Talk:Daniel Keyes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] Essay

Someone dropped a school essay into the article. Perhaps parts are useful, so I put it here: -SCEhardT 20:21, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Typos Or Vandalism in Early Life Section

The early life section starts by refering to what he did at age 67. Either there was a cut and paste error, or the article has been badly vandalised.

Help is urgently needed in creating / recreating the article.

24.8.106.182 (talk) 10:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism

Is this Daniel Keyes also the author of the book Charlie, whose cover was stolen from deviant art? http://gnato.deviantart.com/journal/11346085/#journal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.196.131 (talk • contribs)

If you read the article, you will see the movie Charley is based on the Keyes story. Whatever accusation you're making otherwise is inappropriate for this page. --Tenebrae 01:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Tenebrae, he said nothing about a movie. How is it inappropriate? It would fit perfectly in "Controveries." MattTheMan 02:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
From what I see at the link above, an apparently African publisher has used the noted piece of art. That's the publisher, and it may not even be an authorized edition -- for one thing, it misspells the name of the story, and it shows a young boy where there is none in the story. To jump from that to blaming Keyes personally is an astonishing leap of logic, particularly since authors have very little or no control over what a publisher does. The half-baked slander that some anonymous IP put into the article, without the barest attempt to ascertain the truth, is just reprehensible. At the very least, that kind of unconfirmed personal attack is against Wikipedia policy, and I'm happy to see it was quickly removed. --Tenebrae 01:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Didn't change it but the effects of Charlie Gordon's operation don't merely "wear off" - he dies. This is the implication of the title. The flowers are for Algernon's (the mouse) grave. Algernon died as a result of the operation therefore so will Charlie. Eggerst 21:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I can respect your interpretation, but others interpret it different, that Charlie survives but as he was. I may be right, or you may be, but since Keyes does not state Charlie's fate, whatever we read into it is our individual POV. --Tenebrae 22:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


That's impossible. For sure he will die because the mouse died. To interpret it another way is to put a few of your own words in it or completely skip the part. Since Keyes does not provide a counterexample or any hint at all that Charlie would survive the reader must assume that Charlie's path is a soon to come death. I mean come on that is like saying Harry marries Hermione in the end and not Ginny like the author stated in Harry Potter. You can't change an ending to your liking on Wikipedia.--Velanthis 05:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That's your interpretation, and you have every right to it. We can only go by what the author actually says, and not extrapolate what we believe to be the ending. I could argue that medical experiments on mice serve only as indicators of possible human effects -- feel free to look up the literature on that, from a range of scientists to animal-rights activists.
I'm not saying Charlie lives. I'm saying the author does not, in point of fact, explicitly state whether Charlie lives or dies. He's the author. If you or I say Charlie lives or dies shortly after the story's end, that's our interpretation. But it's not something the author wrote, and that's all Wikipedia can go by. --Tenebrae (talk) 03:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)