Talk:The Light That Failed

Man Bites Dog
Insofar as it really wasn't the light that failed, but his eyesight, I think the title may be the prism through which the whole saga might be read. And yet, it seems from the synopsis that there is little existential focus to the work (or maybe there is, but not recorded in the plot summary). The title is pure Bishop Berkeley but Heisenberg is nowhere to be seen. You have to wonder what is was that attracted Kipling to the title, only for him to leave all the heavy lifting to the late 21st century reader. Anyway, just a thought. I'll read it and report back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.246.187.219 (talk) 16:34, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Just a thought - the box gives Rudyard Kipling or/and the book/first publisher's country as "United States" supporting this with an image of Lippincott's Magazine's relevant cover clearly giving the magazine's address as EC - ie. London, England. I did somehow have the impression Kipling probably qualified as English, insofar as he qualifies as anything. Could someone sort this out, perhaps by clarifying the date and place of first publication in book form, as well as Lippincott's?Delahays (talk) 13:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Cricketjeff (talk) 00:52, 5 April 2020 (UTC) The Light that failed was first published in London in 1890, but only the six copies required for copyright purposes to be deposited in The British Library etc.

Details can be found on the Kipling Society website, it should be noted that this and the magazine editions are the "happy ending" version, not the author's original intended version we know now.