Talk:Clara Viebig

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

recent edits, neutrality, undue[edit]

The recent extension seems well sourced, but imho it is not appropriate in this form.

First of all the current description doesn't really match the extensive description of Viebig given in various other sources (including the article's last one available on Google Books) nor does it really match the according description in the German wikipedia (which might have its own POV issues though). In any case it seems a bit like cherry picking and a case of WP:UNDUE as it kinda picks one individual novel of hers and describes its "most unfavourable parts" and potentially quoting them somewhat out of context (It looks a bit like picking a phrase with n-word from Tom Saywer/Huck Finn to argue that Mark Twain was racist and used the n-word for African-Americans). This is clearly not representative of her work as whole and is not found in this form in any scholarly article or journalistic article on her (at least judging from the ones I've browsed). More importantly the article isn't even mentioning her most famous work (Weiberdorf and the "eifel novels") which takes place in a completely different setting and context. --Kmhkmh (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some sources for coming up with a more appropriate description of Viebig's literary work:

Seeing further additions to the aricle, I'd like to emphasize that this an article on Clara Viebig and her work and not an article on the German empire's colonialism in Poland.--Kmhkmh (talk) 14:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did check the first source, The Borders of Integration: Polish Migrants in Germany and the United States, 1870-1924, and there is some interpretation of her work that is comparable to the cited text in the article. Legitimate criticism of an author is not unreasonable content for a Wikipedia article, so we need to be a little careful here. Regards, RJH (talk) 15:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The cited sources are correctly stated (I checked in the meantine on Google books) and there is nothing wrong with using there criticism as such. The issue is with WP:UNDUE this is supposed to be an article on Clara Viebig and her work, but what we currently have is one sided description of one of her novels which is hardly appropriate. Check for instance the description at Oxfords literary companion to see a "normal" treatment.
Another problem is that the current sources are somewhat one sided and written from a very particular perspective, that is how German colonialism in Poland was reflected in literature of its time. The cited sources analyze the cited novel dormant army merely under that aspect, which is fine for their scope but is it not fine as comprehensive description/assessment of the novel itself nor that of Clara Viebig's work in total, that is for our scope.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to add something to the article, be my guest. However the Sleeping Army was best seller for 2 years in Germany, and its main purpose was to criticise failed colonization of Polish territories, while warning Germans of "Polish danger". Sleeping Army was also the most read novel by Viebig besides Watch on Rhein, and thus is important part of her literary contribution. There was no other purpose for Sleeping Army besides the one analysed.It's not some hidden code, or allegory-its aim was clear and easily defined-to show the struggle to "civilize" lands of "barbaric" Poles , and point out "dangers" they pose to German Empire, as well as demonstrate which methods to conquer them are best. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 15:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is one of her best selling novels, but your description of it is unbalanced and one sided. Speaking of a "main purpose" of novel (as a piece of art) is already a rather questionable approach to begin with. The sources you quote are anything but a (complete) literary review of that book as I explained above already. To be more precise there is nothing about the books literary features (language & style, Genre, contemparory and recent reviews/assessments). The book's ambivalent aspects are ignored completely. For instance that the book was heavily criticized in Germany particularly during the Nazi period for its too "symapthic" or "positive" description of various Polish characters and its partially slightly critical description of the German colonization efforts. All of that does not change the (correct) criticism in your cited sources, but again that criticism describes only one aspect of the book from a particular perpective.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the paragraphs causing the concern should be moved to their own appropriately-titled section to uniquely set them off, such as a "Criticism" section. Regards, RJH (talk) 15:58, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ideally as the articles develops hopefully, those current sources on dormat army should be part of longer section on that book, which covers the other aspects of it as well. A comprehensive article could have separate sections for her best known books (aside from dormat army probably Weiberdorf (="women's village") (her breakthrough novel and a literary scandal at the time (among others indexed by the Catholic Church) and Wacht am Rhein)
Alternatively some of it could be moved to a general criticism section´, which compiles and summarizes the criticism of her, though afaik the first option is usually preferred in good articles.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to expand the article so that more will be covered. However-often novels do have a purpose-there's nothing strange about that. And yes, Viebig was more clever than Nazis, so she realized people were more complex, and thus needed more complex methods to be conquered than used by German Empire(IIRC she criticized use of Catholic colonists and preferred Protestant colonizers). This doesn't change the purpose of her novel or its main anti-Polish aspect. Overall though I have nothing further additions to he article(in fact it would be welcomed), as long as her best selling novel(and one of the two most read) will remain described.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No offense that might be your personal opinion, but it is hardly what the sources state overall. Of course should dormant army be a part of this article and the criticism of it as well, but the section for that book needs to contain a more complete and representative picture rather cherry picking for a particular aspect (general literary reviews, plot, description of style, language and genre, classification within Genre and the literature canon are all missing completely)--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No offense that might be your personal opinionNo offense but that is sourced by numerous scholarly works.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is sourced by cherry picking sources, which not the appropriate approach for complete and representative picture.--Kmhkmh (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to balance out the commentary by noting that Clara Viebig's attitudes were not specific to her alone, but were more widely expressed in Germany. Her work was also part of a larger German literary movement. While racist, these types of colonialist views were not unique to Germany, and it's important to remember that we're viewing her work from the current cultural perspective. I don't think we need to exclude this material, but the article should cover other aspects of her work, such as her writing in the naturalism style. Thank you. Regards, RJH (talk) 15:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the sources don't need be be removed, but they need to be embedded in a proper context and augmented by other sources to provide a more comprehensive and representative picture.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article still has a problem with balance. Some of her other works need to be evaluated to get a "comprehensive and representative picture." Bob Burkhardt (talk) 21:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

  • As an author and a dramatist, she gained a reputation for her Naturalist style with stories that depicted the lives of ordinary people, particularly those set in her native region, the Eifel. Her tales were often centered on love, self-sacrifice, the family and children.[1]
  • Her popular novels Die Wacht am Rhein (1902) and Das schlafende Heer (1904) concerns the historical process of Prussia exerting increasing influence over Poland and the Rhineland. While she portrays her Prussian characters favorably, she is generally unsympathetic toward Prussia's desire for expansionism and it's impact on the local populations.[2] Note that this source appears to contradict parts of the current article.
  • The couple has a son, Ernst Wilhelm Richart Cohn, whom Clara twice attempted to have renamed due to German anti-semitism.[1]
  • Friedrich was forced to shut down his publishing company by the Nazis. Their "mixed blood" son Ernst fled to Brazil to escape Nazi persecution. Clara joined him in Brazil for a year, but returned to Germany due to homesickness.[2]
  • A number of her works became best sellers, and she averaged a novel or anthology every year, beginning in the 1890s. Many of her works were published in journals, newspapers and magazines. Her marriage to Theodor Cohn helped ensure the continued publication of her work, and she earned enough royalties to live on following the death of her husband up until the Second World War.[3] Note: ref. is possibly a good source to mine for other details of her life.
  1. ^ Catling, Jo (2000). A history of women's writing in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Cambridge University Press. p. 113, 146, 147. ISBN 0521656281.
  2. ^ Bland, Caroline (July 1, 2001). "Prussian, Rhinelander or German? Regional and National Identities in the Historical Novels of Clara Viebig". Amsterdamer Beiträge zur neueren Germanistik (17). Rodopi: 383–399. Retrieved 2011-06-08.
  3. ^ Boa, Elizabeth; Palfreyman, Rachel (2000). Heimat: a German dream : regional loyalties and national identity in German culture, 1890-1990. Oxford studies in modern European culture. Oxford University Press. pp. 41–42. ISBN 0198159234.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
I'll incorporate that in the overhaul/extension (still coming up).--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:29, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Regards, RJH (talk) 16:33, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Clara Viebig by Nicola Perscheid 1890.jpeg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Clara Viebig by Nicola Perscheid 1890.jpeg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clara_Viebig&oldid=1210257873"