![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|
Again here's another article on a Jack London piece of work that is in desperate need of being lengthened! This is degrading to any fans of Jack London to have to read an article like this! Please would someone lengthen this! -James Pandora Adams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.154.190 ( talk) 20:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
There's nothing more to include. It's already pretty descriptive. Maybe the time should be added.-- 99.141.169.115 ( talk) 19:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)reader§
The story "White Fang," is often considered a sequal to the story "Call of the Wild," and even if this is not true the parallel similartie between the two is to important not to be mentioned. In "Call of the Wild," the dog goes from being a house dog to being a wild dog and in "White Fang," the dog goes from being a wild dog to a house dog? This would be an excellent way to lengthen this article! -Again James Pandora Adams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.154.190 ( talk) 22:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
The tone of the article doesn't read clearly and smoothly like a good encyclopaedia article should. Sometimes the text seems clunky or childlike. There are problems also with the content of the article; some sentences trail off into areas not relevant to the article itself. 210.80.129.127 ( talk) 03:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
That claim is completely erroneous. It is his most popular, partly because vehement McCarthyism cast a shadow over his more intellectual works that defended and explored socialism. Too often do we think of most popular as best. I challenge a wikier to change this misconception. I believe that among the literary community, Martin Eden is generally considered to be his magnum opus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.41.31.131 ( talk) 14:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
If you read the novel carefully the characters leave the Yukon valley over the moutains heading east. This puts the Yeehats and final scene in the Canadian Northwest frontier not Alaska. Yes I am one of those Bonds. RichardBond ( talk) 02:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
In the infobox, the country of the first edition is indicated as Canada. Is this correct? Wasn't this book published first in the United States? -- Panda10 ( talk) 23:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
There's also an Anime adaption of this novel, an approx. 70 minute movie. However, I have very little info on it, just a European VHS release which unhelpfully has no opening or closing credits (not even a title screen). I believe it to be the work of Toei (possibly the same production crew as Ginga Nagareboshi Gin), based on the animation and art-style though again I have no way of confirming this. Does anyone know more about it so a note could be added under Adaptions in the article? -- TheHande ( talk) 16:20, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I will be using the source below and don't know how to format {sfn} style:
These are the various chapters I'll be using:
Thanks. Truthkeeper ( talk) 21:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
A copyedit has now twice been reverted, described as "erroneous". [1], [2] I have access to the sources and wrote most of the text in the article, so am interested to know what's erroneous. Will change anything that's inaccurate. Thanks. Truthkeeper ( talk) 18:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
99.246.93.154 ( talk) 03:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC)I just read Call of the Wild in a collection entitled something like "Jack London: Tales of the North" from a reputable publisher. It has the illustrations of this page and the same plot, but it's only about 40-50 pages long, plus the plot summary episode (here) of the Skookum King doesn't occur. Am I reading an earlier version, an unacknowledged unabridged piece, or something else? The page as currently written provided no guidance.
It would help if this article could refer to this book in all instances as a novella as opposed to a novel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.199.76.165 ( talk) 07:56, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, chiming in a bit belatedly. I've removed it from the Novella page until we have sources verifying it as such. I wrote almost all the text here and looked at the sources used - none refer to it as a novella. I'll dig around a bit more, and if there are scholarly sources identifying it as a novella, then the best thing to do would be to add an additional section explaining the discrepancy. Victoria ( tk) 15:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I have been comparing ratios on the popular site "Goodreads". The ratio is (novels/novel):(novella/novellas) using the "top shelves" feature.
This is partly an issue of "advertising". If the book is billed as a novel, then it continues to be regarded that way. -- Honestly, Bodhi ( talk) 18:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
-- Honestly, Bodhi ( talk) 19:12, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I would encourage those who actively maintain this article to make the change in the right direction to "a short novel". With its ~<32k word count and lack of subplots, I believe it is most accurately described as a "novella", although "novel" will do. The fact that On Chesil Beach at around 40k words was scraping the bottom of the barrel for the Booker Prize "novel" category shows how far behind tCoTW is by a purely length criteria. The "length" section of the "novel" article here on Wikipedia states "The requirement of length has been traditionally connected with the notion that a novel should encompass the 'totality of life.'" I don't think tCoTW encompasses that lofty breadth of experience. It is divided into chapters, Animal Farm is too… White Fang is the real "novel" and it is nearly twice as long. I think it qualifies as both, but most novels now come in at greater word counts than even White Fang, that number being 80k words… Readers of this article would be better poised to understand the context of this historical narrative by the use of the word "novella". -- Honestly, Bodhi ( talk) 04:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Without having read the cited article by Donald Pizer, "Jack London: The Problem of Form", I am curious about his "evident finding" of "a Christian theme of love and redemption as shown by Buck's refusal to revert to violence until after the death of Thorton..." Buck engages in and even initiates physical violence several times in the story, beginning with his repeated attacks on a human, the man in the red shirt. Most of the fighting in the middle part of the story is then dog-on-dog and some of it is quite pronounced as in a fight to the death with Spitz. Later Buck attacks another human with intentions to kill him. This occurs in Chapter VI: "For the Love of a Man", just prior to Buck saving Thornton from drowning. While at a bar, a character named "Black" Burton accosts Thornton inciting Buck to primordaly lunge for Burton and take two attempts at his throat. Even after Buck is separated from the man, he continues to "prowl up and down, growling furiously, attempting to rush in..." This incident is significant in that Thonton is alive and well able to defend himself and Burton is implicitly a Caucasian, not a nameless aboriginal, but Buck still attepmts to solve the problem immediately and ultimately with physical violence.
I admit again I have not read Mr. Pizer's essay. Does he write about the incidents I have mentioned with a reconciliation to his point above? Dmw15101 ( talk) 13:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
The disambig page shows a poem of the same name by Robert Service. Did Jack London take his title from this? Valetude ( talk) 11:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
This page (until I removed the amount) says $2500. The page for Jack London said $2000: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jack_London&oldid=1026250868
Both were marked with a citation. I don't know which is correct, so I am adding this note and removing both figures.
There is a 1993 film version starring Rick Schroeder which is oddly missing from the list of adaptations. 67.243.220.61 ( talk) 07:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
|
Again here's another article on a Jack London piece of work that is in desperate need of being lengthened! This is degrading to any fans of Jack London to have to read an article like this! Please would someone lengthen this! -James Pandora Adams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.154.190 ( talk) 20:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
There's nothing more to include. It's already pretty descriptive. Maybe the time should be added.-- 99.141.169.115 ( talk) 19:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)reader§
The story "White Fang," is often considered a sequal to the story "Call of the Wild," and even if this is not true the parallel similartie between the two is to important not to be mentioned. In "Call of the Wild," the dog goes from being a house dog to being a wild dog and in "White Fang," the dog goes from being a wild dog to a house dog? This would be an excellent way to lengthen this article! -Again James Pandora Adams —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.154.190 ( talk) 22:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
The tone of the article doesn't read clearly and smoothly like a good encyclopaedia article should. Sometimes the text seems clunky or childlike. There are problems also with the content of the article; some sentences trail off into areas not relevant to the article itself. 210.80.129.127 ( talk) 03:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
That claim is completely erroneous. It is his most popular, partly because vehement McCarthyism cast a shadow over his more intellectual works that defended and explored socialism. Too often do we think of most popular as best. I challenge a wikier to change this misconception. I believe that among the literary community, Martin Eden is generally considered to be his magnum opus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.41.31.131 ( talk) 14:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
If you read the novel carefully the characters leave the Yukon valley over the moutains heading east. This puts the Yeehats and final scene in the Canadian Northwest frontier not Alaska. Yes I am one of those Bonds. RichardBond ( talk) 02:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
In the infobox, the country of the first edition is indicated as Canada. Is this correct? Wasn't this book published first in the United States? -- Panda10 ( talk) 23:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
There's also an Anime adaption of this novel, an approx. 70 minute movie. However, I have very little info on it, just a European VHS release which unhelpfully has no opening or closing credits (not even a title screen). I believe it to be the work of Toei (possibly the same production crew as Ginga Nagareboshi Gin), based on the animation and art-style though again I have no way of confirming this. Does anyone know more about it so a note could be added under Adaptions in the article? -- TheHande ( talk) 16:20, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I will be using the source below and don't know how to format {sfn} style:
These are the various chapters I'll be using:
Thanks. Truthkeeper ( talk) 21:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
A copyedit has now twice been reverted, described as "erroneous". [1], [2] I have access to the sources and wrote most of the text in the article, so am interested to know what's erroneous. Will change anything that's inaccurate. Thanks. Truthkeeper ( talk) 18:36, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
99.246.93.154 ( talk) 03:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC)I just read Call of the Wild in a collection entitled something like "Jack London: Tales of the North" from a reputable publisher. It has the illustrations of this page and the same plot, but it's only about 40-50 pages long, plus the plot summary episode (here) of the Skookum King doesn't occur. Am I reading an earlier version, an unacknowledged unabridged piece, or something else? The page as currently written provided no guidance.
It would help if this article could refer to this book in all instances as a novella as opposed to a novel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.199.76.165 ( talk) 07:56, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi, chiming in a bit belatedly. I've removed it from the Novella page until we have sources verifying it as such. I wrote almost all the text here and looked at the sources used - none refer to it as a novella. I'll dig around a bit more, and if there are scholarly sources identifying it as a novella, then the best thing to do would be to add an additional section explaining the discrepancy. Victoria ( tk) 15:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I have been comparing ratios on the popular site "Goodreads". The ratio is (novels/novel):(novella/novellas) using the "top shelves" feature.
This is partly an issue of "advertising". If the book is billed as a novel, then it continues to be regarded that way. -- Honestly, Bodhi ( talk) 18:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
-- Honestly, Bodhi ( talk) 19:12, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I would encourage those who actively maintain this article to make the change in the right direction to "a short novel". With its ~<32k word count and lack of subplots, I believe it is most accurately described as a "novella", although "novel" will do. The fact that On Chesil Beach at around 40k words was scraping the bottom of the barrel for the Booker Prize "novel" category shows how far behind tCoTW is by a purely length criteria. The "length" section of the "novel" article here on Wikipedia states "The requirement of length has been traditionally connected with the notion that a novel should encompass the 'totality of life.'" I don't think tCoTW encompasses that lofty breadth of experience. It is divided into chapters, Animal Farm is too… White Fang is the real "novel" and it is nearly twice as long. I think it qualifies as both, but most novels now come in at greater word counts than even White Fang, that number being 80k words… Readers of this article would be better poised to understand the context of this historical narrative by the use of the word "novella". -- Honestly, Bodhi ( talk) 04:49, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Without having read the cited article by Donald Pizer, "Jack London: The Problem of Form", I am curious about his "evident finding" of "a Christian theme of love and redemption as shown by Buck's refusal to revert to violence until after the death of Thorton..." Buck engages in and even initiates physical violence several times in the story, beginning with his repeated attacks on a human, the man in the red shirt. Most of the fighting in the middle part of the story is then dog-on-dog and some of it is quite pronounced as in a fight to the death with Spitz. Later Buck attacks another human with intentions to kill him. This occurs in Chapter VI: "For the Love of a Man", just prior to Buck saving Thornton from drowning. While at a bar, a character named "Black" Burton accosts Thornton inciting Buck to primordaly lunge for Burton and take two attempts at his throat. Even after Buck is separated from the man, he continues to "prowl up and down, growling furiously, attempting to rush in..." This incident is significant in that Thonton is alive and well able to defend himself and Burton is implicitly a Caucasian, not a nameless aboriginal, but Buck still attepmts to solve the problem immediately and ultimately with physical violence.
I admit again I have not read Mr. Pizer's essay. Does he write about the incidents I have mentioned with a reconciliation to his point above? Dmw15101 ( talk) 13:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
The disambig page shows a poem of the same name by Robert Service. Did Jack London take his title from this? Valetude ( talk) 11:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
This page (until I removed the amount) says $2500. The page for Jack London said $2000: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Jack_London&oldid=1026250868
Both were marked with a citation. I don't know which is correct, so I am adding this note and removing both figures.
There is a 1993 film version starring Rick Schroeder which is oddly missing from the list of adaptations. 67.243.220.61 ( talk) 07:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)