Talk:Fight Club (novel)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Borrowing from the Poe story

The sentence in the article, "The novel borrows strongly from "William Wilson", a short story by Edgar Allan Poe," may well be true, but as it stands it is an unsupported assertion. Such an assertion requires evidence--citations of parallels or borrowed material, or a quote from Palahniuk saying "I borrowed from the Poe story". Otherwise anyone could add any purported source or inspiration and rebuff requests for verification by saying, "It's a fact, and as such it does not need a citation." I don't think so. --ShelfSkewed Talk 18:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the assertion. I don't see that Fight Club owes any more to this story than it does to other examples of literary doppelgängers. --ShelfSkewed Talk 04:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

well being an english as a second language teacher I can definitely tell that the author of the beginning section is someone who proficient in English yet isn't someone who is a native speaker.

Citation

The Kavadlo article is not cited correctly. Which issue was it published in? Date? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.253.117.67 (talk • contribs)

It's all in the References section. --ShelfSkewed Talk 16:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Jack??

The Narrator paragraph seems to concentrate on why his name is 'Jack' rather than say anything about him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.163.101 (talk) 11:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, i agree, this should be changed. Someone care to write something decent? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.248.62 (talk) 07:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I've deleted some of the "narrator" section. As stated above, it all seemed to be unsourced info about his true name. It's kind of bare now, feel free to add sourced info back to it. Snowfire51 (talk) 08:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Pass

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, T Rex | talk 01:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Similarity to "The Man who Was Thursday"

I've finished reading The Man Who was Thursday and I found it bore great resemblance to Fight Club. Both plots involve anarchy, a large ring of anarchists with a very well-respected leader, and there is a part where it seems the entire society is in line with the anarchists, and only our hero is the only one with common sense. Both stories involve characters with stong nihilism, and most importantly, a main character with a double personality. Research should be made on this. It seems relevant to add to the article. 64.230.75.168 (talk) 01:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

if you can find a reliable source linking the two, then go ahead, otherwise it becomes WP:SYNTHCoffeepusher (talk) 01:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The Man Who Was Thursday does not actually deal with Anarchism as a social philosophy, and rather deals with the stereotypes of anarchists in the english world at the time the novel was written. As the concluding chapter of the story illustrates, the story was never actually about the battle to "save the world from dynamiters." It was an allegory for the Christian struggle with Satan. Likewise, Fight Club has makes no references to the anarchist philosophy in name, and it can be argued not in deed, as the book can either be neo-luddite or primitivist – and not all primitivists are anarchists. Indeed, the stories theme of the cult of the leader and the subordination of the follower to the power of the leader's will bears striking resemblance to Fascism.
Quickly checking the archives of this talk page, you'll see that the issue of whether or not Anarchism and Nihilism were themes in the book has been raised. Ultimately, I removed all references to anarchism on the page due to the simple fact that it was all original research, as neither the author and the source material itself have ever alleged there to be a commentary on anarchism within the book. I'll once again be removing almost all references to anarchism on this page, as I see someone has replaced them. I'll leave the link to anarcho-primitivism in the "see also" section, as it is appropriate there, not as a assertion of intended relationship, but perhaps as an article of interest to researchers. I'll also be removing Tyler Durden form the List of Fictional Anarchists, where he was just added earlier today. When a citation from the book or author commentary from an interview or essay is found, references to Anarchism can be readded as appropriate.--Cast (talk) 00:47, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Some people say that...

"This film is now popularly considered to be an uncompromising critique of humanity's loss of identity through mass consumerism."

I'm no wikipedian superstar, but that sentence doesn't seem like its from a npov. 70.107.152.198 (talk) 01:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Robert Paulson / meme

Stupid trivia that's bordering on vandalism. 76.186.15.83 (talk) 04:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

The last two sentences of this section don't seem to make any sense. Which parts are book and which parts are movie? Justdelegard (talk) 15:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Prof. Kennet

Does anyone else feel that perhaps Professor Kennent is featured too prominently in this book? Granted he is a professor but from what I have seen, his interpretation of the book is not particularly notable or even respected. What about scaling back his presence here for the sake of staying on topic? RyanHoliday (talk) 05:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

History section incomprehensible

well being an english as a second language teacher I can definitely tell that the author of the beginning section is someone who proficient in English yet isn't someone who is a native speaker.

That is true, someone really needs to rewrite it. TweekTard (talk) 13:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Tweek

it's almost painful to read. i found myself backtracking two or three times per line in some places because of it's incoherence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.138.190 (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Nympho?

I just finished reading the book, and of all of Marla's problems she does not once mention nymphomania. She has had an active sex life, but inferences beyond that are from the readers point of view. "Hypersexuality is characterized by a debilitating need for frequent genital stimulation..." (taken from the nympho wiki). Until it can be cited that she has a debilitating need for sex, keep your opinion of her to yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.90.112.114 (talk) 18:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Motif and Subtext section

The Motif and Subtext section. Apart from both having a lot of text that is neither about Motifs in the novel, or the Subtext of the novel, large parts are WP:OR. All commentaries on the novel, that are more than just basic statements of fact need to be attributed to a Reliable third party reviewer. Ashmoo (talk) 10:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Pointless spoiler

The summary section contained "The narrator often repeats the line "I know this because Tyler knows this." This is used to foreshadow the novel's major plot twist in which Tyler is revealed to be the same person as the narrator." I felt this was a weak point that didn't fit with the rest of the section, more importantly a major spoiler that just popped from nowhere without reason. I've removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walkendude (talk • contribs) 05:33, January 28, 2009

Benjamin Button reference

Someone who has seen The Curious Case of Benjamin Button should rephrase the section about Brad Pitt's character and his father's conversation. It is unclear who asks the question regarding Paper Street("He asks him"). 208.85.232.46 (talk) 06:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Steppenwolf similarity

If anyones read Steppenwolf by Herman Hesse the similarities are incredible. There is a guy sick of his life as a bourgeois type and sometimes going out and being, well.. tyler durden. In the end of steppenwolf, we have this magic theater where were not sure if the main character kills this girl hermine (like marla singer), or if he imagines it, or if he imagined her existing in the first place. If this wasn't a strong influence, or Hesse's other similarly themed works.. on fight club, then I dont know what is. Unfortunately, theres no proof, I looked.. not hard just google. Nnnudibranch 08:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think there is a strong similarity, and they're both about a man struggling with the conventions, stuffed expectations and shorthands that we need to live in a society but which at the same time may seem to block us from really feeling we "become ourselves". But reading this article also lit up one lightbulb after another when it comes to why ´some indie pop tweeny kids are so goddam obnoxious. I'd read halfway through Fight Club years ago and then dropped it, wasn't very impressed. Well, reading this article I could see that many kids who grew up in the '90s and 00's, and who became involved in a self-conscious way in pop culture, online publishing etc would have read it almost as a gospel (some of them use online nicks such as 'Tyler Durden' too). It's the same model: you need to have something to fight for so they pick these style wars, get into endless ritual debates about which Primal Scream single is the best one, the influence of furniture on this or that Belgian record label ór the merits of this or that remixer. Always with a wrinkled angry face masking an irony that must only just get through to their own buddies: it's always more a fight than a discussion. Always very eager to point out to everyone else "you haven't understood why Bark is the band against which all neo-glaswegatronica must now be measured".

They need those fights - with fists or, more often, at their internet hangouts and blogs - but the fighting and exclusion itself are much more important than the objects of the fight. They're as eager to denounce cultural icons, recognized writers, the media as they are unable to live without them (just like the guy in the book who vows to destroy the Mona Lisa). Well, when you live in a society that doesn't offer caves and forests and wars for you to go into to prove your masculinity you gotta find something else. /Strausszek (talk) 18:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Product References

Recent packaging for an Avery labeling product, references Tyler Durden and paper street. I know in popular culture sections are common on wiki pages. Is there precedence for a section where products reference cultural works?--SiIIyLiIIyPiIIy (talk) 17:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes in meaning

About a week ago I reverted some Shadowjam changes similar to these made today, with the edit summary undo edits that change the sense of some longstanding statements. Shadowjam replied These edits don't change the meaning and asked for a discussion here. Most of the changes are just the harmless sort of style changes we all make when we dip into an article, but some do change the meaning of a statement, subtly perhaps, but we should be cautious about changes to a fairly stable article like this one. I do admit to being anal about what is written here.

Longstanding statement:

... but publishers rejected it as it was considered too disturbing

Revision:

...but it was rejected by publishers due to the novel being too disturbing

What changed:

source of value judgment of "too disturbing" moved from the publishers to Wikipedia/the writer

Longstanding statement:

[the book] won some literary awards. It then went to Hollywood, generating cinematic-adaptation interest

Revision:

The book received critical interest and eventually generated cinematic-adaptation interest

What changed:

"critical interest" is not the same as "literary awards"

Small stuff perhaps, not earthshaking or worth an edit war, but not correct either. --CliffC (talk) 01:56, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking it here to discuss. I certainly didn't intend to imply much of what you believed is implied by the changes. Some of this grammar really needed to be cleaned up. I've got no problem rewording these sentences to fix these problems. I do think you're being a little too bitey; I'm not a new editor, but I can imagine a new editor would be dissuaded from editing. I'll reply below to the specific concerns.

1) "as it was considered too disturbing" is passive tense where it's unclear who held this view. The reversion takes out "considered", which is the only substantive difference. Perhaps change it to "publishers rejected the book, considering it too disturbing."

2) literary awards is vague; it should list what awards. Critical interest is equally vaugue, admittedly, but this sentence is also uncited, and I think critical interest is broader. The previous sentence said "it then went to hollywood"... I don't think anyone thinks that anthropomorphizing the film is good, formal grammar. If you want to change this sentence, take out "eventually" and change "critical interest" back to "literary awards." I don't find those changes all that meaningful.

Shadowjams (talk) 07:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Mona Lisa

Has anyone yet noted the fact that wiping your ass with the famous painting would be quite impossible? It's painted on a panel of wood, making a wipe incredibly impractical at best, and hazardous at worst. Would this observation be OR? bahamut0013^words_deeds 22:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Ever heard of metaphors? /Strausszek (talk) 07:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Mechanic?

Just after the 8 rules of Fight Club are listed, a sentence mentions 'the mechanic', without explaining who he is. "Later in the book, the mechanic tells the narrator two new rules of the fight club. " This is the first time that a mechanic has been mentioned in the article, and as I haven't read the book, the sentence made no sense to me. Who is this mechanic? Why is he suddenly adding rules to Fight Club? Can we get someone to explain this. 121.73.68.27 (talk) 00:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2