Talk:The Historian/Archive 1

Reasons for edits
Reasons for edits:

I changed the name of the main narrator to Elsie, as opposed to Elise as it was originally printed. Her name is seen on pg. 625 in the line: ""Oh, Elsie," said a broken English voice." From what I remember, this is the only time her name is printed in the book.

Surely the reason he says "Oh, Elsie" is that this was the name of his fiancee who he had finally avenged? I'm really not convinced that this is the name of the narrator, so I'm going to remove the reference. Vikingwoman2 (talk) 10:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I also added a spoiler warning to the Background and Motifs section since there are some things discussed that give away certain aspects of the plot. I know if I was reading the novel and had some of those things spoiled for me I would be upset. -- Jberg88 14:19, 22 October 2005

Please note the reasons I made the following changes:

1. The quote from the gypsy about killing Jews is written with the idea of capturing the speaker's Scottish accent. I removed this attempt at dialect to make the passage readable. If anyone feels that these misspellings must be restored to make it accurate, go ahead and do so, although I will not accept responsibility for the result.

2. I deleted much of the text in the stub after finding (to put it politely) that much of this text can be found, word-for-word, in already-published reviews of the book.

--L. 15:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I was thinking about the name of the narrator in this book and I thought maybe, Elizabeth Kostova herself is the main character in this story. Please tell me what you think! --Northernn 20:21, 21 November 2005

I don't think that the name "Elsie" is the narrator's as it was said out by Master James,an old friend of Paul and also a historian, at the very end of the novel while he was dying.As you see,people cry out their beloved ones' names,but not the old friends' daughters' before they die.That could be Master James' lover or wife or somebody very close to him.

I agree with the previous comment regarding the name "Elsie." Master James called out "Elsie" at the end as a reference to his former love, Elspeth, mentioned earlier in the novel. Elsie was his fiancee; their relationship ended sadly after her car accident in England when she saw an apparition and swerved. This story was told to the male protagonist. --Mpagano 99 18:30, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I deleted the bit about Helen's disease probably being AIDS, which was founded on nothing in the book. I still do not agree with the general statement about Helen's death though, as in the book it just says "I could not know then that she would also drift from us at times, not speaking for hours, fingering her neck, or that a wasting illness would take her for good nine years later". The matters of the vampiric bites and the illness of Helen is not shown to be related here. It could be a non-blood related wasting illness, such as cancer. The are no grounds to assume otherwise, as far as I can tell.

Other issues that I don't know what to change into:

-The comment about the narrator's storyline: she is 16 years old when she starts travelling with her father and hears his story, but two years have passed before her father disappears and she goes to look for him with Stephen Barley (which is set in 1974)

-In the plotline section, it says that Helen disappeared after showing signs of vampirism. However, she did not do such a thing: she cried a lot, wouldn't talk to Paul about what was bothering her and was generally more disconnected from her world; symptoms of depression rather than vampirism, I think.

-Again in the plotline section, it says that Dracula's tomb and library were constantly moved around. The passage in the book that this was probably based on, though, has Dracula saying the tomb in Sventi Georgi is his favourite, suggesting that he has more than one at the same time, not one he moves around. Next to that, the Sventi Georgi one has an elaborate underground chamber to house the library, whereas there is no such indication for the one in the Pyrenees. It seemed to me that the move of the library away from Sventi Georgi was its first move.

-There is mention in the Background and Motifs section of constant reference "to a deadly and horrible terrorist attack on American soil". Where? I read the book and found one reference to a terrorist attack: on one of the last pages. No more. Did I read over all that or is that comment based on a single line in the book? It also says the terrorist attack was by Islamics, which it doesn't say anywhere in the book and that it is near where the narrator holds an academic position, while she is in actual fact there on a conference. ---PA, 6 July 2006

I read the book in Finnish and they had apparently removed all but the last bit about terrorist attacks and lots of other political things too. Is there information about that somewhere and should that be mentioned in the article? Niina, 6 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.146.195.11 (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Other Historical Inaccuracies
Also somewhere in the book, Paul (I think) is recounting the World Wars and saying how a nation or a people fought against the "Axis in both World Wars." This belies Paul as a Ph.D. historian, as any historian would be historically accurate about such things, especially a historian who lived through the events. I didn't post this in the article because I don't recall exactly where it was, in short < >, I don't have my facts in order! --RedJ 17 02:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracy in the 'Historical Inaccuracies'
The statement that Stalin's crimes came to the light only after the 1956 Khrushchov speech misses the truth as it appear to take into consideration only the Western public opinion, poorly informed about the Soviet internal policies and their activities in Central-Eastern Europe during and after WW II. It should be noted that Stalin's crimes do not imply only the famous political cleansing and include a multitude of other crimes, like the Soviet hard labour camps for non-communist population of occupied Poland and Ukraine. As the case refers to a person of Eastern European provenience, it is indeed erroneous to point out the conscience of Stalin's crimes attributed to this character as a anachronism. Therefore, I'm eliminating this paragraph. -- Vampa Vampa (talk), 14 June 2008

Fair use rationale for Image:Historiancover.jpg
Image:Historiancover.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 ensure 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) 23:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Count me in.....
Righty-ho - loved the book. What to do comprehensiveness wise....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it is important to have a section on historical inaccuracies or some other more succinct heading comparing the lore of the book that is presented as factual with actual knowledge of the geography and history of what is covered. I note some reference to a section above which is not in the current version, so I presume it has been removed. It might be prudent to place the removed material here on the talk page so it can be discussed. I think in a novel such as this (and the Da Vinci code) where there is a real sense of plausibility, distinguishing fact from fiction is even more important than usual. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen any sources on that yet, though. I've been through LexisNexis and am now working through Access World News. Where would you look for sources? Awadewit (talk) 00:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I need to think about that one. I suspect some commentary in a book- or horror-related periodical - tricky as I am aware we cannot just have refs of the actual historical events but need ones on the novel's inaccuracies. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:41, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * PS: Was there something in the back of the book about what was real and what was made up? I can't find my copy now....Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a "Further reading" section put together by Kostova - that's it. Awadewit (talk) 01:12, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Bother. Maybe she did some interviews somewhere in Good Reading or some other book magazien or something...Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved text
Here is the retrieved text. Better here than in article as I suspect much will not be able to be sourced and what can be will need an overhaul and rewrite: Casliber (talk · contribs)

..actually looking at it again I doubt any will be sourceable but you never know.... (I am a hoarder don't you know ;) ) Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I found one statement made by the author on this front. Apparently, Kostova was concerned that "some readers might confuse fantasy and reality", so she tried to fictionalize the book a lot, including only one real historical personage and altering the names of geographical locations. Maybe such a section is therefore not really needed, since the novel is (ahem) fictional? :) Awadewit (talk) 20:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hehehe. It does read a bit factlike. I am regretting lending the book to my brother-in-law now as I wish to look at it again...Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Possible, totally awesome article
Do you think we could create an article on vampire killing kit? Awadewit (talk) 01:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I can check my sources tonight (in about 9 hours) to see if it rates a significant mention in two of them. I think the answer is a probable yes. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Can we do this? I'm dying to have a cool DYK. Like all of the other kids. :) Awadewit (talk) 06:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Bother, I knew there was something else I meant to do on teh weekend! Give me a few hours...Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Plot summary
To be able to rewrite the plot summary, I will have to reread the book. I'm doing that now. Awadewit (talk) 03:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've started working on the first part of the plot summary. Wow, it's hard. Awadewit (talk) 04:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Reads well. Only minor issue is the bulletted bit - ican see why you've done it and I do agree it is a very effiicent way of summarising the plot without going into too much detail (and may be the best way of doing it actually). Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I didn't do that - I haven't gotten to that part of the plot summary yet. Much work needs to be done on the summary. Do you remember the novel well enough to help? I'm really struggling with this section. Awadewit (talk) 06:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * One of the things that is not well-reflected yet in the plot summary is the switch between narrators and the use of letters. Awadewit (talk) 04:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I tried writing the plot summary backwards today. That didn't work at all. Now I've messed up the timelines. I'll try to straighten them out in the coming days. Awadewit (talk) 05:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I finally have the basics of the plot summary down. It is too long and not all that well written, but now we finally have a draft to work from. Awadewit (talk) 04:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will have a look later. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:33, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) am massaging the plot a bit. e.g. Rossi was interred I think in a coffin, but I don't think it was buried as such, so I changed to "interred" as there is no such word as "coffinized". Feel free to revert any bits and pieces you don't feel help. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Questions about the plot

 * Is the person who tampers with the manuscript in Istanbul the "dead" librarian from the states? (231 vs. 266) Awadewit (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have a strong feeling it is, from what I recall, but I have leant the book to someone (either my brother-in-law or mother..). Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is. Awadewit (talk) 04:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Everything but the plot summary
I've sketched out the article using sources from LexisNexis and Access World News. I focused on articles and reviews published around the time the book was published. I still need to go through Google News and see if I missed anything important. Awadewit (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Bloody hell, this article has improved greatly. Looks pretty comprehensive too. The only other thing I can think of is maybe reception from dedicated horror, vampire and dracula enthusiasts, how those people feel about this addition to the dracula canon as it were. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That is an excellent idea - who are they? Where would I go for that? Awadewit (talk) 06:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Let me think on it. All that comes to mind right away is the horror magazine Fangoria but there must be others. My mother might haev some ideas. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * PS: 1 am here and I need to sleep - did a cursory search and this page has some promising links to what I was thinking of above. Anyway, I am off to sleep so have a look if you want, otherwise I might nose around the links there tomorrow. Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

more links in this Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've been through these sources. Unfortunately, I don't think most of them meet our WP:RS policy. I added a bit from one. It also talks about an introduction Kostova wrote for an edition of Dracula. Let's try to find more about that. Awadewit (talk) 05:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I found it (the cover is romantic gothic). Any other mentions of it in secondary sources would be nice. Awadewit (talk) 14:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Gratuitous feedback

 * The Historian is founded on Bram Stoker's Dracula, however it is not a horror novel, but rather an eerie tale.

"founded" strikes me as an odd verb to use here. I'd also switch the conjucntions around for flow to: "Although founded on Bram Stoker's Dracula, The Historian is not a horror novel, but rather an eerie tale." Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Please do change away! Awadewit (talk) 06:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Done :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Bram Stoker1.jpg
We need more specific information on this image. Do any of your books have info, Casliber? Awadewit (talk) 03:39, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I will have a look tonight. I think I have seen that photo before. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Note to self - look this up tonight...Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Frustrated. on page 10 of Hollywood Gothic by David J. Skal 1990, there is a photo which is very very similar to this one. B. S. in same clothes and lighting but head is tilted ever so slightly forward to away from the camera, which has been supplied by the Billy Rose Theatre Collection, New York Public Library at Lincoln Centre, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:17, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've resolved this issue. Awadewit (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Big sigh of relief. I did get a shock when I looked in the book and thought, "heck! he's moved!" Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It's that eerie quality of Victorian photography. :) Awadewit (talk) 04:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

On the way to GA

 * Check Google news for stray sources
 * Revise and rework each section
 * It is the plot summary that needs all of the work - it needs to be cut down (100-200 words need to be cut) and revised (what should we do with tenses? what are the leaps in logic?)
 * (i think tenses will scan out with a combination of present, perfect and pluperfect - my latin schooling) Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My question was this: Plot summaries are usually written in the literary present, but since we have three timelines, should we write some of those timelines in the past? You seem to suggest yes. Awadewit (talk) 14:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My sense of it, upon recalling the lot as I read the plot summary, would be to have the two later threads in the present (the Paul/Helen one as it is a main thread for a lot of the book I recall), and the third, oldest one in the past (?). I think having that one in the present as well might be stretching it a bit and more confusing for the reader, but I might be wrong.'' Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:15, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Copyedit
 * Peer review
 * Copyedit
 * Check images
 * I can't find an image of the author
 * (why not get in contact with her? She might donate one :)) Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have not been able to find an address for her. She has specifically kept it private to avoid Goth fans. Would you like to research this some more? Awadewit (talk) 14:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * (I suspect that might be her answer on submitting a picture too, will have to think on this.) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Nominate for GA! Awadewit (talk) 14:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd just nominate it for GA now I think. I think it reads well, so let's see what an independent set of eyes thinks. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Image of author

 * There is a rather nice photo on Flickr, but the license is non-commercial. I emailed the photographer and asked them to change the license. No response on that yet. Awadewit (talk) 18:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That is a start. Flickr response times can be variable....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It has been a few weeks now. I'm kinda giving up hope. Awadewit (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * O-kay, you might be right in pursuing other avenues..Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:45, 13 June 2009 (UTC)


 * We could email Little, Brown, and Co. and ask for a photo. Awadewit (talk) 18:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm emailing them today. Awadewit (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * They responded by sending a pic without the proper license. I've replied. Awadewit (talk) 04:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No response. Awadewit (talk) 06:35, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We could try and find Kostova's email/mail address and ask her for a photo. Awadewit (talk) 18:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Fan address: Elizabeth Kostova c/o Author Mail Little, Brown and Company 1271 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020


 * There is a photo here. I have emailed the photographer and asked them to release the rights under GFDL, etc. We'll see what happens. Awadewit (talk) 20:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No response yet. Awadewit (talk) 00:27, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No response yet. Awadewit (talk) 14:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

more gratuitous feedback
WRT the adjective here in bought the novel for a stunning US$2 million. - I don't mind it but some might think it is too, shall we say, emotional/POVish? I'd anticipate this by using 'remarkable' here, but if you really want the emphasis on 'stunning' that is up to you. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Changed. Awadewit (talk) 21:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

 When she asks her father, Paul, about it, - with a one-word name, do we still need the commas before and after it? Looks a little jarring to me.
 * Removed. Awadewit (talk) 21:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Part III begins with a revelation by Turgut that leads the search for Dracula's tomb to Bulgaria. - I was just reading this again and pondering...the 'revelation' I think then leads the reader to expect precisely that (a revelation, that is), but it just sort of jumps to going to Bulgaria. I know this means more words but I think this needs a rephrase or actually clarifying what the revelation was of. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All of the revelations in the book are very complicated documentary revelations - that is why I left it out. Should I reword it to sound less fantastic and exciting? :) Awadewit (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Gah! (sigh) let's see what a GA reviewer thinks. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)