Talk:Ninety-Three

Untitled
I would like to know why you keep removing the objectivist view of the novel. I myself do not neccesarily agree with the objectivist point of view nevertheless I think they are established enough to be inmcluded in this article. Ayn Rand wrote more on this novel than anyone else so her views should be included. 93 is a fairly rare book and the onjectivist site is one of the only ones that gives an in depth study of the novel. I dont hink theres any good reason that at the very least the link should remain in the article. For the time being I'm reverting my edit. If you can give me a good reason why the objectivist view should be ignored then maybe I'll reconsider.--Gary123 17:32, 15 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, first of all it overbalances the article; it makes it look as though Ayn Rand's burblings are the subject, the novel being just a vehicle. Secondly, you haven't just added material about Rand &mdash; you've returned the awful mess of a links section (capitalised header, messy list).  If you want to add material, do so (though I think that there should be more about the actual subject before the addition of secondary material about a writer whom few outside North America have heard of), but don't mess up the other edits in doing so. Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 18:00, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

The reason I think that the link is important is because its one fo the only sites on the internet that gives a good depth of information about a fairly unknown novel. From the objectivist view website you get background historical information, a plot summary and an analysis.--Gary123 22:16, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

From a European point of view it is an opinion about a very famous novel by a totally obscure writer. I have been familiar with 93 for more than 30 years (I have read it when I was 14); I have never heard about Raynd before I became interested in Wikipedia and read the bio of Jimbo Wales. Living in Europe, I have never heard Ayn Rand mentioned, let alone taken seriously. --Georgius (talk) 19:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Why dose it say Hugo was attacked for stating that the Bretons where "savages" he never directly calls them savvages in the novel he just calls one of them a "savage" and that guy is in a rage when he's called it he dose not directly state it about all the Bretons so I think someone should remove that line.


 * Yes he does say that, in a famous rant:


 * Si l'on veut comprendre la Vendée, qu'on se figure cet antagonisme, d'un côté la révolution française, de l'autre le paysan breton. En face de ces évènements incomparables, menace immense de tous les bienfaits à la fois, accès de colère de la civilisation, excès du progrès furieux, amélioration, émesurée et inintelligible, qu'on place ce sauvage grave et singulier, cet homme à l'œil clair et aux longs cheveux, vivant de lait et de châtaignes, borné à son toit de chaume, à sa haie et à son fossé, distinguant chaque hameau du voisinage au son de la cloche, ne se servant de l'eau que pour boire, ayant sur le dos une veste de cuir avec des arabesques de soie, inculte et brodé, tatouant ses habits, comme ses ancêtres les celtes avaient tatoué leurs visages, respectant son maître dans son bourreau, Parlant une langue morte, ce qui est faire habiter une tombe à sa pensée, piquant ses bœufs, aiguisant sa faulx, sarclant son blé noir, pétrissant sa galette de sarrasin, vénérant sa charrue d'abord, sa grand'mère ensuite, croyant à la sainte Vierge et à la Dame blanche, dévot à l'autel et aussi à la haute pierre mystérieuse debout au milieu de la lande, laboureur dans la plaine, pêcheur sur la côte, braconnier dans le hallier, aimant ses rois, ses seigneurs, ses prêtres, ses poux: pensif, immobile souvent des heures entières sur la grande grève déserte, sombre écouteur de la mer.


 * Charming, n'est pas? Paul B (talk) 17:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Still, out of the four paragraphs under Reception - only the last one has a citation. Sources for the opinions in the other three paragraphs would be nice.

Josef and the weasel(-word)
"is believed to have been a hero of Josef Stalin": believed by whom? Any citation on this? -- Jmabel | Talk 00:58, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Stalin and 93 "Ironically, it is said that one of the characters in Ninety-Three, the ex-priest Cimourdain, inspired what was to become one of the most brutal champions of terror in history, Josef Stalin."

http://ios.org/showcontent.aspx?ct=396&h=53 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A223048 &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gary123 (talk • contribs) 12 Feb 2006.


 * These are all a bit vague and secondary (or tertiary). The first seems the best of the lot. It's enough that I'll certainly assume it is true, but I'd still love to see a better citation. In any case, we should be clear that this was Stalin in his youth when he was studying for the priesthood. - Jmabel | Talk 22:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 07:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 01:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)