Talk:Sense and Sensibility

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ericketts7184. Peer reviewers: Uatkins.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
The information that was added on 12 July 2005 is copied from context and Summary

Copyright violation
Substantial portions of this article, including the sections titled Context, Plot summary, and Literary significance & criticism, were copied directly from SparkNotes: Sense and Sensibility: Context and SparkNotes: Sense and Sensibility: Summary. I have removed these sections from the article. We cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Plmoknijb 10:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

New plot summary
I've added a new Plot Summary. It's not copied from anywhere :) -- Alnaschar 11:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Relationship of girls to elderly owner of Norwood
The relationship of the girls to the elderly owner of Norwood may not be correctly presented in the article. Chapter One of the text seems to say the elderly Dashwood is being cared for a niece/nephew, the parents of the three girls. The Wikipedia article states that the three girls are the daughters of the elderly Dashwood's 2nd wife. Yet the girls' father receives an inheritance from Dashwood and dies shortly after Dashwood does, according to the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.192.125 (talk) 20:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Viewpoints
Deleted text:
 * ... the two sisters may have been loosely based on the author and her beloved elder sister Cassandra, with Austen casting Cassandra as the restrained and well-judging sister and herself as the emotional one. Austen clearly intended to vindicate Elinor's sense and self-restraint, and on the simplest level, the novel may be read as a parody of the full-blown romanticism and sensibility that was fashionable around the 1790s.  Yet ...

May have been? Clearly intended? May be read as? Whose ideas are these?

The only part of the above which is common knowledge is the idea that Elinor represents "sense", i.e., restraint; while Marianne represents "sensibility", i.e., emotionalism.

Everyone knows that in this novel the title refers to the character traits of its two main characters, as in the "pride" of the rich man and the "prejudice" of Lizzy in Pride and Prejudice. --Uncle Ed (talk) 12:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Woeful editing
WHOA! --drop your doughnut on the keyboard and this is what happens; my little (simple) edit snagged the previous two (very worthy) edits and aims to Undo them --not my intent! I shall try to set all right again, but if I cannot then please help. --Jbeans 01:05 21 Feb 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 06:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Re Link formatting
Re link formatting; Elinor Dashwood is currently the only one of the "Characters" who is reported as a Main article, and therefore with a separate page; all which justifies internal link formatting, which I added. Otherwise, until another character, e.g., Marianne Dashwood, is developed as a main article or separate page status, I move that we do not provide link formatting that has no place to go.

Finally, regarding which additional characters to develop further, I recommend that Marianne and possibly Willoughby are it; IMO, Colonel Brandon and Edward Ferrars are below the short list.--Jbeans (talk) 06:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't Colonel Brandon be on a par with Willoughby, since the two characters seem to have a complementary relationship? CiudadanoGlobal (talk) 10:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

USD?
I really don't see the point in adding a "translation" into 2007 US dollars for monetary amounts in this article. I think the magnitude of the sums involved is clearly described by comparison with JAs annual income. Most readers of this article presumably do not use US dollars routinely anyway (I am guessing, but surely more than 50% of English Wikipedia readers are outside the US) so it is meaningless to them. Rachel Pearce (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has established standards for providing monetary equivalents in articles, and generally the USD is considered pretty typical considering its status as the world's primary reserve currency (although the Euro is gaining considerable traction of late). It's probably a judgment call when it comes to providing historical equivalents. In this case, when I was reading the original work, I found myself wondering just how much, say, 50,000 pounds (in 1811) was in today's terms. The story makes a lot more sense when one realizes that somebody *could* retire on the *equivalent* of 5,000,000 dollars in 2007 (the most current year for which full conversion data exists). Also, surprisingly enough, even though a lot of countries have English as their primary language, most English speakers (I believe around 60%) worldwide are American; in any case, as previously mentioned, the US dollar is understood globally, with only the Euro coming in a still distant second. If no one has any serious objections, I will put back the equivalents; please let me know whether you have any suggestions for a preferred format. (This might be a good area for some Wiki template development.) CiudadanoGlobal (talk) 10:39, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia may well have standards about monetary equivalents IF they are given, but does it mandate monetary equivalents even in articles about works of fiction? The part where you added UDS equivalents was the discussion of publication, and nothing to do with the plot. I still think the comparison with her annual income is sufficient. BTW I think your figure for the percentage of English speakers worldwide who are from the US is either wrong or it is "English as a first language" speakers ("English mother tongue"). English speakers as a second or other language are also likely to refer to English Wikipedia. Rachel Pearce (talk) 11:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * When comparing countries in which monolingual English speakers reside, USA is about 60% of that. When you consider what used to be the British Empire and factor in India (130m English speakers) and countries which have a huge population of which a proportion speak English (China / Hong Kong have 82m English speakers) it's not 60% any more, but it's still significant. 49.180.70.119 (talk) 12:59, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Marianne
Shouldn't Marianne have her own page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Auchick (talk • contribs) 03:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC) Actually I see someone has already commented on this above. Auchick (talk) 03:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Age of Characters
In film, the two main sisters appear to be in their twenties or early thirties. But in the book, I think Elinor was 19 and Marianne 16 or 17. I wonder why everyone was so eager for Willoughby to marry Marianne, if she was so young. --Uncle Ed (talk) 02:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure that they are eager for her to marry him, its just expected by the way Willoughby has acted towards her and with her that have lead them to expect them to be married. Also women tended to marry much earlier than currently. Auchick (talk) 11:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I5 would be concidered very proper age for marriage at that time. In Pride and Prejudice it is mentioned that 23 is an old maid. The sooner the better was the general thinking of the time, especially as the girls had no dowries and were living in poverty, as the charity of Sir John. their only chances of improving their circumstances was a marriage to a wealthy man. Wiloughby was very wealthy except for when he was temporarily disinherited.

Set between 1792 and 1797
Where in Sense and Sensibility itself is this stated? Or has this date range been hypothesised by Deirdre Le Fay? If the latter, what is her evidence? 86.154.217.179 (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Jane Austen's World blog by Vic Stanton
The blog Jane Austen's World is cited twice in this article. The blog is written by Vic Stanton who holds copyright on all or parts of it. It has sources, but the sole author does not have editors looking over the work. Generally blogs are not allowed as references for Wikipedia. Are there good reasons to accept this one? Is there no book that publishes the information on currency values then and now? In the main Jane Austen article one or two blogs are now cited, but who knows how long that will stand. I left the blog, and filled out the citation. --Prairieplant (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Bibliography for Further Additions to the Page
Hello - I am interested in adding to this page, especially on the development of the novel, publication history, and critical views. Below is a tentative bibliography.

Bibliography for Sense and Sensibility Article

Anderson, Kathleen and Jordan Kidd. "Mrs. Jennings and Mrs. Palmer: The Path to Female Self-Determination in Austen's Sense and Sensibility." Persuasions, no. 30, 2008, pp. 135-148.

Armstrong, Isobel. Sense and Sensibility, Norton Critical Edition, edited by Claudia L. Johnson, W.W. Norton and Company, 2002, 363-373.

Butler, Marilyn. Jane Austen and the War of Ideas. Oxford UP, 1975.

Chamberlain, Shannon. "John Willoughby, Luxury Good: Sense and Sensibility's Economic Curriculum." Persuasions, no. 34, 2012, pp. 157-163.

"Early Views." Sense and Sensibility, Norton Critical Edition, edited by Claudia L. Johnson, W.W. Norton and Company, 2002, 313-324.

Favret, Mary. Romantic Correspondence: Women, Politics, and the Fiction of Letters. Cambridge UP, 1993.

Fergus, Jan. Jane Austen: A Literary Life. St. Martin's Press, 1991.

Johnson, Claudia L. Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the Novel. U of Chicago P, 1988.

Lynch, Deirdre Shaun. The Economy of Character: Novels, Market Culture, and the Business of Inner Meaning. U of Chicago P, 1998.

O'Rourke, James. "What Never Happened: Social Amnesia in Sense and Sensibility." Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, vol. 54, no. 4, Autumn 2014, pp. 773-791.

Poovey, Mary. The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer: Ideology as Style in the Works of Mary Wollstonecraft, Mary Shelley and Jane Austen. U of Chicago P, 1984.

Rowland, Susan. "The 'Real Work': Ecocritical Alchemy and Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility." Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, vol. 20, no. 2, 2013, pp. 318-322.

Ruoff, Gene. Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility. Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.

Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. Tendencies. Duke UP, 1993.

Williams, Raymond. "Sensibility." Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Oxford UP, 1983, pp. 280-283.

Ericketts7184 (talk) 16:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)