Talk:The Gruffalo

Chinese fable

Someone added that The Gruffalo was based on a chinese fable, but didn't provide a source to back up that claim. I can't find any evidence to support it either. Apparently Donaldson's book The Wonderful Smells was based on a chinese fable (ref) but there's no indication that The Gruffalo was too. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to the anon for the information below. Now look here:

"The Gruffalo ... began as a contemporary version of an Eastern folk tale about a child who cons a jungle tiger into submission by the cunning expedient of having it follow in her footsteps. ... 'I intended the book to be about a tiger, but I just couldn't get anything to rhyme with "tiger".' "

This is a British newspaper - ought to do as a reliable source. And there is a FAQ on her own website, here:

"The book was going to be about a tiger but I couldn’t get anything to rhyme with “tiger”." -- ALoan (Talk) 16:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

more on Chinese fable

I love "The Gruffalo" for the rhymes but recognize the Chinese fable the first time I read it. Most Chinese will recognize the fable "The Fox and the Tiger" (or literally -- "The fox pretending to take on the ferociousness of the tiger" story) because we all read it in our school's textbooks before the age of 6 or 7. Please see the following two sources with their English translations, one from www.hanyu.com.cn, another from http://www2.epochtimes.com/gb/csc67_1.htm. I don't know how far back these stories appeared in Chinese books but it must have been at least a few decades, as I am 50 now and I read it in my Chinese school books when I was 6.

(source: hanyu.com.cn)

狐假虎威 一次，一只老虎抓住了一只狐狸，便要吃它。那狡猾的狐狸抗议说："你怎么可以吃我！我是天帝派来到森林里来做兽中之王的。你如果不信，可以跟着我走，看哪有一只野兽不怕我！" 老虎要证实它的话，就同意了它的建议。 狐狸走在前面，老虎紧紧的跟在后面。森林里的兔子,鹿儿等野兽，看见老虎来了，一个个都躲开了。 老虎看了以为那些野兽真的是怕狐狸而逃的，也就不敢吃狐狸了。 "狐假虎威"这个成语就是由这个故事而来，形容那些依仗别人势力欺负他人的人。

Fox assuming tiger's ferocity A tiger once caught a fox and desired to make a meal of it. The cunning fox immediately made a protest saying: "How can you take me as your food? You must know that I am sent by God to this forest to be the king of all the beasts herein. If you don't believe what I say, you may follow me and see that every beast, without any exception, will fear me." In order to prove the truth of the fox's statement, the tiger agreed to the fox's [wrongly translated as "farmer" in the webpage] proposal. The fox went ahead, and the tiger followed closely. All the wild beasts in the forest, such as hares, deer, etc., on seeing the tiger coming, went away to hide themselves one by one. The tiger thought that these beasts, running away to hide themselves were really afraid of the fox. Therefore, he didn't dare to eat the fox. The idiom "fox assuming tiger's ferocity" comes from the story above, illustrating those who tease people by others' force.

source: http://www2.epochtimes.com/gb/csc67_1.htm

寓言故事中英文版---狐假虎威 老虎在森林四处觅食，刚好抓住了狐狸。 狐狸恳求老虎饶它一命，并说：「您不能吃我，我是天帝派来做百兽之王的。您如果吃了我，就是违抗天帝的命令。」 老虎放开狐狸，不大信服地望著它。 狐狸继续说：「您如果不相信，就请跟我到森林里去，看看百兽是否一见到我就逃跑。」 老虎想了会，就跟著狐狸进入森林。果然，百兽一见到它们，都惊慌地逃跑了。

The Fox That Flaunted The Tiger's Terror The tiger was scouring the forest for prey when he captured the fox. The fox pleaded for his life. "You can't eat me," he told the tiger. "I am sent by the Emperor of Heavens to be the king of all beasts. If you gobble me up, you are defying His Majesty's will." The tiger let go of the fox and looked suspiciously at him. "If you don't believe me, follow me into the forest and see for yourself," continued the fox. "Watch how the animals scamper off at the mere sight of me!" The tiger thought for a moment, then he followed the fox into the forest. Indeed, as soon as the animals caught sight of them, they all trembled and ran away fearfully. 转自：《□仔寓言网》

The author is not unfamiliar with Chinese stories, as she has written a story with a Chinese setting and Chinese characters ("The Magic Paintbrush"). I am not sure if it is based on a Chinese story, or if it is original. I enjoy that book too, and wish the author will comment on whether or not The Gruffalo is inspired by the Chinese fable. It is interesting to note that she had the tiger in mind when she wrote the story, but could not find the rhymes for "tiger", and invented the Gruffalo as a result (see the interview collected in the DVD version of the theatre production of "The Gruffalo"). I wonder if she had the Chinese fable of "The tiger and the fox" in mind then. 61.238.96.18 15:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC) S Chan.

It is interesting that the author used the word "retold". Wonder what the award committees think of this. To be fair, however, the Gruffalo added a first half of the story to the Chinese fable version, and the additions of the body parts (such as prickles and warts), and the rhymes, are original.

Foxtigerfox 16:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC) foxtiger

Spoiler

I reckon we do need a spolier warning! OK so it's a very short kids book but it is a charming one. It would be a shame to spoil it for parents, even if not many kids aged two tto five will be using Wikipedia! Jules1975 14:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Changes?

The section [Further Gruffalo products] mentions changes to the dialogue between versions of the book. Does anyone have any details of the changes? Or perhaps access to the two versions of the book? --SnakeSeries (talk) 03:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Where the Wild Things Are

Has anyone noticed the strong visual resemblance between the depiction of the Gruffalo and the monster on the cover of Maurice Sendak's Where the Wild Things Are? It can't be entirely coincidental. Nuttyskin (talk) 15:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. When I saw this was first published in 1999 I thought it was a mix-up because I remembered the animation from when I was a child - much earlier than 1999. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.97.85 (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Doctor Who

A possible footnote, very minor if relevant, is the use of the book as a reader in a Doctor Who episode, The Hungry Earth, first broadcast on BBC One on May 22nd, 2010. A Welsh father reads part of the book with his dyslexic son before going on night shift on a deep crust geology drilling operation. Later as the father settles down to his night work, he takes the book out of his bag and starts to read it. Tasty monster (=TS ) 22:16, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Tony sideway - next time 'be bold'! If you have the details you can put it in with a reference. I was bold to put in the cameos without a reference - not sure how you reference it, I ought to look extensively through publisher promotional copy but not done that yet! Perhaps we should rename/create section 'In popular culture' for cultural references, as distinct from tie-ins? Kathybramley (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Citations

The last paragraph of the 'Versions and products' section asks for citations but I would have thought the citations are simply the books mentioned in that paragraph. Pages in these books are not numbered, so page references can't be provided, but I have verified all three references in my copies of these books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.228.76 (talk) 03:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Plot

Can I just say that I though this section was beautifully written. Bikerprof (talk) 19:50, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Not a hybrid creature

The claim made in this article that the Gruffalo is a hybrid Buffalo-Grizzly Bear appears unfounded (and apparently incorrect).

The article linked in reference 2 includes the paragraph: "The Gruffalo is her invention, whose genesis is a tale she has told many times. 'I intended the book to be about a tiger, but I just couldn't get anything to rhyme with "tiger". It just wasn't working. But then I came up with "Silly old fox, doesn't he know/ there's no such thing as a blank-blank-oh". Then I began with "Grrrr", which I hoped would sound quite scary. Then all I needed was a word of three syllables, ending in "oh". Somehow, "gruffalo" came to mind.'"

I'm not aware of poisonous warts, or purple prickles, afflicting either Grizzlies or Buffalo, so this hybrid claim just doesn't really gel.

Has anyone got any source to indicate that the creature was ever intended as a hybrid by the author? The interview quoted above indicate that this was not her intention; it seems like just a made-up, fantasy creature, with three syllables, ending in "o".

Would it be okay to have that hybrid claim removed from the article? (EDIT - I have waited a few days, and now made the correction.)

(Also, re: reference #1 - the link to The Canberra Times article seems to have died.)

KiwiHadley (talk) 23:36, 14 April 2019 (UTC)KiwiHadley

Translations

I don't think listing translations of the title is necessarily useful. It's probably more useful to discuss any notable or interesting translations. I thought I'd better leave a note here in case I get round to removing that section, as it will be a substantial change to the article. Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 09:47, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:44, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

I'll have a go at this. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:44, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for picking it up! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 09:05, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments

This is a carefully-written and well-cited article and I have only the most minor of comments.

• The audio file needs to be updated, but that's not a GA matter.
  • Yep I noticed that. Definitely not my area of expertise! I may drop a note on the relevant WikiProject page.

• "also" is used 15 times in the article. Not sure any of them are necessary.
  • Thanks - reduced to 4 now!

• "who do not know how or are learning how to read." - the first "how" is not needed.
  • Removed.

• "In order to cerate" -> "create".
  • Fixed.

• "The name of the Gruffalo itself is, Burke writes," - this follows a chunk on exactly the topic of the choice of name, so this comes across a little oddly. I suggest we have instead "In Burke's view, the name is".
  • Thank you, that works better.

• "not introduced into general circulation and sold" -> "not introduced into general circulation, but were sold".
  • Fixed.

• I'd advise you to archive the rather ephemeral-looking weblinks such as to Forestry England and Whinlatter Forest as these are likely to be chopped (to coin a phrase) when the next thing comes along.
  • Good plan, I've added an archive link. If I get a moment I might go through the rest of the links and archive them as well.

• The Whinlatter Forest ref needs a publisher.
  • Have added the website name.

• The Ardkinglas ref needs a date.
  • Done.

• The refs to WorldCat should be replaced with {{cite book}} and {{cite media}} refs directly to the products concerned. You can use the parameter "id=" for the CD's catalogue number.
  • Thanks, have changed them.

• The prizes and awards don't fit well in "Background and publication history". Suggest you have a section "Awards" or similar.
  • I've changed the "Legacy and merchandise" section to "Legacy", and added an "Awards" subheading, since I thought it fit best in there.

• "Background and publication history" isn't a coherent section, as the "and" reveals. Suggest we have a section on the author (a very brief potted biography) and a section on the book's creation; and it would make more sense to have these up at the top, as they come before the book itself. You might structure these sections like this, for example:

1. Context

1.1 Author

1.2 Creating the book

(existing Plot, Themes, etc)

Publication history

All that will leave "Publication history" where it is now.

• • I have re-jigged the sections around as you've suggested and added a little extra background on Scheffler and Donaldson.

• I suggest you add a sentence on translations; that can go in the publication history, unless you get enough material for a separate section. I wouldn't list all the languages; it's enough to say "33 languages including Korean and Swahili" or whatever. This is one case where citing WorldCat is probably the right thing to do, unless you can find a better source (a recent newspaper article would be ideal).
  • The Guardian reported in 2020 that it's in over 50 languages, so have used that reference. I've find some articles about more interesting ones: Cornish, Scots and Latin.

Summary

This is an excellent article and will make a worthy GA. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you! It was a fun one to write. I've responded to all your comments so let me know what you think! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 14:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Super, it's a GA. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

20th Anniversary Edition

Should the 20th Anniversary Edition of The Gruffalo be mentioned in #Publication history. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 00:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)