Talk:Looking Backward

Strikes
"During the Great Strikes of 1877, Eugene V. Debs" How can he be influenced by the book which was published in 1888? 84.129.141.54 (talk) 21:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Love story
The summary makesno mention of the device used: a love story. 09:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

It's just a great part of our life Lamea Islam (talk) 02:43, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Cut material
The most recent edit cut out the following; "It was written in reaction to the disillusionment with an increasingly competitive and industrial society. Looking Backward sold more than 1 million copies. His work known as "nationalism" inspired the formation of more than 160 Nationalist clubs to propagate his ideas.  + Looking Backward: 2000-1887 is a utopian novel by Edward Bellamy, a lawyer and writer from western Massachusetts, and was first published in 1888. According to Erich Fromm, Looking Backward is "one of the most remarkable books ever published in America." "

i THINK THIS SHOULD LARGELY OR WHOLLY BE RE-INSTATED. Comments? Kdammers (talk) 04:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * "It was written in reaction to the disillusionment with an increasingly competitive and industrial society."
 * This is an unsupported and unreferenced claim.


 * "Looking Backward sold more than 1 million copies. His work known as "nationalism" inspired the formation of more than 160 Nationalist clubs to propagate his ideas."
 * This is now covered with additional detail, referenced, and with an explanation of what 'Nationalism' is, in the second paragraph.--Editor2020 (talk) 15:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There is a considerable distortion in the difference between "several" and "more than 160" Bellamy Clubs. The intro to the 2000 Signet edition notes 'more than 162 Bellamy Clubs in the States alone'; I've restored that number as a better approximation to reality than 'several'. Removing it did not add 'additional detail'. Twang (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

What is this?? Lamea Islam (talk) 02:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Last Paragraph of synopsis
I tried fixing it, but I'm seriously considering deleting the whole thing. It reads more like original research (or at least unsourced analysis) than a synopsis. I'll wait a bit and see if any others can argue for keeping it (though it still needs some revision).Rabidwolfe (talk) 06:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Credits
The previous description of the compensation for labor stated that workers in the system were paid according to their production and compared the system to the Soviet Union. This is dead wrong. Salaries are equal in Bellamy's system. The difference in compensation is in the number of hours worked. Those with more difficult or unpleasant jobs work less hours. In any event, the compensation is the same.

RED DAVE (talk) 18:23, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

NOT a science fiction work
The guy just falls asleep and wakes up in the future.

208.87.248.162 (talk) 01:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

The guy just falls asleep and wake up in the future Lamea Islam (talk) 02:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Or maybe it is! It's nice that the above statements do not deny Bellamy's book as fiction. Is it science, and a STEM partner? NYTimes says (https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/19/books/the-poet-as-efficiency-expert.html) that the book "foresaw a Boston made perfect by technological innovation." Is it also utopian? Another NYT item (https://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/05/arts/paradise-lost-can-mankind-live-without-its-utopias.html) says so. Orwell's 1984 could have been titled 1984-1948 Looking Backward: the year 1984 was just a transposing of the last two digits of the year, 1948, when it was conceived. Nuts240 (talk) 03:04, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Research
Bellamy's research deserves attention, for instance his visiting of Mormon communities in Utah and visiting with Lorenzo Snow. Thmazing (talk) 22:31, 19 November 2013 (UTC)