Talk:Ian McEwan

External link
I feel the external link My Favorite Books by Ian McEwan http://www.metlive.szm.com/ime.htm is not very good and thus should be removed. It has a few sentences describing McEwan, lists some praise and list his novels. Nothing of interest or not already addressed in the wikipedia article. Skinnyweed 00:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Link removed. Skinnyweed 03:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Masterpiece
It says

"His 1997 novel, Enduring Love, about a person with de Clerambault's syndrome, is regarded by many as a masterpiece, though Atonement has received equally high acclaim."

but isn't Atonement regarded as his masterpiece? Skinnyweed 03:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, this depends on who you speak too. Generally, if you read a newspaper review of an Ian McEwan novel, the journalist/critic will say that CRITICS feel that Enduring Love is his greatest work, while PEOPLE (in general) would say Atonement is his greatest work. In a way, that isn't all that wrong, since McEwan himself said that Atonement was the one novel which received such a huge response from so many people. I like to think of Enduring Love as the critics' novel, and Atonement as the people's novel. Personally, I feel they both are masterpieces, although I generally feel his other novels (like Black Dogs or The Child in Time) are neglected, or overshadowed.


 * Anyway, back to the point, this sentence needs citation. That's it. You can put a little a bit about Atonement there too (I see someone has). Just remember: citation.


 * Cheers!
 * Pristine 04:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Am I the only one who doesn't like Saturday?
Don't get me wrong! I think Ian McEwan is a great writer, and I've enjoyed reading some of his other books. I thought Atonement was a masterpiece, and I also enjoyed The Cement Garden and Black Dogs. The Comfort of Strangers was okay, but I didn't like the ending. But Saturday just flat out sucked! I thought the introspection about going into Iraq was interesting, but other than that the book sucked due to the miniscule action and dialouge. I simply cannot understand why it got so much praise. I suppose it's all a matter of taste, but still I barely got through the first half of the book and finally gave up. I'll try reading Amsterdam to see if that's any better.

I remember Robert Smith once saying that every rock band has at least one bad album. I suppose Saturday is also living proof that every author has at least one bad novel. No offense, Ian. I still think you're a great writer, but I for one expect something better in the future.

64.26.116.205 13:31, 1 July 2006


 * No, you're not the only one. Of all the Ian McEwan novels I've read (more or less the second half them), Saturday ranks the lowest. Check out his official forum if you want to talk about his novels or other work with more people.Pristine 05:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought Saturday was offensively self congratulary, concieted, and just boring. I'm with Colm Tóibín on that one. I also tought Amerstdam was silly. Black Dogs however. Ceoil (talk) 00:35, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I think that Saturday was a great novel, unlike his earlier novels. I thought that The Cement Garden was good, but focused to much on childish impulses. His later novels, Atonement, Saturday and, to a lesser extent, Enduring Love focused more on adult impulses relative to childish ones. This created tension and made the novel better. It really is a difference of preference though; I'm not going to say that Saturday was better than his earlier novels, I simply think that McEwan is only getting better as time goes on. Zfjagann (talk) 12:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Naughty, naughty! You know that Wikipedia is not a forum for personal opinions. Too bad that there isn't a WikiForum related to Wiki articles and talk pages.173.61.94.121 (talk) 23:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)Hans Wurst

Last Two Novels Quote
It seems to me that the quote with which the first paragraph ends is out of place. Having read the cited article, it says nothing to prove that Saturday was disliked but critics, makes no meaningful reference to the quality of his other novels and does not mention racial stereotypes. I would suggest that, if such a source has a place, it would be to demonstrate that praise for Saturday was not universal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.252.66 (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright violation
http://www.biblio.com/authors/148/Ian_McEwan_Biography.html Is is that a mirror? Skinnyweed 23:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Nothing to worry about. At the bottom of the page it says "This biography is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article Ian McEwan." H. Carver 02:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Woolverstone Hall School
Eton? And I thought he went to Woolverstone Hall School a *state run* boarding school near Ipswich. It says here that he did go to Woolverstone, and makes no mention of Eton! They are very different places. Timtak 14:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I changed Eton to Woolverstone Hall School since he says in an interview that he went to a 'very unelite place' that existed in a country house. This is Woolverstone Hall School, not Eton. Timtak 14:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

saturday
The page for the novel 'saturday'has been vandalised and the author listed as chicken mcnuggets. I don't know what i'm doing on wikipedia but can someone who does put it right please. here's the link [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_(novel) ] just thought i'd flag it up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.179.60 (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * fixed GrahamHardy (talk) 15:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Spelling
In the "Personal life" section, is it "Sharpe" or "Sharp"?Lestrade (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

Missing info on plagiarism charge
From our article on Thomas Pynchon:

On December 6, 2006, Pynchon joined a campaign by many other major authors to clear Ian McEwan of plagiarism charges by sending a typed letter to his British publisher, which was published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper (Pynchon 2006).

If it's sufficiently notable for that article, the incident belongs here. If it's not real it should be removed from the Pynchon article. --71.174.168.124 (talk) 03:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Just arrived on this talk page for the exact same reason. Going to see if there's any sources around the 'net regarding the matter.  tomasz.  18:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarism II
I removed the sentence about plagiarism from Lucilla Andrews which was unsourced. The source seems to be The Daily Mail. It just seems like tittle-tattle to me. No connection, despite my username. Mcewan (talk) 21:39, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe the IP lifted it from the Atonement_(novel) article but didn't bother to bring the sources over here for some reason. No reason not to include (copy paste) it here. Christopher Connor (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah well, fair enough. I think it belongs there rather than here, however. Mcewan (talk) 23:13, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem
This article has been reverted by a bot to 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) 05:17, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

He's a modern day Shakespeare.
I'm kidding of course. I think this article seems very biased and needs to include some criticisms. I haven't met anyone that actually likes his work, and Enduring Love has some of the most pointless, most pretentious text in a book I've ever had to read. Thank you.92.18.221.102 (talk) 16:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Biased how? there's very little peacock language and no reviews of his work are mentioned. It talks factually about the prizes he has won and accusations of plagiarism. Span (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Amendment up for discussion: Deletion to protect the privacy of a non-public person (Penny Allen - former wife)
My change was withdrawn by the user "Theroadislong" with reference to a previous discussion. Thanks to Theroadislong, in retrospect, this seems to me to be quite sensible and appropriate.

Here is an extract from the revision history: Please discuss this large change on the talk page first ... the sections I deleted relate to a private non-public family dispute in connection with the divorce settlement and are therefore not relevant for Wikipedia encyclopedia. Furthermore, Mrs Penny Allen is a private person and by no means a prominent public figure, so her privacy must be protected. I also refer to the Wikipedia entry on Ian McEwan in the German Wiki, which also does not contain the comments I deleted. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not Yellow Press ...
 * curprev 19:41, 21 July 2020‎ Theroadislong talk contribs‎ 49,146 bytes +3,334‎  Reverted good faith edits by Deejott (talk):
 * curprev 19:05, 21 July 2020‎ Deejott talk contribs‎ 45,812 bytes -3,334‎  →‎Personal life:

Original text passage in the Personal Life section: ''McEwan has been married twice, first to Penny Allen, then later to Annalena McAfee, who was formerly the editor of The Guardian's Review section. He met the English undergraduate Allen in the 1970s, while both were at the University of East Anglia; she was divorced and had two daughters.[57][58] They married in 1982: "My first wife was very New Age. I tried to accommodate it", McEwan said in 2009.[57]  The couple divorced in 1995. Allen ended the marriage because she was frustrated by McEwan's "glitterati" associations, and the dissolution of the marriage was followed by a custody dispute over their two teenage sons.[59] Allen absconded to France in 1999 with them (accompanied by her new partner) after McEwan had gained sole custody, although the elder boy soon returned to his father to visit Botswana with him.[60] Following a Brittany court ruling that their other son should be returned to his father, McEwan gained an injunction at the High Court in London against his former wife in September of that year, preventing her from speaking about the case.[61]  During the hearing, the judge, Mr Justice Charles, ordered the ruling of Paul Clark, the judge at the custody hearing at Oxford County Court, to be read out. The judge at the Oxford hearing had referred to Allen's "vitriolic campaign" against her ex-husband, and also commented: "When thwarted by him [McEwan] or others she has not hesitated to make trouble - witness her 'press releases' in various articles in the press earlier this year [1999]."[62][63]''

''In October 2014, when he was giving a talk at the Cheltenham Literature Festival to publicise his new novel, The Children Act, Allen was reported as unexpectedly arriving to and asking in the question-and-answer session, "When are you going to lift the injunction you have on me and my partner?" Although McEwan recognized his ex-wife's presence, he did not directly respond, and she was escorted from the premises.[64][65]''

''McEwan was first married to journalist, astrologer and alternative practitioner Penny Allen. The marriage broke down, ending in divorce 1995. He had two sons with his first wife. In second marriage, he is married to journalist and writer Annalena McAfee who was formerly the editor of The Guardian's Review section. McEwan lives in London.'' --Deejott (talk) 17:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I hereby put my amendment up for discussion. My proposal is to delete the text passages concerned and replace them with the following shorter text:


 * If we have to go into this kind of thing, and I'd prefer if we didn't, as second choice rather than the marriage broke down ending in divorce 1995...lets say the marriage ended in 1995. Full stop. And then "He is currently married to..." Ceoil  (talk) 01:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks Ceoil, I shall insert this text: McEwan was first married to journalist, astrologer and alternative practitioner Penny Allen. The marriage endet in 1995. He had two sons with his first wife. He is currently married to journalist and writer Annalena McAfee who was formerly the editor of The Guardian's Review section. McEwan lives in London. --Deejott (talk) 14:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Strange edits
At time of writing, it looks like I've made a lot of edits to this article - but what is actually the case is it weirdly looked like someone had been at this article with a dictionary, replacing words and phrases with synonyms, whether necessary or not, and with no edit summary. Rather than revert and lose the useful edits, I felt it better to assume good faith and go through a clear diff, properly summarising the edits, so everything was clear. Effectively, though some edits remain, the article has been rolled back to the end of February. As all the edits I've made have full summary notes, I'd hope if any of them are subsequently changed that a proper edit summary is provided. H. Carver (talk) 03:22, 2 April 2021 (UTC)