Jump to content

Talk:Nell Gwyn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Peer Review

[edit]

Great work on this article so far. It's stable, well referenced, and should definately go through a peer review to help identify those details that will upgrade the article to "A". Nightngle 17:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biography

[edit]

Nell Gwyn is most commonly said to have been born in Hereford (and sometimes Covent Garden). Emphasis in the article incorrectly implies Covent Garden as the most likely. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.67.37.104 (talk • contribs) .

Hopefully it's pretty equivocal now about her place of birth. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All Mistaken, or The Mad Couple

[edit]

Most sources say James Howard's All Mistaken, or The Mad Couple premiered in 1667. This is unfortunately important to the chronology of "gay couple" roles I have in the article now. Howe says (without any hints that the information may be suspect) that it premiered in 1665 and was the first of Gwyn and Hart's gay couple roles. I note this issue has apparently been raised as early as 1964, in an Oxford journal Notes and Queries (see [1]) but I don't have access to that text. I also note that Wagonheim's Annals of English Drama, 975-1700 says "1665?" and cryptically (to me) "mistakenly given title of The Widow and attributed to Roger Boyle". Anybody have any good info? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:12, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I took so long. Unfortunately I can't access N&Q that far back either, but the Fount of All Knowledge, The London Stage, 1660—1700, says in its first edition, 1965, that September 1667 was the first recorded performance (known because Pepys went to it). Scrupulous as always, though, the LS points out that there's no indication that that performance was the première. Both Sutherland in your N&Q reference, and Robert D. Hume in a Philological Quarterly article in 1972, have argued that the première was actually in May 1665, and obviously Howe is taking that as proven. I would, too, even without reading these articles, and even though your "most sources" say 1667. You're probably ahead of me by now, but I'll lay it out:
  1. The LS is purveying the best info they had at the time. They're not arguing new info might not come to light.
  2. Both Sutherland and Hume are big, big authorities.
  3. Howe seems to be taking the 1665 date as proven, as you say, and she's a careful scholar also.
The only intriguing bit is that the LS didn't in 1965 utilize N&Q info from 1964. Hang on. No it isn't. Ha. The preface to the LS has this narrative about how long the volumes were in the press, how all the original editors complicated matters by dropping dead, etc. And the preface is dated 1963. No, there's nothing intriguing, you can safely use the May 1665 date. Bishonen | talk 19:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Great! I really appreciate you having a look and weighing in. Stylistically, do you think I'd be being too scrupulous if I noted the issue in a footnote? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I got my info from Hume, The Development of English Drama (1976), which probably appears in all my Restoration reference sections, being a book of most excellent usefulness. He does talk as if it's arguable, rather than certain: "Secret Love (February 1667), a very popular play, is the first great example of the split plot mode. I have argued elsewhere, however, that James Howard's All Mistaken; or The Mad Couple was perrformed in the late spriing of 1665, in which case it would be the prototype and have an important influence on the form of Dryden's play" (p. 253). So perhaps the date being somewhat uncertain does deserve a brief mention. As you say, the chronology there is rather important for Nell. Howe may not be the best source to cite at that juncture, since I expect she merely read it in Hume's book.
The phrase "the gay couple" was invented by John Harrington Smith, and is the title of his book on the subject, in case you want to add some more footnote pedantry. Btw, I think Howe is being a little feminist there. It's hardly fair to credit the success of the gay couple entirely to Nell! Compare the more even-handed treatment in, ahem, The Country Wife: "Many critics credit the personalities and skills of Hart and Nell Gwyn with creating, as much as any playwright did, the famous flirting/bantering Restoration comedy couple." Bishonen | talk 20:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
I added a caveat to the footnote. I also added a "goes so far as" qualifier to the Howe quote on Nell and the gay couple; I'd hate to lose the quote altogether or spend much more space there on dithering, though. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two Names, or The Dumb Question

[edit]

So all the plays back then have these XXX, or The YYY names. Just curious: is there any deeper answer to the question "why did they?" than "they just did"? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Different productions sometimes gave the same (basic) play different titles. When they were published, both titles were used. (Same idea is still around today: a movie is often released under different titles in different countries). After a while, it became a tradition to have the "or" titles, the second of which is, you'll note, generally more descriptive of the action (e.g. Kyd's A Spanish Tragedy, or Hieronymo's Mad Again)... Titles as printed often differed from those used at the time of production: no one ever said "Hey, you want to go down to the Globe tonight to catch The most excellent Historie of the Merchant o Venice with the extreame crueltie of Shylocke the Iewef towards the sayd Merchant, in cutting a iust pound of his flesh: and the obtaying of Portia by the choyse of three chests As it hath beene diuers times acted by the Lord Chamberlaine his Seruants." (I wonder how many such play's titles would have to be listed as spoilers if given in Wikipedia! - Nunh-huh 14:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Birthplace

[edit]

Following this piece of text I removed from the article

Madam Gwyn was born within the parish of St Martin-in-the-Fields, London, and is thought to have lived most of her life in the city. She is believed by most Gwyn biographers to have been low-born; Beauclerk calls this conjecture, based solely on what is known of her later life.

This simply cannot be proven, as 3 cities have claimed to be her birth place, as said 2 sentences on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.23.92.58 (talk) 13:43, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a misunderstanding, which I have reverted. If you read the sentence before the statement you removed, you'll see that "Madam Gwyn" refers to Nell Gwyn's mother, not to Nell Gwyn herself. Bishonen | talk 00:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I also was unsure to whom this that statement referred, Nell or her mother. I think that the first statement belies the fact that the entire paragraph which follows concerns her mother. Made a clarification, please verify if you wish. (talk) 17:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

[edit]

Oranges sold for sixpence each?

[edit]

Did Nell Gwyn really sell her oranges for sixpence each? We need a citation for this. Remember at at the time, tickets for a play at the Globe Theatre cost from 1d for standing, rising to 2d for a bench, or 3d for a bench with a cushion. 6d (sixpence) could get you a seat in a Lord's Room. 1d would buy you a loaf of bread, and 4d would buy your food for the day. So 6d for an orange is expensive. Maybe it was the price that was paid for an orange at the time, allowing for difficult growing in the UK or importing from Spain. But I think that if we are going to say she sold oranges for the equivalent of a day's wages for a skilled rural worker, we should give a citation for that surprising detail. (I got my typical Elizabethan prices from here.)

Legacy

[edit]

"Nell is also famous for another remark made to her coachman, who was fighting with another man who had called her a whore. She broke up the fight, saying, "I am a whore. Find something else to fight about."[citation needed]

Thomas C. Smith "Japan's Aristocratic Revolution" in Native Sources of Japanese Industrialization 1750-1920 (U of Cal Press 1988 145-146

"...in Fielding's story of Nell Gwyenn. Stepping on day from a house where she had made a short visit, the famous actress saw a great mob assemnled and her footman all bloody and dirty. The fellow, being asked by his mistress what had happened, answered, "I have been fighting, madam, with an impudent rascal who called your ladyship a whore." "You blockhead," replied Mrs. Gwyenn, at this rate you must fight every day of your life; why, you fool, all the world knows it." "Do they?" the fellow said in a muttering voice; "They shan't call me a whore's footman for all that." I believe this is from The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling by Henry Fielding. 137.81.40.148 (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Louis Fallert lfallert@uwsuper.edu[reply]

Early Life section

[edit]

This entire section needs streamlining and excision of phrases such as 'that is highly unlikely to be true', which do not bear sources. References made in vague terms (also unsourced) to 'a manuscript of [X year]', etc, which seems less than strictly encyclopaedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.113.171 (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Nell Gwyn/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Recommend a peer review to see if it meets A. Might also go for GA --plange 03:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 03:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 01:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit request

[edit]

Please add a hatnote for the incoming redirect protestant whore:

{{redirect|protestant whore|the Daniel Defoe character|Roxana: The Fortunate Mistress}}

"protestant whore" redirects here. For the Daniel Defoe character, see Roxana: The Fortunate Mistress.

The moniker "protestant whore" is also used for the main character of the 1724 novel, Roxana [2]


NOTE: The is a restricted edit, because of a filter keyword, requiring a person with a user account of sufficient validation to enact.

-- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 03:45, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done- thanks for the suggestion, especially the Defoe section, which avoids people ending in a cul-de-sac - Arjayay (talk) 13:06, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nell Gwyn. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 18:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"prolific"!?

[edit]

Why is she described as a "prolific celebrity" in the introduction? She only had two boys when many (particularly married) women mothered larger families than this - look eg at King Charles' niece the future Queen Anne. Nor was she a writer, painter or sculptress, so would not be prolific in the creative department (unless you count acting as creative).Cloptonson (talk) 05:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Having just come to the article, I also immediately questioned the use of this term. Since nobody has come forward to justify its use, I've deleted it. --Blurryman (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Protestant whore" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Protestant whore and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 13 § Protestant whore until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 01:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is inconsistent on Duchy/Dukedom

[edit]

Other places in Wikipedia state that the United Kingdom has only two duchies: Lancaster and Cornwall. ALL OTHER DUKES (according to Wikipedia's other articles) are holders of Dukedoms, NOT Duchies. At the time I'm typing this, this article contains the text "... Murray de Vere Beauclerk, 14th Duke of St. Albans is her descendant, and the current holder of the duchy". I'm not going to take the time to chase down and verify the frequent assertion that only Lancaster and Cornwall are duchies. I can end up spending all day trying to fix your mistakes. I just know that elsewhere in Wikipedia the designation of "Dukedom" is stated to apply to everything except Cornwall and Lancaster, and it's far more likely that the person who thinks St. Albans is a "duchy" is in error than I am, and if I bother to provide citations OF YOUR OWN PAGES it's time I need for something else. Even the Duke of Norfolk has a Dukedom, not a Duchy. GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER!!!2600:1700:6759:B000:E894:BFCC:705D:880 (talk) 03:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence Simpson[reply]

If you even click the WORD "duchy" in that sentence, you'll eventually get to
https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Duchies_in_England
WHICH SAYS THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO OF THEM!!! So either correct THIS article (Nell Gwyn) or fix THAT. It shouldn't be MY job to tell YOU which one of them is wrong!03:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence Simpson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6759:B000:E894:BFCC:705D:880 (talk)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nell_Gwyn&oldid=1217996038"