Talk:The Lorax

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Books Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

The Lorax is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.

I read a link to neoclassical economics in a better way this time becuase i feel its important to connect it to the larger issues dr seuss was trying to raise awareness of. same thing with the idea that it is more than a sad story about nature. theres precedence in seuss books, look at the butter battle book.

so ive been thinking about all of the oncelers relatives leaving as a human population crash, because they wouldnt just leave their good relative. or a combination of that and how greed and corruption ruins families in society. same things for the 'migrations' of animals, some are seen so sick that they arent able to walk, mass die off. ill find a way to add it at a later date

-Bob

Do you think that grickle grass is invasive?

Bob, the article can mention that The Lorax is regarded as a parable about industrial destruction of the environment, because that goes beyond any one editor's point of view. Personal speculations outside the text, though, are original research and don't belong in the article.

Regarding the "neoclassical economics" mention, it seems to imply (1) that classical economics, which dominated the 18th and 19th centuries, was less inclined to environmental destruction (2) that the US moved quickly to protect the environment between the 1920s and 1960s, when classical economics was out of fashion. I don't think either is correct. The book is about commercial industry destroying the environment generally, and singling out destruction that is allegedly caused by "neoclassical economics" strikes me as POV.

Aside from that, I welcome your contributions. Gazpacho 05:29, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lake Erie?

The article currently sttes at the end that Seuss had the book changed after publication to remove the line, "I hear things are just as bad up at Lake Erie!" Yet a Google search for this [1] gets only one hit other than this article, and that hit isn't a credible source. Could someone please find information to back up this claim? --LostLeviathan 22:02, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

True, and good point, but that is if one only searches the full text of the string. Another search, [2] ("The Lorax" "Lake Erie") brings up 980 results, including some pretty credible results, I'd say.

From T.E.A.C.H. (which got the text from The Late, Great Lakes, by William Ashworth, Alfred A. Knoph, Inc. (pg. 133), 1988.):

"The demise of Lake Erie even made it into a Dr. Seuss book, The Lorax."

With a slight misspelling of "hear" (spelled "here"), we get Thinkquest's page entitled Why he wrote The Lorax. Along with many others on the subject (as I said, 980 of them). I agree that just entering the string looks misleading, but one has to remember that differing variations on the wording, as well as only references can be made. Thank you for your concern, however.--[[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] ^{[[additions | e-mail]]} _{05:26, 29 October 2005 (UTC)}

• • Thank you very much. --LostLeviathan 22:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

--"The Lorax has the distinction of being the only book that Seuss himself ever changed after publication, by removing the Lorax's line, "I hear things are just as bad up at Lake Erie!" which he found to be out of place in his fantasy work, as it refered to a real world place."

Is this correct? He didn't remove a reference to Weehawken, a real world town in New Jersey bordering NYC.--

Yeah, but lots of people who aren't from the area have heard of Lake Erie. Weehawken sounds very Seuss-ish, and if you're not from the area, you probably haven't heard of it. Besides, it only states that it's memorable because it was changed, it doesn't state that it was the only reference to a real world place. Ehurtley 02:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why it uses the word "reason" when it talks about the Truax...I feel reason makes it seem like it would be reasonble to support unsustainable logging...I'm considering changing to to read more clearly the point of the Truax...logging companies attempting to make unsustainable logging look like a reasonable thing to do. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aerros (talk • contribs) 04:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC).

Just great. the article in its current state doesn't mention Lake Erie untill the trivia section:

“

The book was made into an animated television special in 1972, produced by DePatie-Freleng Enterprises. The line about Lake Erie was spoken by one of the humming fish as they marched out of the river at the foot of the Once-ler's factory.

”

That being the first appearance of Lake Erie, it makes no sense at all! It makes even less sense to have to come to the discussion page to find out what the line was. Propose fixes? --200.44.6.104 04:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Summary

Isn't the article's plot description kind of adult for a children's book? ("...his business was destroying the Truffula ecosystem, causing mass migrations of native fauna...") Yes, I realize that the book has a not-too-subtle political message (I'm doing a paper on it right now), but I would think the article could describe the plot in simpler terms, and point out its environmental themes in a separate section.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marbehraglaim (talk • contribs) 15:40, 25 April 2006.

The Book is for children but the article is for Adults. It is alos funny when one uses such fancy words for a children's book. The article can be facy aslong as it still is legible. (What good is it to use words only you know withouth a link to the meaning). All complicated concepts have thier own page and facy workds can have an Interwiki link such as [[wikt:word]]--E-Bod 20:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying the article shouldn't have a discussion about the environental implications of the book. Of course it should. The problem is that it fails to distinguish the story description from the story interpretation. Both belong in the article, but separately. Someone who's never read the book and reads the article is likely to think that the story is actually about ecosystems and native fauna, when in fact those terms never show up anywhere in the book, and it would be inconceivable that they would. The article fails to give a sense that on its most literal level, The Lorax is simply a delightful tale that takes place in an imaginary world populated by weirdly named creatures and colorful woolly trees. And for most of us, the book can still be enjoyed on that level. In neglecting that fact, the article sounds oddly unprofessional. It would be like describing The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe as a story about Jesus. That's certainly what C.S. Lewis intended the book to represent, but on a basic level it's just a fantasy, and to ignore that fact is to overlook the main reason why the book appeals to more than just a Christian audience, just as The Lorax appeals to more than just environmental activists. marbeh raglaim

I have changed the page. I wrote my own summary of the book, and I condensed the old summary and made it a separate section called "Interpretation." If you have any objections, we can discuss them. marbeh raglaim 09:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

While the Interpretation section has some interesting information, it mostly seems like Original Research. Any way to get some citations, or maybe a published review that states these same ideas? Pnkrockr 18:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the insights of the Interpretation section, while well-written, are fairly obvious to anyone who's read the book. Do you know anyone who would disagree with the claims in this section? marbeh raglaim 18:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not a matter of anyone disagreeing, but just that everything needs to be cited. Pnkrockr 20:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Memorable Quotes

There was some sort of random SAD SACK quote with an address for a blog that I removed. As far as I could tell, it had nothing to do with The Lorax. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.82.180.22 (talk) 16:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)