Talk:W. H. Auden/Archive 4

Online resource suggestion
There is an hour long lecture available online by Professor the Lord Harries on the religious aspect in Auden's work. I think this would be a very good addition to the resources available here in the external links or perhaps even incorporated into the body of the article. http://www.gresham.ac.uk/event.asp?PageId=45&EventId=820 (I only don't put it up myself as there is a possible conflict-of-interest as I am connected with Gresham College, where the lecture was given). Jamesfranklingresham (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Will definitely take a look at it. Macspaunday (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Anglo American?
W.H. Auden is in now way an "Anglo American". The term Anglo-American is used to describe an American of English heritage. Auden did not visit the U.S until well into adulthood and later became a U.S citizen. Taking U.S citizenship does not make him American. Describing him as English is surely most accurate. It is highly unlikely he didn't see himself as an Englishman - are there any sources for him referring to himself as an American? Also, according to the edit history user Macspaunday (who reverted my initial edit) first removed the original English description which had been in place for about 5 years from when the article was originally created, then replaced with "Anglo American" and appears to revert any changes to this despite there being no consensus. 92.11.250.240 (talk) 14:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Anglo-American" was most recently restored by Paul h., a long-term maintainer of this page, on 5 May 2009. It had been changed to "English" by another user apparently based in Manchester. Auden very clearly (though not explicitly) referred to himself as early as 1943 as a member of the category "Anglo-American Poets"; the examination paper that he proposed for Harvard students of English literature (printed in Prose 1939-1948, Faber & Faber) included the following question: "Anglo-American Poets. 'Migration is a severe test. It forces the artist to dig below the surface of his inheritance. The minor writer strikes barren rock and withers; the major writer discovers unsuspected riches.' Discuss." This is fairly obviously an allusion to his own "migration" to the U.S. four years earlier (and perhaps also to T.S. Eliot's migration to the U.K.). As for consensus, try a Google search of "Auden 'Anglo-American Poet'" and the result will show many reference works that independently use the same term. Auden's own use of the term seems fairly conclusive. Macspaunday (talk) 14:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Google results aren't relevant - nor is how a term was incorrectly used in 1943 (yet, without an actual reference -and the text you quoted there doesn't actually show Auden calling himself an "Anglo American" anyway). The term Anglo American refers to an American of English descent, which is incorrect in this instance. Google also has plenty of results that refer to him as English - as he was, in fact, English. You revert edits back to English, yet you never gave a reference for your removal of the English description, nor the "Anglo American" description and just because another editor believes than the description is correct does not make it so. Also, you insinuate that I am the only editor to change the description BACK - this is not true. Whilst I was reviewing when the description was changed (by yourself) I came across instances where you reverted changed to the description you changed without consensus. 92.11.250.240 (talk) 15:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The phrase under discussion here is "Anglo-American poet." It is pretty clear that Auden's work can be categorized into an English period and an American one.  After Auden's move to the U.S.A. the poems change in style and content and are unmistakably American, just as the work of the '30s is infused with the British Isles.  In terms of birth, Auden was English. As a poet he was clearly Anglo-American. --Paul (talk) 16:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Paul h. is of course correct, but in order to end the argument over the point, I've (tentatively) changed the page to use "English-born poet who became an American citizen" which is simply factual and should not cause any argument at all. But of course I think "Anglo-American poet" is better. Macspaunday (talk) 16:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And the first definition in the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary (with quotations dating from 1769 through 2005) is "Of, belonging to, or involving both England (or Britain) and America." This seems an entirely suitable adjective to describe Auden as a person and as a poet. I doubt the OED is using the term incorrectly, and this page used the term in exactly the same way. Macspaunday (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Because the OED definition is obviously correct, and because I think it's reasonable to say that the OEDlives up to the basic Wikipedia standard that requires information to be verifiable in published sources, I would suggest revising the phrase to read as follows: "an Anglo-American poet, born in England, later an American citizen," etc. This conveys exactly the meaning that Paul h. and the OED are referring to; it uses the term "Anglo-American" with exactly the same meaning that Auden himself used in his phrase "Anglo-American poets"; and it has the merit of adding two essential facts in a compact and accurate way. Paul h., what do you think?Macspaunday (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I would hate to lose the essential fact that Auden had two poetic careers and national sensibilities, and is essentially the reverse of T.S. Eliot (or Henry James) in that regard. The proposed wording "an Anglo-American poet, born in England, later an American citizen," seems like a reasonable and accurate compromise to me.--Paul (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Done, complete with a footnote to the OED and a footnote to Auden's usage of the phrase "Anglo-American Poets" in 1943. Macspaunday (talk) 19:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The OED footnote requires an online OED subscription. It should be redone to reference one of the paper editions of the OED. --Paul (talk) 20:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I don't have a subscription. Maybe I made the URL too short, or maybe it only works if you enter the word in the seach field in the home page? Could you possibly try the longer URL that I entered in the last revision? You may need to refresh the page in your browser. Thank you again. Macspaunday (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope. "Sign in The Oxford English Dictionary Online is a subscription service. Access to the Dictionary is only available to users with valid licences."
 * Perhaps you are signing in from an IP address at a place that has an institutional license?--Paul (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was the reason. Excellent catch. I switched to a different IP address, and got the same message that you got. I think we'll have to live with "subscription access required", which is also noted in the link to theNew DNB entry. The printed version of the OED has an earlier version of the definition that also makes the same point, but the current version is the clearest, and moves this meaning from third to first on the page.Macspaunday (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And I also added the first definition at Dictionary.com. The dictionary that comes with the Macintosh OS X operating system has a similar definition, and adds another definition: "of English descent, but born or living in the U.S." - a definition that exactly fits Auden. You will remember that the editor who insists that Auden was not Anglo-American seemed to be arguing that the term refers only to people born in the U.S. who were of English descent. This is completely mistaken: further evidence may be found in the 1983 edition of Chambers 20th Century Dictionary which has as the first definition "English in origin or birth, American by settlement or citizenship", which exactly and perfectly fits Auden, who was English in birth and American by both settlement and citizenship. Perhaps the question can now be regarded as settled. Macspaunday (talk) 23:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Just for the record, in case this question ever comes up again: Merriam-Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition, 1934, defines Anglo-American (noun) as "an American, especially a citizen of the United States, of English origin or descent"; that's Auden precisely. Also, The American Heritage Dictionary of the American Language, 1969, defines Anglo-American (adj.) as "Of, relating to, or between England and America, English and American", which again is a suitable adjective for Auden's double career and nationality.Macspaunday (talk) 05:40, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * And the definition at Dictionary.com, "a native or descendant of a native of England who has settled in or become a citizen of America, esp. of the United States", comes from The Random House Dictionary, another authoritative source. I think there's no need to add much more to this discussion; or at least I hope so.Macspaunday (talk) 22:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "English-born poet who became an American citizen" is specific and accurate. "Anglo-American" will always raise shackles. We don't call Syliva Plath an American-Anglo poet. She's Amercian even though for a while she lived and eventually died in England. This discussion should not orientate around dictionaries only, but how the phraseology will be read and received. You lose nothing by dropping the "Anglo-American" bit. Spanglej (talk) 22:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't have any strong objection to that suggestion, which certainly gets the facts right. Auden clearly thought of himself as an "Anglo-American poet" but that's not an overwhelming argument for using the phrase in an encyclopedia entry. Paul.h, what do you think? Macspaunday (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't get how people were discussing an edit by someone who said "Taking U.S citizenship does not make him American." Of course that makes you an American... 98.198.83.12 (talk) 11:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps
This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review.

Although there is little doubt about this article's GA status, I am still concern about the format of the references. Books are referred to without page numbers, which makes it hard for an interested reader to find out more about the subject, or indeed for a reviewer to verify the content. This should be fixable, though it would take a lot of work. I think this would be necessary before the article could be considered for FA, but apart from that it shouldn't be to far off. Lampman (talk) 16:25, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Very grateful (on behalf of myself and other contributors such as Paul.h) for these comments. Of course you're right about the page references. I'll gradually add those, but it can't happen immediately because I won't have access to my books until September. If I can specify any page references during the summer, I'll do so. Again, thanks for the comments, and any further suggestions would of course be valuable. Macspaunday(talk) 16:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)