Talk:Agnar Mykle

A regular Reclusive
I thought it was Sousa, I said to myself, just read the article on Mykle. Well written, stringent and enlightening. That the writer for the latter part of his life became a reclusive, is quite right. How did norwegian public life react? For the first part of Mykles life the article goes public. Why did'nt Mykles old friends in the gouvernment party (Labour) help him out in the second? The truth is that Mykle was well and thoroughly ostracized. Not to mention this shrouds otherwise good presentation into some sort of remote reclusivness, only accssible for even more aesthetic study, very unlike the writer himself. Around 1960 Mykle fired a whole page broadside in Dagbladet against the norwegian publishers, especially his own, and from then on he was "mad Mykle" in that business. When he died thirty years later in 1994, very few had seen the writer around, not even his upcoming biographer, a well known publisher, who seven yeras earlier even had written his first book on the subject and had dwelt in the same city.Writers may become reclusive, articles should not.Eric Haig 13:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Eric is right For most of the time it was Sousa. However the whole sentence "His favourite composer of marches was Kenneth Alford..." is mis-leading and of no importance. Mykles favourite composer changed many times through his life. For an author it should be more relevant to know his favourite authors. Anders Heger

"He was very intelligent ..."
Mykle is an important writer, both for his literary work and for the debates caused by his novels in the 1950s and 1960s (and even later on). He deserves a better and longer wiki entry than the current version. – I did a bit of cleaning, and decided in the process to take out the sentence "He was very intelligent and learned how to read before he began school". That sentence is too empty, without any further pointers or links or related substantiation. Doesn't everyone learn how to read before beginning school? And isn't every writer "very intelligent"? Slavatrudu 08:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The power of punctuation
I quite like the sentence <>, as I support all efforts, including those of incorrect (absence of) punctuation with unintended side effects, that help us understand our longing for "closeness to Norwegian literature". So let's not edit that one. Slavatrudu 10:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

This is the most idiotic section of the entry. Baseless, uncited opinions have no place here.

Rubicon
I am puzzled by the phrase "originally thought of as a follow up on the previous two." Rubicon is quite clearly a sequel to these, although for reasons which I have never understood, Ask Burlefot is renamed Valemon Gristvâg. On the back cover of my Norwegian version, there is an extract from a letter from Mykle to the publisher which purports to explain the change, ending "Ask er død, - leve Valemon!" ("Ask is dead, - long live Valemon!") but I am afraid Mykle's reasoning is unclear to me. I'd value elucidation from fellow Wikipedians. User:PDAWSON3 —Preceding comment was added at 22:34, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Agnar Mykle. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090112142953/http://www.mic.no/nmi.nsf/doc/art2006053014324744868390 to http://mic.no/nmi.nsf/doc/art2006053014324744868390

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:40, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Ted Nelson
I ran into a video that Ted Nelson made about meeting Agnar Mykle when Ted was 12 and later when Angar came to the US. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjNgn18u0WM&t=57s

There does not seem to be anything controversial in what Ted says about Agnar. I am aware that it is not up to the standards Wikipedia usually applies, but there is a request to add to the article.

Any advice? Keith Henson (talk) 22:50, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

It has been a month and no comments. Perhaps I should take this to the teahouse. Keith Henson (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand the relevance of this video to this article. I'm sure Agnar Mykle has met many people in his life so simply stating that Mykle has met Ted Nelson adds nothing to this article. Additionally, biased, self published sources should be fact checked which in this case seems impossible WP:NOTRELIABLE. Also, note that I've removed biased and irrelevant information from this article before which also only cited this video as source. SemperVinco (talk) 01:17, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


 * There are many people (including me) who can verify that it is Ted Nelson in the video. If you watch the video and conclude it would be of no interest to someone reading the article, I won't argue with you.  Keith Henson (talk) 00:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't doubt that it is Nelson in the video, but rather the claims he makes about Mykle (including ever meeting him). But as you say, even if there were more reliable sources about their acquaintance, I still don't think it would be very relevant to the article. SemperVinco (talk) 14:40, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Of all the people in the world whom one could or would lie about meeting, why would Ted Nelson make up a story of meeting with a writer whom hardly anyone in the U.S. has given a thought to in over 50 years? Pascalulu88 (talk) 21:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)