Talk:Any Human Heart

Any Human Heart has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 5, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Novels Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

I have added in a plot summary

I have added in a plot summary and source plus external links for this novel. Ivankinsman 11:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now I have finised the plot and added in a theme/narrative structure section. Ivankinsman (talk) 13:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have just re-read this novel once again and it is absolutely brilliant a second time round. I think William Boyd is probably the best living British novelist, just pipping Sebastian Faulks by a head. There are just a few small problems I have with the plot:

- During the Oxford Days section of the journal, the author has LMS studying History under his tutor, Philip Le Mayne. At the same time he is also working on his biography of Shelley which becomes his first published book, The Mind's Imaginings. Now, there is no evidence that LMS is qualified to write such a book - for example, he seems to be no great reader of poetry. I personally think it would have been better to have had him study English Literature at Oxford - at one point he even contemplates this when he meets Anthony Powell, '...Powell suggested I change to English Literature. He said he had a friend reading English who raves about a young don called Coghill at Exeter ... It's not a bad idea, this possible move.' (p.91 paperback edition)

- The second point concerns LMS' writing of The Cosmopolitans, a book about an obscure group of French poets such as Larbaud, Fargue, Dieudonne, Levet, et al. Now, although he spends some time in Paris with Ben Leeping, where he writes some articles, again there is no mention of how his French is good enough to undertake a major study of French poetry before the First World War. As a language teacher, I know his spoken French might be good from his time spent in France but that would be about it.

- The third point is about Land Fothergill, the love of LMS' life during and immediately after his Oxford days. They actually make love in Paris but then she rejects his proposal of marriage in June 1931. LMS meets Land again in June, 1934 whilst he is accompanied by Freya and the meeting is a very awkward one. This is last mention of Land by LMS (p.161 paperback edition), which is strange, given she made such a huge impact on him as a young man, so the reader does not learn what happens to her later in life. Ivankinsman (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He tries to change course to English (which is, or used to be, very hard to do at Oxford, unlike at Cambridge where one can change subject each year), but we hear no more about it so presumably his request was turned down. Perhaps that's what fires him to write a good book about Shelley. But you don't have to have studied either English Lit or History academically to write competently about them. A schoolfriend of mine failed Oxford entrance to read History, got in the following year to read English ... and has since published at least one well-received quasi-academic history book.

Ditto French - a person bright enough to get into Oxford would very plausibly have written competence in French. He read History, for which at least one foreign language is normally required.

Maybe LMS knows what became of Land. (Did she become a Labour MP? Maybe in the fictional universe she became a well-known Labour politician like Barbara Castle, so there is no need for LMS ever to mention her again.) Maybe he has no idea. In the days before the internet people did simply lose touch, and one does not always stay in touch with old girlfriends, especially if it ended badly. But that's a large point of the book - characters fade in and out, and the narrator is not omniscient - for example he never really does find out why he got a Third (his tutor had thought him good enough to try for an All Souls Fellowship), or whether the Windsors had anything to do with his betrayal in Switzerland.Paulturtle (talk) 15:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 13:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Here are some comments:

Lead

I can't tell if Logan Mountstuart is supposed to be a fictional or real writer whose life has been fictionalized based on the information here.

Composition

"Boyd sees the journal form as a separate from biography or memoir, a different treatment of the same essential subject, the human condition, and "I don't think there's anything wrong with going back over territory you've previously covered." can't tell what this means.

Synopsis

Retitle this section plot and then see what changes you can make when you think about it as plot instead of synopsis or summary. Remember, some things people can learn just by glancing through the book or are only important in the moment of reading the book, not an encyclopedic plot summary. In the rewrite, trim and consolidate and clarify, this section is a little messy.

Genre and style

May want to think if the following statement is neutral and in proper style: "While Boyd had earlier written work in the form of memoir or biography, a journal is different: ""For a start, it's written without the benefit of hindsight, so there isn't the same feeling you get when you look back and add shape to a life. There are huge chunks missing."[3] "

General impression

I like the last 4 sections, they really flow well and present good concise ideas. I would suggest rereading the lead, composition and synopsis sections and make sure you are presenting the correct information in each one, all three seem to be a little conviluted and unfocued. Also, the Synopsis should be a little shorter, less focused on minor details and more focused on presenting the plot arch. Also, you sometimes lapse into sections which use complicated passive and multi-worded verbs that are a little verbose, might want to read through the article for these and see if you can polish up the style. I have the same problem and I know when someone points it out, it suddenly becomes very clear :-)

I hope this brief review helps and you can build on this before the GA review,Sadads (talk) 23:18, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Any Human Heart/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of November 5, 2010, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Writing is pretty good throughout. I would suggest contacting WP:GOCE and going for WP:PR after this point, and requesting further copyediting, with an eye for a bit more succinct wording.

2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout. One of the cites contains a redlink. A few others could use more info and fields filled in.

3. Broad in coverage?: It is indeed thorough, covers major aspects, including: Composition, Synopsis, Themes, Genre and style, and Critical reception.

4. Neutral point of view?: Neutral presentation throughout, no issues here.

5. Article stability? Appears stable from inspection of article edit history and talk page history.

6. Images?: One image used, appropriate fair use rationale on image page, passes here.

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— -- Cirt (talk) 22:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Similarity to Earthly Powers

The article makes me feel that Any Human Heart may have strong similarities to Earthly Powers by Anthony Burgess. Have any critics noted this, and if so, should it be mentioned in the article? DuncanHill (talk) 22:07, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having written this article, I read a fair number of reviews and don't recall the comparison. Were there one, it would certainly be relevant. That said, there appears to be some thematic similarity (I've not read Earthly Powers) but as the article stresses one of Boyd's innovations was the use of the journal rather than memoir, which itself leads to a radically different perspective on history. Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've not read Any Human Heart, but have read Human Powers :) I came here after seeing part of the television adaptation of Any Human Heart, which itself made me think of Earthly Powers. DuncanHill (talk) 11:28, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP recognized links

That very well may be but it also has to be realized that this article is being read by more than British readers, the latter who just may more familiar with the event because of the former colonial status. There are at present at least three links to this event two of which are now obsolete as being direct links to the main article--the Nigerian Civil War. The continued use of a redirected link works wonders for the Britain or Commonwealth inhabitant subconsciously aware of the term Biafran War but the same weltanschauung may not exist with the reader unfamiliar with the event. WP strives to the least ambiguous about the information it presents and that is recognized by the WP recognized link of Nigerian Civil War stands for all the other previous article titles or direct links. So what would you suggest to fulfill WP's objective?66.74.176.59 (talk) 03:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Any Human Heart. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:46, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]