Talk:A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Novels
Literature Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the 19th century task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments
A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court is part of WikiProject King Arthur, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to King Arthur, the Arthurian era and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] the veil

"...as when Merlin makes a "veil of invisibility" that actually does not exist. When the veil is worn, people act as if they did not see the wearer, even though he is in plain view."

It was my understanding that the veil only hid one from their enemies, but to everyone else they were plainly visible. Fishopolis 23:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC) ----> Fishopolis

I'll try to explain - save for time traveling there is no other fantasy element in the story whatsoever, as it's not a fairytale but a satire (regardless of what Hollywood adaptations try to convey). Merlin's "veil of invisibility" isn't meant to be described as his actual power. It's meant to show how weak and susceptible are/were the minds of common people (the ones that believed what Merlin said) and to show their unwillingness to question imposed authority. It is more or less the reiteration of famous "Emperor's New Clothes". --Zoran M (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Walter Scott caused the American Civil War

And Wagner caused WWII... Seriously, can this be fleshed out or re-phrased by someone who knows about this stuff, because as it stands it makes Twain sound risible. JackyR | Talk 16:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Twain knew (as a Southerner himself) about the whole Southern romantic self-concept of themselves as a noble aristocracy (and its humble but loyal lock-tugging servants) beset by the vulgar outsiders, which in turn was fed by the soppy romanticism of Scott's version of medieval history. I will try to find you some cites from Twain's own works when I get a chance.--Orange Mike 19:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Cheers. And indeed "the whole Southern romantic self-concept of themselves... was fed by the soppy romanticism of Scott's version of medieval history" is already a major improvement.
Of course, Americans were not Scott's intended audience: the American Civil War is in another country, on the other side of the world, 30 years after his death. Scott's project, so to speak, was the creation of a "modern" Scottish identity (part of the romantic nationalism occuring throughout Europe). Even Ivanhoe is a projection of Scott's national mythology onto England, with Anglo-Saxons instead of Scots and Normans instead of English. So it will be interesting to see if the Twain quotes are critical of Scott as a person, of Scott's literature, or of the uses to which Scott's literature was put in America. JackyR | Talk 21:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Main Theme

"the main thrust is a satire of romanticized ideas of chivalry and of the idealization..."

I believe the above statement to be slightly - if not mostly - wrong. The book's "main thrust" is far more of a jab at blind faith and the power of this faith, especially when wielded by the early Christian church. Twain surely makes plenty fun of knights and their seemingly eccentric and ridiculous lifestyle, but the theme of the book as a whole puts far more of an emphasis on the exploitation of the gullibility and perhaps naivete of the Medieval mind by other "magicians" and, ultimately, the church. Fishopolis 23:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)> Fishopolis

[edit] Prediction of First World War battles

The "Prediction of First World War battles" looks like original speculation, unless the speculation was done by some noteworthy source outside of Wikipedia, in which case we should say which source. Wikipedia is not a showground for original thought. Robin Johnson (talk) 13:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, this section seems rather *absurd*. In the book there is no prediction or foresight. It's merely a coincidence, and not much of one, at that, since it was published in 1889, more than twenty years before WWI even began. If anything, it's closer to the Spanish-American War, and even drawing connections between that and this novel is strange - lances and bayonets? Not to mention, no sources. I'd bet it's original, as well. I'd do away with the whole section. Sometimes a cigar, uh, battle is just a battle. Maria 13:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
If, say, an academic had made the connection and written it up in a noteworthy publication, then reporting on that publication would be within the scope of this article. However, I'm not convinced that that is the case - I can find nothing with Google that discusses this book and first world war battles together - so I'm going to take the section out. If someone puts it back in, it must clearly state where the connection comes from. Robin Johnson (talk) 18:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
More or less good analysis should be decided by various readers of the article as it evolves? No? I know that's not technically the policy but I don't like the policy. Whomever added the WWI bit justified it with a few illustrative, comparative sentences, suggesting the image of a fortified "position virtually impossible to overcome by advancing troops because of barbed wire and machine-guns," the main tactical situation in WWI. The correlation between the climax and WWI would be pointed out by most mouth-breathing sophomores in a class discussion, I don't understand why sensible things cannot be said. I'm certainly not going to trawl obscure, unread assistant-professor papers like they matter more than the wikipedia article.

-urbo

The point here, I believe, was not only the original research (which is a biggie), but the use of the word "prediction," and that Twain's depiction of battle was somehow foresight into the future -- nearly thirty years into the future, in fact. The correlation may seem apparent in hindsight, but it does not relate to the novel or to the intentions of the author. Whatever coincidental correlation the original editor saw is just that: a coincidence. Besides, speculative term paper theses do not belong on Wikipedia. It was unnecessary, and so it was removed. Maria 13:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
And again I had to remove the entire paragraph about "prediction" (someone apparently clings to it like his life depends on it). Even if it was properly referenced it's still a bit stretchy. It's more likely that the battle in the novel reflects Civil War usage of machine gun (instead of anticipating future usages) - but that's also a subject to discussion. Zoran M 06:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, no machine guns in the (U.S.) Civil War! The earliest volley gun was the mitrailleuse, which became known because of its use in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War. --Orange Mike 13:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, at least according to this article there was some kind of device already. But, the point was anyhow that by 1889 Twain had enough material to base the description on. Zoran M 21:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
You're right, I was wrong; the Gatling gun was briefly in use late in the war! It was more important for the psychological effect it had on the witnesses, who knew they were seeing something that would be important in the future, than for the actual tactical value of said use. --Orange Mike 14:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I can go along with that :-). And I think we can safely assume that for shrewd a mind Twain obviously was, even psychological impact would be inspiration enough. --Zoran M (talk) 20:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Quotation

"The very bludgeonging to which the ideals are exposed makes the satire less than effective. Hank describes himself as void of sentiment and poetry, acts in a rather Philistine manner, and despite being swept centuries into the past and across the ocean, refuses to believe that magic exists. Being unwilling to yield, he is unable to compromise with Camelot on anything, leading to chaos, and in the end, though he characterizes Merlin as a 'doddering old fool', Merlin is able to send him back with a few passes in the air.[1]"

This analysis comes from some guide to fantasy lit., written by somebody who probably doesn't understand satire very well. I think it should be removed. Obviously "BELIEVING IN THE SPECIALNESS OF MAGIC!" isn't Hank's problem. --urbo

[edit] A movie that would do the novel justice

Is there any? And which one? Every single version I saw (including the one with Bing Crosby) deals mainly with the main premise and a couple of more or less benign motives from the novel, mostly for comedic effect. By "justice" I meant that a movie should have overly satirical tone instead of slapstick or musical. And if there is one I think it should be noted in the article itself. Zoran M 06:50, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more with Zoran M. All the dramatic adaptations, it seems to me, stress the comedic aspects of the story to the exclusion of everything else. Twain's Hank Morgan is not really a very funny man; he is as prone to pose as a bigshot magician as Merlin is (as in the incident in the Valley of Holiness, for example). Hank's final encounter with the knights at Merlin's Cave is anything but funny; ditto his reports on the living conditions of the common people and the heavy hand of the royal government and then Church. Yes, there ought to be a movie to due the novel justice, and it sure as anything wouldn't be a movie for children!

Hank is a rather dark-sided character. His "man-factories" create a modern totalitarianism in the shadow of medieval autocracy, an elite that is just as cynical and manipulative in its own way as the Church, the landowning class, and the feudal state are. In this respect it's interesting to compare Hank Morgan's "reforms" with the "reforms" pulled by Communist Chinese in Tibet. The latter was, after all, very similar to a medieval feudal state, with landlords exercising judicial functions over tenants who were held in place by an ideology that mixed religion with superstition. Hank's secret cadre of "man-factories" bears a close resemblance to the Communist Party as it functions in Tibet. Medieval feudalism catapulted into modern totalitarianism. Weird stuff. Tom129.93.65.134 (talk) 03:45, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plot enhancement

I majorly edited the plot summary yesterday, removing most of the statements which sounded like opinions to me and adding as much of the plot as I could remember. However, it has been a year and a half since I last read the book; someone who has read it more recently really needs to add to my summary. Also, if someone could make a list of characters I would be grateful; for the life of me I couldn't remember Hank's wife's name. Bkwrmgrl1 (talk) 23:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] first story involving travel backwards in time?

I deleted the claim that it was the first story involving travel backwards in time. It was preceded by "The clock that went backwards" by Edward Page Mitchell, published in 1881. The full text is online. -Fagles 14:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

William Dean Howells, who was of course a close friend of Mark Twain, wrote a time-travel story. But I can't recall whether it was written before or after Connecticut Yankee. I suppose H.G. Wells' distinction is that he was the first to work at giving the story a "scientific" cast. 129.93.65.134 (talk) 03:49, 19 January 2008 Tom129.93.65.134 (talk) 03:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)