Talk:Daniel Defoe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project 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 here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group. | ||
 |
This article has been cited as a source by a media organization. See the 2006 press source article for details.
The citation is in: "Surfing is safer — and smarter — with flotation devices" (January 18 2006). UCBerkelyNews. [1]. |
|
This article has been cited as a source by a media organization. See the 2006 press source article for details.
The citation is in: "Limits of self-organization: Peer production and "laws of quality"" (September 20, 2006). [[First Monday]]. [2]. |
Contents |
[edit] Old conversations un-titled
The addition of "spy" to Defoe's professions seems a good one, but someone has rushed in to take it out saying (a) it is not mentioned in the main text (it is--"[the] leading Minister and spymaster in the English Government. Harley accepted Defoe's services" --though certainly more could be said) and (b) it is open to debate (it is not).
Does anyone know a repectable source that denies Defoe was a spy? To offer a few that do not doubt it:
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: "Defoe became one of Harley's agents and an opinion sampler. Over the next three years he extended the possibilities of counter-insurgency, invented practices that survive to the present day, and earned the reputation of master spy"
Bastian, p. 214: "Defoe ... was now anticipating the role he was to play nine years later ... that of a government spy"
Drabble, Companion to English Literature: "Harley ... employed him as a secret agent"
but perhaps we can defer to Defoe himself: "In This Little scheme of their Affaires I have Acted as a _True spy_ to you" (Letter to Harley, January 4, 1707). Pauldu 23:17, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Malo has added back the details of Defoe's gravestone, arguing "re-added gravestone info, it demonstrates that he accepted a name, varied from his birthname". The gravestone was erected on September 16, 1870 (not, as Novak suggest, 1871--See the Times (London) for 15 & 17 September 1870). Consequently, it is hard to know what light it can throw on Defoe's use of his name in 1690. I have, however, left the comment in because Malo seems to think it important. It is perhaps worth remembering that, even were the gravestone original, we do not always get to annotate our own graves. The reinsertion suggests that there is some doubt whether Defoe accepted the name Defoe during his lifetime. As he was referred to by others as Defoe, and, signed himself Defoe, and when (nomes de plum aside) he chose to use his name in his writing, often used De Foe or Defoe (see, eg, "Advertisement from Mr De Foe to Mr Clark" (1710), it is probably unnecessary to summon extra evidence from beyond the grave.
I'm slowly trying to edit this page, reflecting for example the biographies by Bastion (_Defoe's Early Life_ (Macmillan, 1981)) and Novak (_Daniel Defoe: Master of Fictions_ (Oxford, 2001)) as well as Defoe's own works. The original article had the date of birth and death exact, whereas they are both open to doubt. Defoe gave varying accounts of his age--though admittedly he was silent about his death. The place of birth was wrong. To say Defoe rose to fame with Crusoe is like saying Shakespeare rose to fame with Hamlet. Defoe was not born in Stoke Newington; his father was not a butcher, and Daniel did not use Defoe merely as a nom de plume. The statue over his grave was erected in the 19th century, so it is not relevant. There is said to have been a brass plaque on his coffin when it was exhumed. Omissions aside (eg of Defoe's economic journalism), these were the problems with the first two paras. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.117.149.7 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 12 October 2005.
Sources vary as to date of death. Some say April 24 or 26. http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/defoe.htm says both.
I am really sorry to have had to correct Stroke Newington (-r) as it gave me a good laugh! :) Nevilley 23:45 Jan 9, 2003 (UTC)
Please verify his death date. Most say either Apr 24 or 26. Mandel 07:28, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)
Added detail of Defoe's Review. Rawdon 10:44, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] media source
You've got some attention from UC Berkeley. "My corrections were undone by people who clearly had little idea what they were talking about almost as quickly as they were made by me (who knew a little of what he was talking about).". - BanyanTree 03:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- "The minute I got to [the text stating] which book made him famous — and while I'm English, I'm no expert in Defoe — I knew it was wrong." That's funny, because I see no text saying which book made him famous, either in today's (Jan. 19, 2006) version or or the October 2005 version. It says "[Daniel Defoe] gained enduring fame for his novel Robinson Crusoe." I strongly suspect that most English speakers would only recognize Defoe through RC; the Esperanto article mentions two or three translations of Robinson Crusoe, but no other works of Defoe, and a quasi-random sampling of the Library of Congress catalog turned up a number of translations of RC into French, German and Japanese, but no obvious translations of any of Defoe's other works.--Prosfilaes 03:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
The quote: "My corrections were undone by people who clearly had little idea what they were talking about almost as quickly as they were made by me (who knew a little of what he was talking about)." doesn't seem to capture the true reality of the edit history of this page. Of all the changes made by Duguid only one was reverted (regarding the grave stone), and that was eventually reverted again to Duguid's version. So it seems more like all of his corrections were not undone. Tnikkel 23:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] in response
The last point is absolutely right. I apologize. "My corrections" is misleading. Two corrections were undone -- the gravestone and the spy. One correction was not by me. I should have made that clear. Nevertheless, as I tried to show in the discussion, Defoe was indeed a spy.
The first point is not quite right, however.
"The minute I got to [the text stating] which book made him famous — and while I'm English, I'm no expert in Defoe — I knew it was wrong." That's funny, because I see no text saying which book made him famous, either in today's (Jan. 19, 2006) version or or the October 2005 version.
There is, of course, no single "October 2005 version"; there are many.
The version of 22.10 on October 11, 2005, says, as the page had said for some time,
who first gained fame for his novel Robinson Crusoe.
It is almost certainly true that "most English speakers would only recognize Defoe through RC", but that is beside the point. How we remember Defoe has nothing to do with how he first gained fame. He was quite famous long before RC was published, which was the point I was trying to make.
Indeed, back in 2002 <Revision as of 17:46, 10 September 2002> the article had the reasonable comment: "He is most famous for his novel" RC. And in 2004 <Revision as of 18:17, 30 January 2004> it said, equally reasonably, "He became a famous pamphleteer, journalist and novelist"; by October 2004 that had been changed to "became famous for" RC and in November that was changed to "first became famous" ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pauldu (talk • contribs) .
[edit] External link
Hi, I would like to add an external link to the World of Biography entry
- probably the most famous portal of biography to this article. Does anybody have any objections?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jameswatt (talk • contribs) 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- This user has added similar requests to link to biographies hosted on the same site to about 50 different articles. Although I believe that these requests were made in good faith, adding the links to all of the articles would be spamming. In addition, the biographies tend to be not very insightful and/or minimally informative, and the webpages contain Google AdSense links.
- A fuller explanation of my own opinion on these links can be found here, if anyone wishes to read it.
- Hbackman 00:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Anyone have a source?
I've just been doing a school report an Defoe, basically an analysis of his writing style. While looking through the article I saw that it claims that "there is evidence that his financial dealings were not always honest." I'd just like someone to check and see if they can find a source for that, as I've not seen it anywhere else, and I've probably looked through three or four biographies for my report. Not extensive research, but they all seem to agree he was in debt because he was so eager to invest in multiple businesses that when his investments hit hard times he lost a lot of money. Just wanted to check on that.--Az 03:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] stylistic question
Is it necessary and proper to italisize the phrase "five hundred" in the first paragraph? It is an impressive score, but should wikipedia be the body to emphasize that impressiveness? --Amanaplanacanalpanama 22:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Robert Drury
I feel that there should be mention made of Robert Drury and the possibility that he was as much of a source for 'Robinson Crusoe' as Selkirk ever was. Drury was from Stoke Newington, where Defoe lived, and was shipwrecked on Madagascar for many years. His subsequent account of his adventures, though once thought to be by Defoe himself, has now been accepted as authentic. Mike Parker Pearson's recent book 'In search of the red slave : shipwreck and captivity in Madagascar' gives a good account of what happened to Drury.
[edit] Edinburgh Courant
There is evidence of Defoe serving as editor of the Edinburgh Courant in the early 18th Century [1] [2]. I'm not sure where this should be added.
[edit] Another media mention
There's a good article in First Monday, which mentions this page and some issues with it - also referring to previous activities/discussions. It would probably be worth taking a look. Cheers. Cormaggio is learning 11:07, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
