Talk:The Gift of the Magi

Untitled
I'm no literary expert but I once read (probably in "The Book of Lists") that the "$1.87 - and 60c was in pennies" bit is easily explainable by the fact that at the time the story was written, two-cent pieces - while no longer in production - were still commonplace. As I'm not one to make this call, I'll wait to spot any discussion or find some proof before making any changes. --DrChainsaw77 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrChainsaw77 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The mathematician Martin Gardner mentions this explanation in The Unexpected Hanging (quote and discussion). I don't have the book to hand so I can't add a proper citation, but I'll update the article. Hajoma (talk) 20:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Is Della and Jim's flat a "one-room apartment opposite the elevated train"? Where does is it say so in the text? 62.194.97.180 (talk) 10:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Possible misquotation?
This article ends with a quotation from the conclusion of short story that includes: "The magi, as you know, were wise men – wonderfully wise men – who brought gifts to the new-born King of the Jews in the manger." In the Project Gutenberg version, the phrase "new-born King of the Jews" is not present--instead the word "Babe" is used. The term "Babe" is also in some older Google Books collections of short stories.

Which quotation is correct? Can someone determine this and correct if necessary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phycophile (talk • contribs) 12:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

What is comic about the irony? Wik says comic irony is humorous. What is humorous here? Is there a source for this assertion?211.225.33.95 (talk) 05:09, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

The moral of the story
The article says there is a moral point to the story about gift giving but fails to spell out the moral itself - expecting, I guess, that the moral is somehow self evident. It may be to some, but not to me and though I have my own ideas, I’d like to read about the interpretations of others, and whether or not there is any consensus on a deeper abstract moral to this story. Is it truly about the giving of tangible gifts or does it have a deeper moral, about the gift, within relationships, of oneself. Perhaps, intangible gifts should only be given if a limit is drawn before changing or relinquishing a part of oneself in order to please a loved one, as it ultimately sullies the greatest gift anyone has to give them: their own unique selves. Perhaps that before giving oxygen to your child in a plane crash, first put on your own. Anyway, it seems that in an article about a parable which clearly HAS a moral, some discussion beyond simply stating that there is one should be included in that article. 107.127.46.15 (talk) 08:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)