conceivably be argued that Winesburg, Ohio is both a novel and a collection of short stories, and I think changing the title to Winesburg, Ohio (short story cycle) may be confusing to people unfamiliar with the genre, I'm going to put some thought into changing the page title to Winesburg, Ohio (book) which encompasses all of the above and is fairly clear in signifying the subject.--Olegkagan (talk) 17:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Tried to change the page title to book but was unable to. Not sure why. --Olegkagan (talk) 04:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Wineberge.jpg

Image:Wineberge.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Winesburg, Ohio (novel)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: James26 (talk · contribs · count) 09:37, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

Minor

• Might be a personal preference, but I thought that the article could've briefly noted who Irving Howe and Forrest L. Ingram are ("According to author", etc), sort of like it does with Barry D. Bort later.

• Done.

• Study of his manuscripts show that. . . — Shouldn't this be "studies"?

• I can understand why "studies" would sound better but the reason it's the singular here is because the primary source of this information is William Phillips' study of the manuscript of Winesburg, Ohio which led to his very important 1951 article: "How Sherwood Anderson Wrote Winesburg, Ohio". This is an article that is constantly referred to in the literature. It is acknowledged as THE study of how Winesburg was written.

• demonstrate the pervasiveness of the formal innovations. . . — This might read better as something more concise, like "influence." Just a take-it-or-leave-it suggestion.

• Though kind-of a mouthful, "pervasiveness of formal innovations" is more specific than "influence" and so I'd rather keep it. If you can think of a paraphrase that would maintain the meaning, I'm open to it.

• Why are the entries in "The stories" section not placed in quotation marks? Is this a Manual of Style issue I've overlooked?

• It's not a Manual of Style issue. The reason is in Note 1. Simply put, it's because that's the specific way it's often (though not always) written in print. Only the story "Queer" has quotes in the print versions of the book. See my examples in the note.

Major

• I felt that the "Genre" section would make for a better opening than "Setting". I didn't feel as though "Setting" gave me a clear enough introduction to what the book is about. This is partly because "Setting" reads somewhat like a continuation of the lead—and the article's body should feel separate from the lead.

• Agreed. Done.

• It was not until Francis Hackett, "then editor of The New Republic, who showed the manuscript to Ben Huebsch, owner and editor of a small publishing house in New York," that the stories (Huebsch suggested calling them "Winesburg, Ohio") were brought together and published.

I'd like to see this rewritten for a few reasons.

Without the quotation between the commas, the sentence reads, "It was not until Francis Hackett that the stories (Huebsch suggested calling them "Winesburg, Ohio") were brought together and published."

It feels like a verb should be inserted with regard to Hackett's actions (perhaps "intervened").

I also think that it may read more smoothly without the quotation at all; the information could simply be paraphrased. Finally, I also found the lack of attribution for the quote to be a bit awkward (I think the article could say who the quote is attributed to), though this may be a personal issue.

Easiest version I came up with: "It was not until editor Francis Hackett showed the manuscript to Huebsch that the stories were brought together and published."

• I've simplified the admittedly poor sentence. See if you like the current slightly simpler version better.

• The most prevalent theme in Winesburg, Ohio is the interplay between how the Winesburg citizen's. . .expresses itself in the loneliness and isolation that makes their various adventures noteworthy.

You use "citizen's" here, which refers to an individual, but finish the sentence with "their". Did you mean "citizens' "?

• You're right, I was guilty of apostrophe crime but now it's fixed.

• . . .whereas the simple, stripped-down vernacular that Gertrude Stein found so appealing in Anderson's writing of the time became an exemplar of quintessential American style most famously associated with Ernest Hemingway, the expressionistic portrayal of emotional states in Winesburg, Ohio was later, by some critics, considered "undisciplined" and "vague".

Is all of this really necessary in one sentence? From what I gather, the gist of it is, "Though the vernacular was praised by Stein, and later made famous by Hemingway, some critics have labeled it 'undisciplined' and 'vague'. "

While I don't think a rewrite is needed in this case, I do question whether the Hemingway part could be left out.

• My instinct is to leave it as is again due to specificity. The sentence refers to Hemingway in particular because it was he who became the first of the young writers who blossomed under Anderson's influence and then basically dropped the older author. It is written "most famously associated with Ernest Hemingway" because it was indeed made famous by Anderson, but (a few years) later furthered and today associated with Hemingway who overshadowed Anderson. I agree that it's a complicated sentence -- if it's not a GA because of it, I'll change it -- otherwise, if possible, I'd like it leave it.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Response

Hi, James26, thanks for taking the time to review Winesburg, Ohio. From a quick read, I think that fixing the article based on your largely spot-on comments shouldn't be a problem. If I can, I'll do it this evening. Otherwise, tomorrow. Till then, --Olegkagan (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

My responses are in-line above. --Olegkagan (talk) 04:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Possible move

Talk:Winesburg,_Ohio#Requested move 11 July 2016 may be of interest; specifically, if Winesburg, Ohio is moved elsewhere, then perhaps Winesburg, Ohio (novel) should be moved to Winesburg, Ohio. jnestorius^(talk) 14:59, 11 July 2016 (UTC)