Talk:The History of Mr Polly

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The History of Mr Polly article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Novels High‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

'Random wandering'?[edit]

'Random wandering'? Is that really correct terminology or has every literally article fallen prey to what has become the latest buzz word used by kids trying to sound cool? Wouldn’t the term "wandering aimlessly" be more appropriate?

nice one

Fictional Fishbourne?[edit]

The village in the novel may well be fictionalized, and may indeed be based more on Sandgate than its real-world namesake but "the little village of Fishbourne slumbers and sleeps" on the Sussex coast, not very far from Chichester. There is a celebrated Roman villa there - Fishbourne Roman Palace - so it is not even especially obscure. Moletrouser 18:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1960 version, 1959 version?[edit]

The article states 'The 1960 version no longer exists', but there's no mention of a 1960 version in the previous sentence, but there is mention of a version shown 'between 28 August and 10 October 1959'. Is this what is meant by the 1960 version? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 15:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was my slip-up. It's the 1959 version that's missing. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Primacy of the UK first edition[edit]

Prompted by the Fishbourne/Foxbourne confusion, it occurs to me that we categorically should not be referencing the American edition of the book so extensively. I will therefore endeavour to covert the references to the UK first edition published by Nelson. Nick Cooper (talk) 18:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It threw up the strange fact that - if indeed it really does - the US edition replaced "Climax Club" with "Reform Club," even though the former is still used in various reprints (or at least the three I have to hand). However, it did reveal that it is actually the UK first edition that erroneously has "Foxbourne" at the start of the novel, "Fishbourne" at the end, and the latter is the corrected form subsequently. I will therefore amend the footnote accordingly. Nick Cooper (talk) 21:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating. I have a later (UK) print and always wondered why Gutenberg began with Foxbourne and ended with Fishbourne - so that's why... Thanks for clarifying it! --Thrissel (talk) 21:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it looks like Gutenberg used the first US edition, judging from the use of "Reform Club" in their text. Presumably the use of "Foxbourne" was a simple typesetting error by Nelson's printers, subsequently corrected. Nick Cooper (talk) 22:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]