Talk:American Gods

God/Myth List Qualifier

Having browsed through the history of edits on this page it appears that the list of myths/gods/characters-from-previous-works etc is particularly contentious and subject to mini-revert wars. This is particularly problematic as the discussion page shows that a number of people come here looking for exactly this list and the justification for one name being kept while another is removed seems hazy at times. About the only thing people agree on is that a comprehensive and accurate list is very hard to agree on. :) Gaiman's own interviews and blog (referenced at the bottom of the main entry page) suggest that he himself is not completely certain who everybody is (Delerium in the park is a particularly good example of where general consensus, rather than authorial intent, seems to hold sway. If the author themself states that they're uncertain about something can it really be included as a definite?...or would Gaiman's own opinion count as the ultimate in original research? :) My point is that I thought the list could perhaps benefit from a caveat statement at the beginning of the section such as "Although a number of characters in the novel are explicit and occasionally named examples of specific gods and mythical figures, many more are implied in vague or passing references that are open to interpretation. Even Gaiman himself has admitted in interview (can't find the citation as yet...will keep looking) that he is unsure whether an ancillary character in San Francisco is in fact Delirium of the Endless as is widely accepted by his fans. As such it is extremely difficult to form a comprehensive and wholly accurate list of all mythical figures in the novel". I'm certainly happy for the wording to be changed if it's not ideal, but I think something ought to be there just to show that it's not 100% accurate with no debate and total agreement. Normally I'd be bold but this is obviously a tender issue and I don't want to just wade into it without discussion. If there're no major criticisms within a week or so I'll add it anyway and see what happens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozlucien (talk • contribs) 07:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be a list of gods who appear as characters and a separate list of gods who are only mentioned? A lot of the gods on the current list don't make personal appearances, which makes the list sort of misleading. If anybody objects, please tell me so. If not, I'll make the changes as soon as I've finished the last hundred pages and have the time. Mythgeek Ellipsis (talk) 19:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Wiki is also not a bureacrocy. It says that next to its not a democracy. We are not taking a vote, we are merely making it user friendly. Im not sure why the list of gods bothers you so. It is well within the rules of wiki. reread them. It is merely saying things can't be decided by an ctual poll. Not that we can't do what makes research easiest for those looking up the article. I am re deleting the edit. that lit helped me. im sure it will help others. All information starts out as original researxh. there is plenty of worse offenses in wikipedea if you need something to keep you busy, look at the Dragonlance article. that is all original research seemingly. Maybe if you have theb chance go clean that up. It sure needs it, Azemandeus. isn't that the name of the smartest man on earth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.157.10 (talk) 10:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe the whole list should be removed, as it is mostly OR. It's not really necessary, even. Link the appropriate names to the article on that god or myth and leave it at that. If, in a few days, no one has a valid argument, I'm just going to remove it. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 17:53, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'm removing the list, since no one has a valid argument to keep it. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 16:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Reverted this edit - that list you're so quick to disparage is one of the main reasons people access this article, it's essential. I would favour seperating the list altogether and giving it a page of its own rather than deleting it outright. 193.1.100.7 (talk) 22:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Whether people wish it to be so or not, doesn't remove the fact that it is OR. We cannot verify most of the entries on that list and Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. There are so few named references in the book, yet many more, based on assumptions. Nor is Wikipedia an indiscriminate collection of information. Perhaps if one wishes to speculate about what deities may or may not be in the book, they should visit a fan site instead.

I'm not sure why you believe I was "quick to disparage" the list, as I gave almost a month of discussion time, with no reasons why the list should stay. Still, just because one person believes that many people visit this page primarily for the list, is not a good reason why the list should stay.

If one wishes to trim the list to only verifiable references (directly stated in book, listed in interviews, etc), then I would not be opposed to the list. However, as the list is a random collection of gods that have too many entries that are based on too little description, it needs to be removed until trimmed. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 10:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it would be reasonable to include a list of gods who are actually named in the book. If there are reliable third party sources we could cite for speculation on others, they could be included with the citations (for instance if the New York Times Book Review says "gods possibly referenced include..."). I don't think we should list all speculation, however. Aleta ^Sing 18:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I read an online summary of a presentation by Neil Gaiman, and edited the entry based on that summary. But upon reading this discussion I feel compelled to ask: Should the author's direct assertions be considered authoritative on the matter of identity or representation of mythological beings in the author's own work? I believe so, and thus feel justified by my edit. Is anyone in disagreement with the idea? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.36.46 (talk) 22:30, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

If Wikipedia is not a Bureaucracy, or a Democracy, then what is it? Andy_Howard (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

If one cannot get a list of all the Gods in Wikipedia, then where else can one. If it's so offensive, perhaps a separate entry. One can list the characters with descriptions from the book, without any speculation, with verifiable material only. Robauz (talk) 12:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Spoilers

I m sorry, but spoilers are a part of wikipedia. It says that in the rules that this is not an advertisement for books or movies, and it is very reasonable to have complete plots included here. So there will be no "spoiler " warnings. I guess if you don't want the plot spoiled best not to look in here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.157.10 (talk) 10:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Somebody please put some of these spolier marks in the book plot because I just read a bit through it and I think I know way too much already. Sorry for not editing it myself —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.147.54.3 (talk) 06:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I would if I knew how to add spoiler tags, I figured since they didn't have them, it would be safe.

68.229.55.89 (talk) 04:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:NDA, Wikipedia does not use spoiler tags. Dreadstar † 04:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Media Distribution of Book

It says that the book was only done in hardcover and softcover print format, yet I have the audio book on CD, can someone find a reference online and update the article? Thanks. 71.225.125.176 15:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC) --Stexe

Shadow as Baldur

Rewrote this after a review of the edit history here. I believe that if "Shadow is alluded to be Balder" is included in the article, then it should also be included that Gaiman himself said that Shadow's real name is Baldur Moon, although he has not (and doubtless, given his love of keeping the mysteries of this story intact, never will) said that Shadow is Baldur. Is there a reason I'm not able to find in the various edit histories for why this little fact was removed from the article? I want to open it for discussion before I add it back in, especially since I'm having some trouble finding a cite for Gaiman's statement about Shadow's real name. RaCha'ar 20:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I removed Paul Bunyan from the "for instance" of folk heroes line, because this character is specifically mentioned as NOT being a folk hero; rather he is an artificial construct for marketing. Myrrander 08:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Question. Where did Delirium appear? I don't remember her in the book. JethroElfman 17:34, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

She's the girl with crazy hair and a dog (Barnabas) in the park when Shadow and Wednesday meet with Easter, if I remember rightly. Don't have the book on me or I'd give a page cite... -RaCha'ar 17:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I see her there on page 306 of my paperback, thanks. JethroElfman 04:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Page 328 of the new edition; Chapter Eleven. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.73.59 (talk) 11:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that a bit far fetched? OK, the vague description might suit Delirium, but it could just as well be an illustration of everyday San Francisco life and its drifters. Having a homeless person of any age and gender be accompanied by a dog is an established combination, after all.

Not at all. It's not at all unusual for Gaiman to self-reference in that way. However, some searching has turned up that Gaiman's only comment on the subject of whether that really was Delirium or not is that he doesn't know, and the conclusion that it is in fact has largely been among his fans, never confirmed. So I'm going to remove it as unsourced original research, although I certainly personally think that Gaiman works in several references to his past works. -RaCha'ar 22:07, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Except that Gaiman himself said he wasn't sure whether it was Delirium or not. That would be speculation. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 13:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll agree that it's a return to previous themes, but would argue that the parallels between the Sandman and the American Gods / Anansi Boys universes are largely constructed by the community. See the rather different characterizations of several key figures such as Bast and Odin in 'Seasons of Mist', for example. Thanks for removing the paragraph.

I can't find ANY indication that Shadow is Baldr, I think this assumption is pretty far fetched. He doesn't really share any of the same themes with Baldr, except being Odin's son. Given the way he is conceived he is probably something different or new, or a reference to one of Odin's many many other children, perhaps Thor (Reborn).206.248.181.137 (talk) 12:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

"Monarch of the Glen" in Fragile Things is a sequel to American Gods. In that story, Shadow is confirmed to be Balder. Aleta ^Sing 21:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

One theme that Shadow clearly shares with Baldur is goodness and "light" in the sense of a good and helpful god as opposed to a "dark" malevolent god. Shadow cares for people when none of the other gods do (except maybe Mr Nancy). Baldur fights Wednesday at the climax and undoes Wed's plans. Baldur cares for the people of Lakeside, finds the little girl, and ends the kobold's murders. The other gods treat each other as equals more or less, but humans are pawns.

Loki, speaking to Laura, says that if he had a sprig of mistletoe he would use it to run Shadow through. This is how Loki is supposed to kill Baldr during Ragnarok. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.10.246.162 (talk) 09:36, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Baldr's death actually occurs long before Ragnarok. Baldr's return to Midgard from Hel is actually one of the occurences during Ragnarok.Cheesecake42 (talk) 16:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

citeneeded

I have never before heard the assertion that Stardust and Sandman are intended to be part of the same world as American Gods and Anansi Boys. I'm going to leave this tagged with citeneeded but if the user who added it or someone else doesn't point to some proof for this I'm going to remove it as original research. -RaCha'ar 00:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed after more than a week of waiting with the IP going on to no further activity on WP. Feel free to re-add if you can find some assertion from Gaiman that this is true. -RaCha'ar 22:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Balder Moon

I have issues with the character being referred to as Balder "Shadow" Moon in this article. I understand that the character article is at Balder Moon (which I also have some problems with); however, Shadow is never referred to as Balder in this book. It's only from comments made in interviews by Gaiman, and later Monarch of the Glen, that we know that this is Shadow's real name. I'm having trouble figuring out how to point this out while still linking to the character's real name; any help? -RaCha'ar 15:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Nothing you can do about it. Treat is as any fictional character that gets "fleshed out" in later stories and gets retconned. It's something that happens when writers end up writing unplanned sequels.

The guy no one remembers

The guy who no one remembers, who tells a waiter about her futere, anyone who know who this is? Is it ever explained?

It's emphatically not explained. Lots of fan speculation, but Gaiman has not and likely never will say who it is. -RaCha'ar 23:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

re-reading the book again, NG did write about a god who had become forgotten, When the Siberians crossed the Bering land bridge and came to America, they brought their god with them and he lasted until the crow people took the forgotten god's people as slaves. If he meant that god, then it is there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.81.76 (talk) 19:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Long long list

Do we really need this long list of every god who appears or is even briefly mentioned in the book? It's taking up the bulk of the article now and it looks sloppy. I vote to cut it down to major characters only. -RaCha'ar 18:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The List is essential, it should stay. However I think many of the characters listed are not, in actuality, mentioned in the book. I move the List be trimmed to include only characters mentioned. -G.Hargreaves

Yep, pretty much exactly what I was thinking. I'm not suggesting that the list be removed entirely, but it's definitely too long and trivial right now. -RaCha'ar 22:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's also beginning to edge on OR, as User:GrahamHardy has been adding dozens of new entries to the list, most of which were never explicitly named and probably described in minimal detail. --Pentasyllabic 00:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

They are all explicitly named; I think the list may be nearly complete now though (I'm getting sick of it at least !) Can it not be separated off ? The title of the list is "Gods and legends appearing in the novel", If the list is to be trimmed then the Title needs to be changed. I beleive the list is now more or less complete so the 'Incomplete' note could be removed... GrahamHardy 00:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your hard work, but I think this is an absolute excess of information. I believe this list should be limited to those who have major roles in the book, not every single god who is at all named or appears. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and care must be taken to cover the important information without verging into trivia. Can we work together. here to construct a list of those gods that have major roles in the book? -RaCha'ar 02:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with that; I just went with the current title of the list "Gods and Legends appearing in the Novel" saw that it was incomplete and was asking for help so completed it ! I Change the title and slash the list; I've taken the book back to the library though so I cannot do it ! Thanks, GrahamHardy 12:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

• Personally I find it kind of useful, although I guess I could have just typed the unfamiliar gods names in the search box. Lisiate 00:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Myself, I think that a list like it could be useful, but without any context or identification, a lot of these entries are not obvious. I can remember when I finished the book and wanted to know if that dead child that the proto-humans were carrying around across the tundra was based on something, so I popped in here to check and was disappointed to find nothing, but even now, I wouldn't know which of those it would be (my suspicion is none of them, but shows how much I know about the subject) without clicking through about half to find out what they were in the first place. Unfortunately, if you start providing long explanations of from whence the character is identified, the list starts growing out of control and you end up with a fork that ends up getting deleted, so I'm not sure what the solution would be. A lot of Gaiman's mythology is outside of that which some of his readers might be familiar with, but I've got no idea whether this is the right place to help novices understand what he's talking about.Cool moe dee 345 19:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The list is too long an cumbersome to be useful in its current form. If it's going to be left up in its current form, the more obscure references should probably include a footnote that lists the page number the figure appears on and a line or two that refers to it. I do question the list's compiler regarding what exactly qualifies as "appearing in the novel". Specifically, Jaquel makes passing reference to Jesus. That shouldn't qualify as an appearance, though. I don't recall any appearance by the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, either, although the same do play a large role in another Gaiman body of work, "Good Omens."ChipEverwood 21:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be kept. It cleared up a lot of confusing things for me. Czolgolz (talk) 21:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Some of the references on the page confused me. I went back through the book trying to figure out how I had missed Jesus as a character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.162.43.222 (talk) 14:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the list of all the gods is essential and the very nature of what an encyclopedia is all all about: easily accessed information linked to further information. The list could be a seperate page, but what does it matter if it makes the page long, it's at the bottom of the page. : Robauz (talk) 02:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Cthulhu?

Peter Vasiljev 02:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC): AFAIK, Cthulhu was never mentioned in the novel. Gaiman did write a somewhat spoofish short story of him/her/it giving an interview to a reporter ("I, Cthulhu", if I remember correctly).

I recently bought my second copy and during the carousel scene, Shadow has a vision of an octopus headed god, and that can only be Cthuhlu. Cthuhlu is currently trademarked, so Neil could not mention him by name.

Gaiman has indeed written various stories referencing the Cthulhu Mythos, but American Gods doesn't contain any direct reference to Cthulhu or any other Lovecraft creatures. The reference to Cthulhu does not belong on the list.ChipEverwood 20:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The High Priest of Rl'yeh is mentioned. This is a reference to Cthulhu. Kuralyov (talk) 23:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Delirium

I just read a line in the book. It says "A young girl, no older than fourteen, her hair dyed green and orange and pink, stared at them as they went by. She sat beside a dog, a mongrel, with a piece of string for a collar and a leash." Anyone else think this is a reference to Delirium? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.137.177.46 (talk) 18:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Another Piece of the Universe?

I was thumbing through Fragile Things and something in the introduction caught me. More so for the back ground of "Pages From A Journal Found In A Shoebox Left In A Greyhound Bus Somewhere Between Tulsa, Oklahoma, And Louisvile, Kentucky" where Neil writes,"I wanted to write something about identity and travel and America, like a tiny companion piece to American Gods, in which everything, including any kind of resolution, hovered just out of reach." So would that make it part of the same universe of American Gods? It's worth a thought, maybe not a mention, but a thought.--Pony English 21:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Difference

So, what is the difference of the 12,000 word extra version to that of the retail? Pony English 07:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Sam = Morrigan?

What is the basis for listing Sam Black Crow as Morrigan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.1.17.5 (talk) 19:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering the same thing, i just reread the novel and although black crows were associated with the Morrigan, and only very briefly at that, there seemed to be no connection between Sam and the Morrigan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.14.239.249 (talk) 23:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Also Sam is Native American (Cherokee? I don't have the book handy), and Morrigan was a Celtic goddess- the ethnicities of the incarnations generally seem to follow those of their worshippers. Thee darcy (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The Morrigan is featured at the battle. She's the one who pisses in front of Eostre and talks about the coming battle. Sam Black Crow is never mentioned at the battle. Plus, Sam is a lesbian, not bisexual as stated in the main article. Lots of lesbians experiment with men in their youth, same as gays experiment with girlfriends, if they're unsure or trying to act straight in front of family. Assume the same for Sam, she's clearly lesbian in her later years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.81.76 (talk) 19:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Assume nothing. We have what we were shown and can only go on that. ~Auzemandius {talk/contrib} 16:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Neil Gaiman has said that Sam is "basically bi" http://thebookbeard.tumblr.com/post/145768471426/do-any-of-your-books-have-lesbians-in-them-i — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apow0896 (talk • contribs) 05:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Cameo characters

In addition to the numerous figures from real-world myths, a few characters from The Sandman and its spinoffs make brief cameos in the book.

I'm not familiar with The Sandman series, can anyone list those characters? Thanks a lot. :D --TX55^TALK 16:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Delirium. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.229.236.112 (talk) 08:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

american magical realism

Request to have American Gods added to wikipedia's "magic realism novels: american magic realism" category http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_magic_realism_novels — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stockholmcode (talk • contribs) 06:52, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi, this sounds reasonable. Can you point us to a reliable source that calls American Gods an example of magical realism (as opposed to fantasy)? LadyofShalott 15:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Gaiman himself points out a cyclical error

Has anyone identified and/or fixed the error cited by Gaiman in the Wikipedia article (but not explicitly named)? Can editors familiar with this work check this out? SamuelRiv (talk) 03:43, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

It looks like it's the article on the Zorya, specifically, the creation of the third sister, Zorya Polunochnaya. On the page, it states that she was a creation of Gaiman's, but around May of 2010, the article reads as if there is historical basis for her. Gaiman talks about the whole thing in the Youtube videos linked there.Luminum (talk)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Gods. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006191612/http://www.rjspindle.com:80/content/american-gods-neil-gaiman to http://www.rjspindle.com/content/american-gods-neil-gaiman

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Lede

Too much publishing history in the lede. Suggestions? Kortoso (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Will edit and move details to another section.Parkwells (talk) 12:37, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Shadow isn't a nickname

I don't think "Shadow" Moon should be in quotes-- the book says it's on his ID and ticket, implying it's his legal name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.127.77.18 (talk) 22:17, 7 March 2022 (UTC)