Talk:The Story of a Bad Boy

Toby Tyler; or, Ten Weeks with a Circus
[To Greencardamom]: I'm sorry I have now twice removed your good faith addition to The Story of a Bad Boy. The way citations work, the addition implies that both sources list the same examples of "bad boy" literature. I can confirm that the source I provided does not list the book you offered as another example. Would you mind giving me an idea of what your source says about this Toby Tyler book (by the way, you linked to the Disney film rather than the book) in reference to the "bad boy" genre? From the Wikipedia article, it looks like it automatically does not qualify because it imparts a lesson. The bad boy genre, as I understand, specifically says that bad boys can grow up to be good people, not that bad boys are punished as the summary at Toby Tyler states. On that criteria (which The Story of a Bad Boy article compounds), the book fails inclusion in the list. I'm wondering if it could be added as an afterthought kind of note, much like the "Ragged Dick" mention is in the article now. --Midnightdreary (talk) 20:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

It seemed awkward to put the cite in the middle of a list, and the cite supported many of the titles in the list anyway. Also just because there are multiple cites at the end of a sentence doesn't mean every entry in the list has to be in every cite, it's a combo of cites for the entire sentence. See the examples in WP:INTEGRITY. Here's some sources for Toby Tyler:
 * .. it associates the bad boy books with Mark Twain and Toby Tyler.
 * .. a direct association of Toby Tyler with Peck and bad boys.

We need an article on the bad boy's to understand what the sources say about the genre, I don't think it's that tightly defined as you say, Toby Tyler was part of that tradition in the late 19th century along with Tawin and Peck and others who wrote about bad boys. Green Cardamom (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I hope I don't seem to be splitting hairs here, but neither of the provided sources seem to suggest that "Toby Tyler" falls into the "bad boy genre" of literature, but merely state the character is a bad boy. My understanding (superficial as it may be) comes from the sources in the article, many of which say explicitly that the "bad boy genre" does not include didacticism or moral judgment, etc. "Toby Tyler" seems to do exactly that. So, my question is this: Is this a book about a bad boy, or is this a "bad boy book"?


 * Well I'll try to address this on some finer points. As the source [1] above says, Toby Tyler was best remembered for Tyler having fun running away, rather than any contrition Toby might feel, which is supported by later authors who stressed the fun of running away to the circus. I did read the book BTW, there is no overt didacticism or moral judgment, that I can remember. By definition bad boy books were mostly post-Civil War children's books that rejected the sentimental and didactic children's books of the past and include a nonconformist protagonist who works within the framework of the morality of the time, exactly what happens to Toby Tyler (in the end he returns home). The book really is in the same class as the others, it's just not as well known today so not as often mentioned. Also source [2] above is really clear, directly putting Toby Tyler & Story of a Bad Boy in the same category, there's nothing else that source could mean. Don't be concerned about semantics, rather look at context and intention, I think the exact phrase "bad boy genre" is fairly recent (1973 is earliest I can find in a paper by Anne Trenskey "The Bad Boy in Nineteenth Century American Fiction"), but writers have spoken of bad boys and bad boy books before and after without saying "genre", that's just academic categorization. The important thing is they were a new type of children's literature that broke from the pre-Civil War styles. Green Cardamom (talk) 05:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * On this point, I admit I have not read the book. My judgment on its didactic message comes from the first line in the "Analysis" section of its Wikipedia article: "Toby Tyler is a 'bad boy' novel, meant to teach a lesson what happens to boys who do bad things." It seems to be in huge conflict with what is here. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Unrelated: your citations are incomplete. The second one is a collection of papers, and no name is provided as the author of this specific paper. Further, when adding new citations to an already well-cited page, it's usually best to emulate what's already in use (I'm looking specifically at the encyclopedia you included which does not offer the author name first as all the other cites do here). --Midnightdreary (talk) 04:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, if I'm reading WP:INTEGRITY correctly, we're both right: stacking citations is okay, but they should support all the info, unless a note is including pointing out which supports what. Is that how you're reading it too? --Midnightdreary (talk) 04:10, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * In a case like this, since we're just supporting simple factual data, I don't think it's that important to clarify which source lists which books, unless you see the need to clarify it for readers. Green Cardamom (talk) 05:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't see why wouldn't want to be clear here. I'm also still going to push the idea that all these other sources say there is no lesson involved in the text, and Toby Tyler seems the exception. I suggest it be removed from this list and added as its own section with that note. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:35, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Toby Tyler seems the exception. Well let's put another way. You're saying Toby Tyler is not a bad boy book based on an original interpretation of the secondary sources. None of the secondary sources explicitly say it's not a bad boy book, or say it's an exception. You're interpreting that based on what you believe a bad boy book is, and what you believe Toby Tyler is - a synthesis of ideas that may or may not be right (and you admit). So what do we know for sure? The secondary sources do discuss Toby Tyler in the same frame as the other bad boy books, even listing The Story of a Bad Boy and Toby Tyler in the same sentence in a reference to "bad boys", an explicit reference that is hard to interpret any other way, a direct equivalence of The Story of a Bad Boy with Toby Tyler. Green Cardamom (talk) 06:10, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Now, hang on, I'm not defining anything personally; I'm looking at the sources that tell me the definition. The sources I've seen refer to "bad boy literature" as a genre and, further, that the genre is not meant to impart a lesson. These sources on Toby Tyler aren't as explicit with that term "genre", but I'm not disputing there's a "bad boy" involved. I hope that's clear. If you feel like I'm unfairly synthesizing something, I've explained my understanding thoroughly. Let me just ask this: is there a moral to the story or not? And, if so, how do we include the book on a list with a genre defined specifically as not having a moral? Or do you disagree with that definition of the genre entirely? --Midnightdreary (talk) 23:27, 12 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Every story can be analyzed morally. The question is if Toby Tyler is overtly or intentionally a story with a moral, and no I don't believe it is, not that I can find. Usually the "moral of the story" is at the end of the book with an overt lesson being imparted - take a look, I just did, and read the whole book a while ago. You seem to be basing your understanding of the novel on a single line in the Wikipedia article which reads "Toby Tyler is a "bad boy" novel, meant to teach a lesson what happens to boys who do bad things" .. this line is un-sourced, and appears to show a misunderstanding of what the genre is, at least according to the definition you found for it. You may want to ignore what the Wikipedia article says entirely, or even correct it. In any case, I'd like see what definition people provide for the genre, in your sources, because the one I was able to find online made no mention about morality or lessons, rather put it into context with older books pre-Civil War in terms of lack of sentimentality and being realist. This is what I mean about synthesis, trying to interpret if it fits a certain definition requires original thinking and deciding whose definition to apply and how to apply it according to ones reading of a book. It's not that clear cut. Given no other sources we wouldn't do that because it would be Original Research, but we do have sources that categorize Toby with other bad boy books. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


 * [undent] In fact, I feel that what I'm doing is trying to avoid synthesis, and I'm carefully avoiding offering my own opinion as well. Case in point, you may have noticed my pedantic ridiculousness as to whether the source uses "book about a bad boy" or "book in the bad boy genre". I'm trying not to place any judgment call on any of this personally; I want to allow the source to take over. If the line in the Toby Tyler article is incorrect, it could be removed (that's what's confusing me). If you're curious about how my sources define the bad boy genre, I've already given it as lacking in moral message. It's sourced on this page as such. --Midnightdreary (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)