Talk:Mrs Dalloway

Joyce
I have just read Woolf's 1925 essay 'Modern Fiction', where she praises Ulysses as a representation of 'life' far better than that commonly depicted in realist novels. The comment in the introduction suggesting that she did not rate Ulysses would at least need a reference, I think. 86.143.138.203 (talk) 18:46, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * And Tom, great Tom, thinks this on a par with War & Peace! If this means T.S. (Tom) Eliot, it ought to be specified. Valetude (talk) 23:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:LGBT literature?
Can someone please explain the sense in which this belongs. Yes, the author was a lesbian gay (or bi, depending on one's construction of these words), but that clearly doesn't suffice to put the work in that category any more than a random Patricia Highsmith novel. I don't know the work, I know it only from the film The Hours, but I don't remember any explicitly gay themes. At a quick look, the other works in the category have explicitly gay themes (except The Importance of Being Earnest, about which I have the same issue, only with more confidence, since I know the play well.

Is this category well-defined? And if so what are the criteria for including this novel? -- Jmabel | Talk 21:01, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * The main character is pretty much a closeted gay woman. 99.241.162.52 (talk) 07:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Clarissa, Doris, Septimus, Sally... the book is rich with gayness.~ZytheTalk to me! 00:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Themes
Clarissa's relationship with Sally, who like her has 'grown up' to be a matron, is the most explicit. It contrasts with the marital relationship which it is suggested is sexually cold and unemotional (she sleeps in a single bed in a room the critic Elaine Showalter has described as "tomblike").

However while Clarissa's sexual attraction to women is important perhaps it isn't enough to classify it as LGBT.

What then, would meet such requirements? Perhaps a taxonomy to determine such qualification? Keep in mind, contemporary literary analysis of both Virginia Woolf and her works might prove in disagreement with the idea of such disclusion. -Vinegartom 13:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The kiss that Sally and Clarissa share is a central moment in the novel as well as in Clarissa's life. Woolf is subtle about her narration and the exact nature of Clarissa's sexual preferences are unclear, but her attraction to Sally is pivotal (compared to her marriage to Richard, with structured comfort but a single bed). That alone should qualify the novel as LGBT. Jostling grievances 16:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

The "themes" section in general seems somewhat superficial. The section "Mental illness," for instance, suggests the novel is a kind of Dickensonian social consciousness novel, which while possibly present on a certain level, just isn't at the novel's heart. The thematic discussion present here is more a catalog of dynamics and elements of character and narrative than a serious analytical discussion. If it cannot be fixed (I myself don't have the time), I suggest that the section be deleted or at the very least re-framed.Brendan 10:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bclogston041 (talk • contribs)

Requested move
Shouldn't Mrs. Dalloway redirect to Mrs Dalloway (without the period), instead of the other way around? This is an English novel, written by an English author, and it was originally published without the period. I would change the redirect myself, but don't know how. 203.173.35.197 06:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. In case anyone's in doubt, here's the original cover, as published by Hogarth Press back in the 20s (I want one...). Convention seems to indicate that moving it is, in fact, the thing to do. Cantara 07:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support: if information provided above is correct. Tutmosis 22:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) Seen this already? 07:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm going to go ahead and be bold, moving this back to "Mrs. Dalloway", with the period. Even though the original title may not have contained the period, the vast majority of references to the title, in both America and England, are with the period, and the commonly-accepted (and encyclopedic) method would be with the period. However, I'll add in a footnote noting the original spelling of the novel's title without the period. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 03:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Parable1991, would you mind clarifying why you reverted this move? I've gone ahead and moved it back, pending an explanation from you. (See my comment above for why I believe the article should be located at Mrs. Dalloway.) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note? ) 01:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Somebody move this back please! English practice is to drop the period in titles Mr Mrs Dr etc. -- as evidenced by original title. (If you see it in an American or Canadian reference with the period, that's only because the editor of the book in question is following American style conventions for their own book; Wikipedia doesn't have such a style.)Thanks!--Ibis3 04:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I will clarify my move and as I have moved it back. Regardless of how it is published now, it is necessary to use the original title. This shows in Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Despite me being English, I prefer the full stop, although I cannot argue with what the author intended and neither can you. Besides, it is still also published without the full stop in the U.K..

It seems that nobody has questioned this point in 14 years, but here I am: the basic claim that the "original title" had no period seems to me incorrect. Yes, the period isn't rendered in the hand-lettering on the dust jacket of the first edition... but under that dust jacket, both the title page and the hardbound spine do contain the period — as does the text of the book whenever the word "Mrs." appears (as in the first sentence). (As, indeed, does Woolf's manuscript.) This all indicates pretty clearly that the "original title" does in fact include the period, and its omission on the jacket is just a graphic liberty taken by Vanessa Bell. The article title ought to be changed. Aeiouweiou (talk) 04:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Not stream of consciousness
A stream-of-consciousness narrative implies a single protagonist, and this doesnt apply to Mrs Dalloway.

Dictionary definitions concerning stream-of-consciousness narrative describe it merely as a literary technique with the thoughts of characters being espoused, as does the Wikipedia entry for stream of consciousness. The only reference found citing individual as a requirement is the psychology definition for stream-of-consciousness. Therefore above statement is not applicable. -Vinegartom 12:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

This section needs citations.--Kbrewer36 (talk) 20:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Mrs vs. Mrs.?
I think the note about the period is interesting. If there are sources that can be used to expand on it, I think it's worth having a section devoted to it. Is there any particular reason for its initial lack of a period? -Midnightdreary 18:07, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Often but not always in British English, the full stop will be omitted from the abbreviation. Reginmund 20:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mrs Dalloway1.jpg
Image:Mrs Dalloway1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

new changes (april 2008)
I made a whole load of changes to the page just now.

I was kind of shocked that the thing was only two sections long. Now there are a lot of sections, but they could all use expanding.

I haven't overhauled a page before, so it's probably worth someone scanning over and fixing things up.

--Brendan 99.241.162.52 (talk) 06:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

And I've just changed Clarissa Dalloway's age from fifty-two to fifty-one. Someone who has "just broken into their fifty-second year" is only fifty-one and will not be fifty-two until her next birthday.Cliff (talk) 19:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 00:34, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

How old is Mrs. Dalloway?
This might be a trivial point but, bear with me.

The article says "Clarissa Dalloway is the 51-year-old[3] protagonist of the novel." Footnote 3 refers to a sentence in the book that says "She had just broken into her fifty-second year." Depending on how we interpret "broken into" I would think that means that she has just turned 51 years old and is now starting on her 52nd year. On the day of our first birthday, we have finished one year and are beginning our second year. We say on his first birthday that a child is one year old and we continue to say that until his second birthday. Only then is he two years old.

Do others agree, or is my understanding not common usage and/or not what Woolf had in mind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alan Meyer (talk • contribs) 20:17, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm 57 the best way to get to know about you and me

KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT FROM YOU CAN YOU SEND ME A LITTLE MORE ABOUT YOU

Jdtripp699 (talk) 04:28, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mrs Dalloway. 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/20130807202747/http://modernism.research.yale.edu/wiki/index.php/%22Mr._Bennett_and_Mrs._Brown%22 to http://modernism.research.yale.edu/wiki/index.php/%22Mr._Bennett_and_Mrs._Brown%22

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) 12:44, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Which novel?
The Hogarth Press, run by her and her husband Leonard, had to turn down the chance to publish the novel in 1919 because of the obscenity law in England...
 * Not quite clear whether this refers to Ulysses or Mrs Dalloway. Could you clarify? Valetude (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

ASMR
Austrian writer Clemens J. Setz suggests that a passage from the novel Mrs Dalloway authored by Virginia Woolf and published in 1925, describes something distinctly comparable. In the passage from Mrs Dalloway cited by Setz, a nursemaid speaks to the man who is her patient "deeply, softly, like a mellow organ, but with a roughness in her voice like a grasshopper's, which rasped his spine deliciously and sent running up into his brain waves of sound".

According to Setz, this citation generally alludes to the effectiveness of the human voice and soft or whispered vocal sounds specifically as a trigger of ASMR for many of those who experience it, as demonstrated by the responsive comments posted to YouTube videos that depict someone speaking softly or whispering, typically directly to the camera. Lmharding (talk) 00:07, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Essay?
This feels more like an essay than an encyclopedic article, I've added a template message about it but I don't know think I can help improve it. Ianstagram (talk) 22:06, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Publication date question
In February 2024, User:Ficaia marked the publication date included in the article's lede with the dubious template, and gave the reason as "Seems to have been published in 1922".  I'm starting a discussion here. I don't claim to be an expert on this novel, but I did a bit of research and came to the conclusion that the 14 May 1925 publication date is accurate (citations below). The book The Mrs. Dalloway Reader says that Woolf began writing Mrs Dalloway in the summer of 1922, and finished it in late autumn 1924. Another book, Virginia Woolf, A-Z states explicitly on page 173 that "Mrs. Dalloway was published in Britain by the Hogarth Press on May 14, 1925 with a dust jacket designed by Vanessa Bell, and in the United States by Harcourt, Brace & Company on the same day with the same dust jacket." Page 172 of the same book states: "In the fall of 1922, the short story 'Mrs. Dalloway in Bond Street' ... 'branched into a book' and Woolf began to think of the story as the first chapter of her new novel." I found several other books that support the claim that the novel was first published in 1925, but hopefully the above sources are sufficient. Finally, a search of the OCLC database for author = Woolf, Virginia, title = Mrs. Dalloway, type=book, and date range from 1920-1925 found a manuscript in microform of Mrs. Dalloway dated 1923-1924, but all published books in that range show only 1925 as the publication date. Ficaia: you didn't supply any sources to support your claim, but do you agree that the above is enough to remove the "dubious" template from the lede? If so, I will add both of these citations to the article. Thanks. NOLA1982 (talk) 02:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Yep, thanks for clearing this up. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:27, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick reply. NOLA1982 (talk) 14:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

NOLA1982 (talk) 02:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)