Talk:The Count of Monte Cristo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

This article has been rated as B-Class.

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

This article is supported by the 19th century task force. (rated as Top importance)

Assessment comments

[edit] Possible Expansion?

Does anybody have the time, and background info, to add a section to this article regarding influences that effected the writing of the book, like the Hundred Days, Royalists, Bourbons, etc. I have the background, just not the time. If not, I'll get to it eventually.Signor Pastrini 05:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The setting of France 1813 and on is one of the most interesting in European history. The whole of Europe is upside down because of the battles that have been raging ever since the French revolution began. The way George Bush desperately tries to bring democracy to the Middle East, Napoleon set out to spread the French gospel of equality, liberty, and brotherhood far and wide and in the process take over the continent killing off kings and queens and other nobles all around only to be crowned emperor. The emperor - Napoleon - has just lost his Grand Army to the Russian winter and is forced to abdicate and retreat to Elba. How any one in their right mind would think that Napoleon would honor such a gift is really beyond belief but at that time the honor code among the leaders of the time was held rather sacred. So if Dantès was accused of being a Bonapartist while Napoleon was still on Elba indeed this would be a grave accusation as it would be believed that such a man could be dangerous to the public order after the Bourbon had again mounted the throne by Old Europe's public consent. But let's blame this on the English! Without their interference on the continent and without the Russian and Prussian armies Dantès would surely have walked free had he been a Bonapartist. To be sure it took the whole of Europe combined to bring down Napoleon and the French 'revolution' so one can imagine the seriousness of such an accusation. Apparently the 100 days are about to begin in that Napoleon plans the greatest comeback of all time. No man in history ever tempted fate like that before or after. Perhaps that being locked up and falsely accused as Bonapartist is not such a bad thing after all. Better to be in jail 15 years as Bonapartist, than to live five at the court of Versailles as a Bourbon. But poor Dantès surely did not understand this, the meaning of his own predicament.

Greatest Book Ever!!!!!

The novel starts in 1815, not 1813. Gushing Napoleon-worship notwithstanding, you've missed out an awfully bloody couple of years. And Russian armies? In the 100 days? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.199.144.113 (talk) 11:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] (Hypothetical) Tragic finale

Suppose the Count had let Valentine die?Suppose a distraught Maximillien had commited suicide? Suppose Albert and the Count had gone on with their duel and killed each other? - R.G.

I believe the Count didn't let Valentine die. (Spoiler) Valentine was alive in the end.

I know that's what happened.What I was asking was what would have happened if he HAD let her die. - R.G. (talk) 04:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

who have seen the movie???

It would be a very sad book. Call me whatever, but I still feel pretty sorry for Villefort. He got the worst of the Count's wrath.--Sol Kiske 20:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The greatest attribute of this novel is that the reader can feel for each and every one of the characters. I have read the novel nearly a dozen times, in both French and English, and I see the story a different way each time. Arguably the greatest novel ever written. Aericanwizard 02:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A question of accents

I've only read the book in French, but I believe the protagonist's name is spelled Dantès (accent grave), not Dantés.

--anon. 20 July 2004

Correct--The Count of Monte Cristo ^Parley 08:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nothing about The Hand of the Dead ?

I've read that book, it shows the vengeance of Benedetto toward Dantés, closing the cicle. I'm surprised no one has written an article about it.

http://www.tiendaociojoven.com/trade/productview/266617/4451/?

-- miguel.royo. Dec. 2 2004.

[edit] the count of monte cristo

There are many sequels to The Count of Monte Cristo, but none of them was written by Dumas. Dumas himself said that he does not think this kind of novel could have a successful sequel. And he was probably right, since all these sequels are hardly worth mentioning, including that one.

But there was a sort of sequel. I forget the name but it was one of Dumas' short stories. Apparently de Vilfort managed to gain some of his sanitity back and he is on his deathbed. He confesses before Valentine and Max that she isn't really his daughter, but was instead switched with the dead one for some finacial reason. The story was definatly a sequel because all the names are the same and de Vilfort even mentions the Count and his unfair treatment towards him. I know Dumas wrote it as it was part of a volume of his work.

[edit] character descriptions, spoilers, plot summary questions

I've started to describe the characters of the book, but I'm not sure how much should be revealed in each description.

Take for example Dantès. He's later known as the Count of Monte Cristo, among other names. On one hand, it's good to mention the other names that Dantès uses, as a means of keeping track of names. On the other hand, listing the names does spoil any sense of surprise or mystery.

What do you think?

I'm still reading the book (never read it before), so my contributions to this article will be limited before then.

I do think that the plot description should be restructured so that it flows in a more chronological manner. I just don't like how the current summary throws in at the end basically, "oh by the way, Maximilien Morrel is in love with the daughter of the guy who sent Dantès to prison".

That being said, this article is already more developed than a lot of book articles on Wikipedia. --Tachikoma 05:36, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I corrected two unimportant errors about Count's revenge against Danglars. Danglars did not receive a note to 6,000,000 francs from the Count, but 5,100,000. And in the end, Count leaves him 50,000, not 100,000 francs. But this paragraph needs further revising - starving Daglars nearly to death by Vampa's outlaws was not primarily done to extract 5 millions from him - that came as a collateral 'damage'. This was basically a revenge for the death of Dantes' father (he died of starvation) as a result of Danglars' plot. Dejanr June 1 2007

Moogleluvr reverted my change to "He chooses the latter, giving the Count the five million francs in exchange for a note for 5,000,000 francs." Not very important, but it is just not right. The note is for 5,100,000 francs. To quote from the novel "M. de Boville took the paper Danglars presented him, and read: -- "Received of Baron Danglars the sum of five million one hundred thousand francs, to be repaid on demand by the house of Thomson & French of Rome." DejanR June 3 2007

[edit] More Characters?

Some of the minor or other characters should be added in the character section. I don't know all of them (I haven't finished the book yet), but I know that there is a certain Monsieur Cavalcanti (I think), the Villefort's had a son (or was it the Dangar's), and maybe some other minor characters. Another example, a few of the important sailors in the beginning. You think any of them should be added? It would help keep track of the numerous amount of characters that are throughout the book. - May 5, 2006

Ah, I added Valentine Villefort, Noirtier de Villefort, and Baron Franz d'Epinay yesterday, August 5, 2006. I think that Madame Villefort (Valentine's stepmother should be added, along with a few others that I will try to get to soon.

(UAAC 01:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC))

Mr. Morel, the owner of the Pharaon, was incorectly named as M. Morel. His name is Pierre Morel. The citation from Count's will: "I bequeath to Maximilian Morrel, captain of Spahis, -- and son of my former patron, Pierre Morrel, shipowner at Marseilles, -- the sum of twenty millions..." DejanR June 1 2007

I think it was meant as Monsieur Morel, which would be abbreviated M. Morel. Changing it to Pierre would certainly be correct though. Lord Bodak 14:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I also added reference to Edmond's father, Louis Dantes. Although he appears in only two or three scenes at the beginning, he is an important character in the novel, and his death due to starvation explains the revenge Count did towards Danglars (DejanR June 1 2007]

[edit] Translations

Does anybody have any information regarding which English translation is the best one to read? Both in terms of style/readability and accuracy.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.87.80.100 (talk • contribs) .

There seem to be two common translations of the unabridged version. The first is fairly old, and seems to be used by both the Modern Library and Oxford World's Classics in their editions. The Penguin Classics edition uses a new translation by Robin Buss. According to the Penguin edition's introduction (which I don't have in front of me at the moment), the translation focused on keeping the spirit of the original intact. I own both the Oxford and the Penguin editions, but I find the Penguin edition much more readable. Whatever you do, choose an unabridged version. Lord Bodak 03:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

On another note, something really should be in the article about the history of the text-- since there are so many abridged versions out there, and multiple translations, and (I believe) multiple sources of the original French that don't always agree. The only source I've been able to find is Robin Buss's introduction to his translation-- when I get my copy back I'll try and put something together based on that. Lord Bodak 11:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

A few new ISBNs have been added beyond what I considered the minimum acceptable. This begs the question, how many should we have? I initially added three-- a one-volume edition in the original French, and the two most common unabridged English translations. Another French edition has been added, and I consider that superfluous. The Wordsworth English edition has also been added-- it appears to be another printing of the 1846 translation. If so, I do not think it needs to be listed either. A classic like this has been published countless times; only significant editions should be listed here, in my opinion. Lord Bodak 01:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I added both those ISBNs, feel free to remove them. Aericanwizard 02:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sequels

I don't know how accurate it is, but I found a site that lists a majority of the works of Dumas, and quoting the site : "From Notes on the Works of Dumas by C. Conrad Cady: Many forgeries and deriviative works have come from the novel The Count of Monte Cristo, but the only ones to come from the hand of Dumas, are the plays Monte Cristo, Le Comte de Morcerf, and Villefort."Aericanwizard 15:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subplots

I just added a brief section to the plot summary concerning the many subplots of the novel. I believe that it is noteworthy to mention how the story often deviates from Edmond's story of revenge, only to reveal that it has done no such thing. The depth of this novel is astounding, and I believe that the many subplots are largely responsible. Add more subplots as necessary. Aericanwizard 15:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we should split the summary into descriptions of the different plots. For example, a section could be labeled major plots and would contain the revenge plots, one for each character. And another section would have the minor plots or subplots. It would make it easier to follow the book. As it is, it's rather confusing to anyone who hasn't read the unabridged version. Just a thought.Bkwrmgrl1 (talk) 13:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Revert?

I was going through the history of the page, and I noticed that there was a case of vandalism way back on July 3. In it, a few sections that included influences, adaptations, themes, and trivia were deleted. I'm wondering whether we should restore these sub-sections and which ones to restore, if we do. I would have just restored them, but wanted some other input. By the way, I like the expansion and reworking that has been taking place, but we could probably use some citations, and some official critiques of the novel. Good job to all involved! Aericanwizard 18:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ship title question: Pharaon or Pharoah?

Hello, I've read this book in French but not in English. Seeing as this is English Wikipedia, would it be better to translate the ship's name into English? More importantly, which name is used in English language printings of this book? Thanks for your time. --Tachikom a 16:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

In the translations that I have read, the name of the ship is still The Pharaon. Although the translation to English would suggest changing the name to The Pharoah, the ship is still a French ship. Aericanwizard 19:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Do you feel that it's important to mention the English translation in the article? If I didn't speak a word of French, the name would strike me as a bit odd. For that matter, the name of the ship is not important to the overall story, so perhaps it could be deleted entirely. --Tachikom a 19:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the name of the ship is irrelevant, moreso because the name of the ship does not serve any sense of foreshadowing to the events which are to come. However, in a summary of a story as presented here, it is noteworthy enough to mention the name of the ship, similar to how Jason sails aboard The Argonaut, and how Nero captains The Nautilus. Granted, those ships play a much larger role in their respective stories, but I believe the name of the ship, whatever it is, should stay. Perhaps a "Trivia" or "Notes" area could be developed for the article, where the translation of the name could be given. Aericanwizard 20:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] which language should be used for character names?

Hello, I read this book in French, but I suppose that most people who are reading this Wikipedia article have read/will read the book in English. I don't know if the character names are given any differently from one language to another. This could potentially make a difference in characters such as Mercédès, Haydée, and Maximilien. Are the character names spelled differently in English language editions? I'm asking this because of the character list of the article, where someone (OK, me) will put the French spelling, and then someone else will change it. Thanks. --Kyok o 21:07, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

In the English translations I've read, the names were spelled the same as they were in the French edition (Mercédès, Haydée, Maximilien, etc.) BettyAnn 23:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question about Villefort

So did Villefort know that Benedetto was alive when he buried him? I've read almost to the end of the book, and up until the part where Benedetto is on trial, I was under the impression that Villefort thought that the child was dead when he buried it, but when Benedetto reveals that he is Villefort's son, he makes it sound as though Villefort knew that he was alive and lied to Mme. Danglars about him being dead in order to cover up the affair.--Azer Red Si? 22:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Initially Villefort and Mme. Danglars thought the child to be dead, but Villefort discovered the child was alive before he buried it.

Actually no - Villefort and Mrs. Danglars thought the child is dead and Villefort buried the child in the coffin. Moments after that, Benedetto stubbed him and took the coffin, thinking that there is some treasure in it. He run away with the coffin and opened it when he was near some river. He also thought that the child was dead, but since he had some medical training, he tried to re-animate the baby and eventually succeeded. Some months or even a year later, after Villeford was cured from his wound, he returned to the house and found that the coffin is missing. So he started some dummy police investigation and eventually found out that the certain child was given to the orphanage that night, but was later claimed by some woman. He was unable to find the child, but he suspected it to be alive. He didn't tell Mrs. Danglars about that, so she thought the child to be dead. BTW should Cavalcanti had married Miss. Danglars, he would have been marrying his half-sister. DejanR

[edit] Persona

Persona is a singular word. Edmond Dantès assumes a persona. In fact, he assumes multiple personae. He does not "assume a person." The plural of the word "persona" is "personae" or "personas." See [1] -- Ccady 18:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Albert Edmund's Son?

The article currently states that Edmund impregnated Mercedes before his incarceration, but I think that this line is false, and possibly vandalism. I'm pretty sure that the novel states that Mercedes waited more than a year before marrying Fernand, which would make it impossible for Albert to be Edmund's son. I don't have my copy of the novel with me, but can someone check into it? Aericanwizard 20:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point, I was only thinking in terms of grammar when I last edited the article. I think you might be right, but I haven't read the book in a while and can't be certain. BTW, I read it in French, so I am unfamiliar with how/if the character names (e.g. Edmond) are translated in the English language versions. If "Edmund" is more commonly used in the English translations, perhaps it should be used in the article. --Kyoko 21:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that is a typo on my part. I think it is translated as "Edmond". I'll check my copy of the novel as soon as I can, and make the necessary changes. Aericanwizard 21:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it states that she waited 18 months before marrying Fernand, making it impossible that Albert is Edmond's son. Aericanwizard 02:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Not only that, but Edmond explicitly takes issue with another character in the novel referring to Mercedes as his "mistress", which would imply that they weren't sexually active together. I suspect that the person who included that assertion was acting in good faith, but working from a recent Hollywood film -- which heavily modified Dumas' original story -- rather than the novel. --Todeswalzer|Talk 22:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Links to the text

I recently included a link to the Gutenberg text for the novel, but it was quickly removed by Ccady on the basis that the text is already available through Wikisource. However, the pages for a number of other novels (Crime and Punishment, Heart of Darkness, Oliver Twist, Moby Dick, and Don Quixote, for example) have links to both the Wikisource text and the Gutenberg one; some even link to three or more different locations where the text is available. Furthermore, Gutenberg seems to be the standard link for articles discussing particular novels. Its exclusion here seems unusual.

I don't really see the problem with linking to both; in fact, having multiple links made available can be beneficial in case one of them should become broken. (I was also going to link to the original French version, also at Gutenberg, but I wanted to understand the rationale for removing my first link before including something else in the "external links" section.) --Todeswalzer|Talk 19:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You are probably right. I am not the arbiter of all things correct, but it seemed to me that the preferred link from a novel is to WikiSource if it exists, and then to Project Gutenberg if it does not. (Interesting discussion about the reason for WikiSource.) If it makes a difference to you, then go ahead an add the link back in. I defer to your judgment. If you do add the link, I'd suggest using the Gutenberg template. --Ccady 22:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Ccady, I've reinstated the link to the Gutenberg text; I've also included a Wikisource link to the original French text. On this last point I am, however, unsure if a specific template should be used, since it links to a non-English page. (I decided to include this in place of the Gutenberg link to the French edition, since Gutenberg's was split up into four separate pages and so seemed rather inconvenient for our purposes here.) --Todeswalzer|Talk 01:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fernand

In the last couple of days, I've noticed that the plot summary has changed several times, changing the line that Fernand is Mercedes' cousin to the read that he is Dantes' cousin. As I understand it, he is Mercedes' cousin, as he is Catalan, like Mercedes. However, the term cousin as I remember it in the novel may be a bit vague, and Mercedes may only refer to him as "Cousin", or friend. Does anyone know for certain if Fernand is Mercedes' or Dantes' cousin, or for that matter, if this is notable enough to include in the summary? Aericanwizard 20:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw that change, too, and understood it to be switching the direction of the relationship: it originally said that Fernand is Mercedes' cousin, and now I think it says that Mercedes is Fernand's cousin. It could easily be construed (as you have done) to mean that Mercedes is Dantes' cousin. Please clean it up as you see fit. --Ccady 14:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I just started re-reading the book (Edmund has just been sent to the dungeon). Fernand is her cousin. He is her father's brother's son. She also refers to him as her brother. --Moon Rising 01:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baron de Château-Renaud

Skunyote, please do not keep changing Château-Renaud's title from "baron" to "duc". He is a baron. See Chapter 53.

- Croyez, madame, répondit Albert, que si j'eusse su votre arrivée à Paris et connu votre adresse, je n'eusse point attendu si tard. Mais veuillez me permettre de vous présenter M. le baron de Château-Renaud, mon ami, un des rares gentilshommes qui restent encore en France, et par lequel je viens d'apprendre que vous étiez aux courses du Champ-de-Mars." Château-Renaud salua.

[edit] Abridged and Unabridged

Hi. I just finished reading the book and I was hoping that maybe someone can compile a list of what was not in the abridged version. For instance, the subplot of what happened to Dangler and such.

Well, there's more than one abridged version, which one did you read? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.246.134.80 (talk) 01:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Consistency

Throughout the plot summary, Edmond Dantès is referred to at times by his first name and at other times by his last name. It seems to me that this may be somewhat confusing to the layperson who is merely skimming the article. Would it be advantageous to pick one (either first or last) and refer to the character in that manner? Darry2385 03:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The book refers to him alternately by his first and last names; Dantès is used more often. I don't think it's confusing to the reader who starts from the beginning and knows the full name. Frankly, I think the article would become dull if only one name were used throughout. JMHO. --Moon Rising 05:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

My apologies reviving for an old dispute, but I must agree with Darry2385. While the book does indeed refer to Dantès by both his first and last name without being confusing, the same does not apply to this article. True it may cause the the article to read a bit flat, but despite its subject this article is not literature. As such I must argue that simplicity and ease of use must be placed before aesthetics and a single name used for the main character. Preferably Dantès as it is--as Moon Rising has kindly pointed out--used more often in the novel. --Snark365 (talk) 04:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

It seems that there has been a substantial bit of vandalism on the page in the last few weeks. I think it might be time to lock unregistered editing for a brief period of time. Any thoughts? Aericanwizard 19:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

You have my vote.--Ccady 20:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I proposed locking the page on the appropriate section of wikipedia, but the admin said that there had not been enough recent traffic to warrant locking the page. So, I guess it's up to those of us watching the page to keep it in good condition. Keep up the good work everyone. Aericanwizard 21:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Just my input but i don't think you should lock it. I am not registered but still like editing what i think should be edited. I don't really want to register, either, so please keep it open. Much appreciated. :)<~~anonymous~~> 25 November 2007

[edit] 18 or 19 years old?

Dantes' age keeps flipping between 18 and 19. Which is it?--Ccady 17:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Haven't had a chance to research it thoroughly, but from my edition, the first description of Dantès is <<C'était un jeune homme de dix-huit à vingt ans, ...>>. "It was a young man, 18 to 20 years old..." Although that doesn't definitively answer the question, I think that would be suitable for the article, or something like, "A young man around twenty years old". Aericanwizard 04:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Just found it... When being questioned by Villefort, Villefort questions Edmond's age, to which he responds "I am nineteen years old". Because of edition variations, page number is somewhat meaningless, but it is in chapter VII, "The Interrogation" Aericanwizard 04:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Length of plot summary

The plot summary is far more detailed than Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels/Style_guidelines#Plot_summary says it should be. Shall we trim it?--Ccady 17:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. It sounds right. DejanR 14 Oct 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dejanr (talk • contribs) 03:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I also think the length of the summary is fine the way it is. It is detailed, yes, but it also provides people with a well-written account of the book. It is like a miniversion of the actual book. It's just right. 1:48, 25 November 2007 <~~Anonymous~~> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.239.40.76 (talk)

Agreed the plot summary isn't too long. For heaven's sake, the book is over 1200 pages in Buss's translation, and unlike (say) Proust, it's a completely plot-driven work. Rules are made to be broken. --Andersonblog (talk) 03:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

See my March 28th note under subplots above. Bkwrmgrl1 (talk) 23:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Potion ingredients?

In the current article, it says that the potion the Count gave Valentine to make her appear dead was made of a combination of opium and hashish. Without looking it up, I don't remember the ingredients ever being told. Now, we know that the Count uses both of those, so it's possible, but that isn't good enough for an encyclopedia. Unless anyone can find a source from Dumas that specifically says the ingredients, they should be deleted. Bkwrmgrl1 (talk) 15:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Huck Finn......

I think that the parody to The Count of Monte Christo which is present in Huckleberry Finn should be added to the Homage section in a professional manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.61.214.121 (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nortier and poison

The following quote from the plot summary is incorrect: "Then she attempts to murder Valentine's grandfather, Nortier, but his servant accidentally drinks the poisonous draught and dies. Nortier is coincidentally saved from a second attempt when he disinherits Valentine as a ploy to stop Villefort from forcing Valentine to marry Franz d'Epinay. Héloïse then targets Valentine, so that Edward would get her fortune."

In fact, Nortier disinherits Valentine, then once d'Epinay refuses to marry her, he reinstates her in the will. It is then that Madame Villefort attempts to poison him but instead kills Barrois.

I'll change the section to make it more accurate. Fleagle 22:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Baptistin

The current entry about Baptistin is debatable. It says "Monte Cristo's valet-de-chambre. Although only in Monte Cristo's service for little more than a year, he has become the number three man in the Count's household and seems to have proven himself completely trustworthy and loyal". Well, not quite - Baptistin has been coughed (by the Count) stealing 1500 francs. Although the Count said the sum was moderate, such a behavior is hardly "completely trustworthy". DejanR 15.03.2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dejanr (talk • contribs) 17:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Graphic

The graphic of character relationships is a good idea but it's completely illegible. Can this be fixed somehow? --128.230.232.119 (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

There isn't really anything wrong with the graphic itself, it simply displays far too small. Anyone who really want's to read it need only go to the its info page. --Snark365 (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)