Talk:Dime novel

Untitled
I seem to remember from my studies in American history that penny dreadfuls here were nasty letters sent through the mail at the payment (one penny) of the recipient. Since the recipient paid for the insult, they were especially frustrating. I'm still looking for a web reference for this. --Davidstrauss 15:34, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I personally seriously wonder why 'penny dreadful' redirects to 'Dime novel', instead of the other way around... last time I checked the first penny dreadfuls in the UK both preceded dime novels in the US by a few decades AND the penny dreadfuls were far more popular in the UK than dime novels ever were. But the reason for that is probably the same as the reason why half the articles on the english language wiki describe only the situation as it is in the US without stating such. (my own personal opinion for why that is would be 'because unlike Canadians, Brits and non-first language anglophones, contributors from the US are much less likely to realise that there's a world outside the US and that things here are different from there') Robrecht 00:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Both "Story paper" and "Dime novel" should be merged into one big article, "Penny dreadful", which would cover both subjects. Ashibaka tock 03:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see that it matters much which directs to which, but I do think that all three topics you mention are deserving of their own article. "Penny dreadful" has a specific meaning in the UK, but not in the US, and the reverse is true of "dime novels" here. And neither of them resemble storypapers, even though both drew on the material printed in those publications. The Storypaper entry deals almost exclusively with the British papers and from what I read there, there are certainly differences between the Uk and US versions. I'd like to see the Storypaper article enlarged for that reason, not for any nationalism. For all I know, each country in the world had its own version of storypapers, but the topic is tough to research. I also am curious about the source for the comment that penny dreadfuls were more popular than dime novels ever were. I can't dispute it as I don't have any figures, but dime novels were phenomenonly popular over the course of their entire history. I know penny dreadfuls were likewise widely bought and read. But I don't think it's a contest as to which was "more popular." And by the way, in my collection I have runs of several later English titles, such as Dick Turpin Library, New Black Bess Library, Spring Heel'd Jack, Claude Duval and Sexton Blake.Double-L tock 04:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Blood and Thunders
PBS American Experience on Kit Carson says (8 'graphs above end of "Scene Four")
 * in 1849, came a new literary hero, Kit Carson: The Prince of the Gold Hunters -- a giant of a man who referred to Indians as "redskins," "critters" and "varmints," and cheerfully slaughtered them by the dozen.
 * Written by an East Coast hack who claimed it had been "founded on actual facts," the book was a smash hit. Almost overnight, it became the template for a brand new genre of adventure stories -- hair-raising, action-packed and set in the uncharted wilds of the far West. Americans called them "blood and thunders."

Seems to me i recall from the visual that accompanied these words a display of actual publications, at least one with the title "Blood and Thunder". --Jerzy•t 08:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The "resurgence of the dime novel format".
I have added a dispute tag to the section that claims that there is a resurgence of the dime novel. The opening sentence, "2010 saw the resurgence of the dime novel format" is not supported by refs, runs contrary to the rest of the article, and seems like a puff piece for the e-book industry. I removed this section but it was re-added by a contributor whose only edits concern this section. Comments appreciated. Thanks.--Dmol (talk) 22:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Although I am sympathetic to including the resurgence section, Dmol is right that, to be included, the resurgence needs to be supported by some reliable 3rd party references other than the companies puffing their product. Plazak (talk) 01:20, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the solution is to remove the links? If the contributor really thinks that the addition of the "resurgence" is important to study of the genre, then that is the important information, not the links. Although I had never heard of any "resurgence" ouside of this article, so it smacks of original research to me. Chris La Mantia (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Also worthy of note is that the contributor, jnthibeault, recently posted on twithelp.me: "Starting the PR machine for Dime Novel Publishing. Got any suggestions for who to contact? We've got a list but personal intros would help! Asked by: jnthibeault Tue, 13 Apr 2010" (see http://twithelp.me/profile/jnthibeault/) Chris La Mantia (talk) 06:21, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Third party validation is provided of this "resurrgence:" http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2010-09-30-Bookap30_ST_N.htm as well as the launch by Amazon of Amazon Singles, focused on serialized fiction --jnthibeault (talk) 7:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In a quick scan of the USA Today link referred to above, I did not see where it even contains the phrase "dime novel". Instead, it compares the current serialized digital fiction format to the magazine-serialed novels by 19th-sectury novelists such as Dickens, which is very different from the dime novel format. Plazak (talk) 18:16, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Size matters
Is the page size right? Because I'm pretty sure single pages aren't 4" high! Or is that supposed to be 4" wide? TREKphiler  any time you're ready, Uhura  05:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Dime store novel
Dime store novel redirects here, but the article doesn't mention the phrase dime store at all. WhiteDragon (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

History section
Re last paragraph: While Alexis de Tocqueville’s prescient predictions are, indeed, fascinating, this last para to me reads likes someone’s school thesis shoe-horned into a topic where it’s not truly relevant to the actual topic (dime novels). The tone and POV also are a departure from everything in the preceding (and following) paras. It seems to me this para could be deleted without any loss of info actually germane to dime novels. Or, at best, if it’s left in, it should be greatly cut down. Anyone else agree? I’d rather not edit this without consensus. Opinions anyone? Cynthisa (talk) 20:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)