Talk:The Monster (novella)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Truthkeeper88 (talk · contribs) 02:05, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• I had to read the sentence twice about Henry and the doctor - for some reason I thought the doctor's face was disfigured. The sentence flows nicely, but it's a lot of information to parse. Maybe try shortening a little. Otherwise, a really nice lead.

• I changed this to: "The story takes place in the small, fictional town of Whilomville, New York. An African American coachman named Henry Johnson, who is employed by the town's physician, Dr. Trescott, becomes horribly disfigured after he saves his employer's son from a fire."

Background

• Nicely done

Writing and publication history

• Link Oxted?

• Done

• Link Homefield - or clarify, I've lost the thread in terms of where they were.

• Still in England -- linked Kenley for now; I've forgotten what Homefield referred to, but I'll look it up.

• McClures or McClure's?

• McClure's, fixed.

• Perhaps unnecessary question: reading the plot summary I found myself wondering how long this is, which isn't mentioned until the Style section. I'm not sure this is the place, but I'm wondering if the length - short story/novelette/novella is relevant to the writing section, and if so, whether it can be scrunched in there somehow. Hope this makes sense.

• Crane referred to the story as a "novelette" while he was writing it, so I think that's worth noting here. I added/reworded the following: "Crane initially sent his "novelette", a manuscript of more than 21,000 words, to McClure's, along with several other works including "The Bride Comes to Yellow Sky". It remained unpublished for nearly a year."

Plot summary

• I've never seen the characters italicized. Do you normally do that?

• I originally had the characters bolded in Red Badge, but sometime during the review stage someone changed them to italics because of the MOS. I just kind of carried it into this, in lieu of writing a characters section or something.

• The new Trescott house - rebuilt after the fire?

• Yes, I've clarified -- "newly built".

Themes

• Various critics have written about the story's paradox themes of deformity and monstrosity. > paradoxical themes?

• Ah, much better. That sentence has always bothered me.

The rest look very nice. I'll have another read through tomorrow to see whether anything else needs work. Your usual high standard and well-written work. A pleasure to read. Truthkeeper (talk) 02:25, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Yay! Thanks so much for taking the time to review. It's a lesser Crane stories, but one that has become quite popular over the past forty years or so (as opposed to most of his other stories, that become less popular). Let me know if anything else needs to be done. María (yllosubmarine) 14:35, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I forgot to look at the images, but need to walk away from the computer for a little while. I'm assuming you're taking this to FAC, so want to be certain everything looks good, though to be honest haven't found much to complain about. It's a very solid piece of work. Truthkeeper (talk) 14:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Images are fine. I've passed it. Good luck. Truthkeeper (talk) 15:07, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Trescott

Does Crane give Dr. Trescott a first name? If so, that should be included. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

I believe it's Ned (and his wife's is Grace), but they're mostly ever referred to as Dr. and Mrs. Trescott, respectively. They're known by their statuses, whereas Jimmie -- a mere boy -- is the only one of his family really referred to by his name. So I'm not sure the Doc's first name is relevant?

Also, I've reverted your edit here, but only because I know how confusing the Cora/Crane thing happens to be! Stephen and Cora were never officially common-law in either the US or the UK; they lived as man and wife while in England, even telling people that they were married, but Cora was legally married to Captain Donald William Stewart. She went by "Cora Crane" during this time, but her legal name was still Stewart, although when she met Crane she was going by "Cora Taylor". Of course, she's now known as Crane, and that's what her Wikipedia article uses (rightfully so, I think), but including her "full" name in this one sentence in this article is rather redundant: "Crane began writing The Monster in June 1897 while living in Oxted, England with his common-law wife Cora Crane." Whew. I hope this makes sense, and thanks for your help, María (yllosubmarine) 20:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Please be aware that my input on these matters detracts not at all from your work on this wonderful and informative article. I commend you for your work, and it was a pleasure to read the article. I have no expertise on Crane and his work, and my knowledge is limited to reading "The Red Badge of Courage" over 40 years ago, and reading it superficially but with great appreciation.

If Crane, even once, called Dr. Trescott "Ned", then I think that our article should call him Dr. Ned Trescott at first mention. If Crane chose not to give such a central character a first name, then that is a significant decision by Crane as author indicating a certain distance that ought to be reflected, somehow, in the article, especially if reliable sources have commented upon the lack of a given name for this character.

As for Cora's surname, I don't understand how a couple could be considered "officially" married by common law, because a common law marriage is inherently an unofficial relationship. On the other hand, if she was legally married to someone else, I agree that the attribution is problematic. So, I don't pre-judge whether "Cora Taylor" or "Cora Stewart" or "Cora Crane" is the best way to characterize her. What I am sure of, though, is that it is not appropriate to describe an adult woman by only the first name "Cora". I also feel uncomfortable describing their relationship as a "companion" with all the platonic connotations that word carries, especially because they chose to describe their relationship as some sort of "marriage", which is the farthest thing, as I see it, from a platonic relationship in the continuum of relationships between men and women. I will not revert your reversion, because you know far more about these matters than I do. Instead, I will humbly ask you to address the concerns that I have raised as a naive (but I hope thoughtful) reader of your article. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, you make some great points. I've added Ned's name to the plot summary, which admittedly isn't the first mention of the man, but it's where he's first truly introduced. What do you think?

The Crane/Cora thing is so very muddled, and different authors refer to their relationship (and Cora herself) differently. The issue with common-law marriage is that at the time (in both the US and UK) it was a legally recognized position, providing rights and benefits to the woman as if she were married. Because Cora was already married, however, it couldn't have applied to them. Crane's article once referred to Cora as his "common-law wife", but I removed it at the suggestion of Stephen Wertheim, a prominent Crane scholar whose work I've used to source this and other related articles -- he explained as much in an email to me, so I bowed to his superior knowledge and removed the "common-law wife" mention, substituting it for something less legally-suggestive.

Sorry for rambling, but I believe you've hit on something important here. Crane/Taylor/Stewart... it's such an issue. Most biographers refer to her simply as Cora, so I'm afraid my tendency is to be as informal as they happen to be. Since the main Crane article currently refers to her as Cora Taylor, however, I've changed the sentence as follows: "Crane began writing The Monster in June 1897 while living in Oxted, England with his longtime partner Cora Taylor." I'm not sure about "longtime partner", since it makes them sound like they worked together in a law firm, but perhaps it's an improvement over "companion"? Let me know if you have any suggestions, and thanks again. (BTW, this article is currently at FAC, so feel free to weigh in there if you're interested!) María (yllosubmarine) 15:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Infobox

I've reverted the addition of the infobox, per BRD per the following reasons. First, it was very large and fell into the next section of the article on my screen, causing text squash. Second, the author of the article didn't wish an infobox and in fact left the project because after an infobox was added to a book article she brought to FA status when it ran as TFA a terrible fight broke out. Our of respect for that editor, one the few around here who wrote about literature and is now gone, I've reverted. I'll probably get all kinds of grief for doing this. Victoriaearle (tk) 02:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)