Talk:Paul Auster

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

Reception[edit]

It seems to me that the 'Reception' section is overly long and largely centers the views of one critic (James Wood) by quoting his criticisms of Auster. While criticism is entirely valid, I'm not sure how much it adds to the article having such a large chunk of it made up of a copy/paste from one critic's views on Auster. Would recommend significantly cutting this, does anyone have any thoughts or objections to this?Boredintheevening (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree. At the very least, the parody should be completely scrapped. I don't think it is fitting for an encyclopedia and that Wood's description of Auster's prose preceeding the parody quotation is enough to make the point.--Zamomin (talk) 09:10, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

This line stood out, as it seems opinionated ... Regarding Auster, "His later work has matured to be less pretentious in style while retaining its appeal to lovers of post-modern literature." Was "Travels in the scriptorium" really "critically acclaimed"? I think it was the exact opposite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.247.80.7 (talk) 23:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Style?[edit]

There is no information on Auster's stylistic devices - occasionally some vague points are made in the individual articles on each of his published works, but there is nothing addressing the author's very well-defined style. For example, a few of the book-articles mention the almost autobiographical nature of Auster's characters, which is a strong theme throughout his work.

There is no article on Leviathan, one of his most acclaimed works... I was going to write a lengthy article on Leviathan myself, but now I'm considering doing a much shorter one, but adding more to this page in terms of style/themes etc. I could then link the various (short) book-articles back to the main thing, saving repetition, and further highlighting his rigidly structured style.

Also there are a few over-opinionated lines in the articles (as has already been noted) - I might change some of these around a bit.

Any objections? If no one has replied within the next day or so, I'll start work!

bish 21:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I tried to put something into the article about his reoccurring subjects. --Kaffeeringe.de 21:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am amused by the synchronicity. I have gone by the name of Sidney Orr for 60+ years, since my father, as many of his clan, shortened it from "Orlovitz" -- previously a Lithuanian Kovno/Kaunus-based clan. The character in Mr Auster's book affected my appearance in Google searches substantially. The world may be better for that. Sidney Orr (talk) 08:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Themes"?[edit]

When referring to one of "Paul Auster's reappearing subjects," what does "American space" mean? I can think of at least three different connotations of this phrase, so can the contributor--or someone else --be more exact, or just delete this, the last of 14 (!) such items of reappearing subjects?Mwprods (talk) 21:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


French award - what and when?[edit]

There is some contradiction as to what grade of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres he received and when. According to clapfilmes, in '92 he was made Commander, whereas biography.jrank says it was Chevalier. Enotes agrees with Chevalier, but says it was in '93. Once this is resolved, the info can be added to the article. Jay (talk) 13:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked within the French Wikipedia where it appears that Auster was made Chevalier of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres as far as 1992 and Commandeur of the same order in 2007. --189.135.115.104 (talk) 21:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC) (Portokali, from France)[reply]

Auggie Wren[edit]

Just wondering if anyone would have details to add of this book [1] Cos Eile 15:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem[edit]

This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. VWBot (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/* External links */[edit]

I've tried to tidy up the links section.

The following links seemed worthy of deletion to me, but feel free to challenge:

I tried to introduce an order - mainly grouping the links to interviews together and ordering them chronologically.

I'd also question the links to the Spanish and Portuguese blogs; as this is the English-language entry, perhaps they should only be on the Spanish-language and Portuguese-language entries respectively?

FrenchieAlexandre (talk) 01:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Questions of influence[edit]

I know that Auster is well versed in the French canon, and that he's renowned as a translator. But grasping the extent and precise sort of this influence and whether or not he would call himself a postmodernist- putting aside if other people have- is difficult given the contents of this article. We seem to have different links attesting to (totally) different degrees of influence and personal association. A new version is called for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.18.136 (talk) 00:48, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Paul Auster. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:58, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

re: "bends the rules of storytelling and blurs the difference between fiction and autobiography..."[edit]

I am Jim Auster, Paul Auster's older first cousin. Regarding the comment on Paul Auster Wiki page about his writing "bending rules of storytelling, blurring the line between fiction and autobiography" please allow me to fill in examples and facts that Paul doesn't just "bend rules" but clearly breaks the rules by misrepresenting and abusing our family history. Contradictions in his books prove the point. Paul's first novel Invention of Solitude is about his inability to cry or feel any emotion upon news of his father, Sam Auster's death by portraying Sam as a "solitary" nobody dropping dead on a bare wooden chair alone in a bare room with no one who loves or cares for him, when in fact Sam died of heart attack while making love to his girlfriend. In 4321, names are changed but is more biographical than fiction, and now again in clearly autobiographical Bloodbath Nation, Paul's father is reincarnated as a hero replacing my father Irving Auster as the electronic wiz who worked for Tom Edison, founded the family radio tv appliance business, and supported his brothers. To dramatize the long term effect of gun violence on our family from my grandmother's 1919 murder of my grandfather after he withdrew their last $4000 to buy gifts for his girlfriend he mis-characterizes our family as "ruined, troubled, haunted". My gentle hard working talented loving and much loved father was the only witness and is 180 mis-characterized as violent tempered and full of rage because of the murder experience. To the contrary, all of the Auster family is relatively normal, happy, and successful, except perhaps Paul himself, or not, if story is fabricated for literary effect but clearly presented as autobiographical, making the premise of this otherwise well intentioned book a lie. All of my family is affected and will back up facts of Paul's misuse and abuse of family history but there is a more important issue of general principle against "bending the rules of story telling and blurring the line between fiction and autobiography" Please let me know how to report this, my honest well intentioned posts were rejected as "vandalism". Jimauster (talk) 15:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Paul_Auster&oldid=1194778630"