Talk:Clarissa (novel)

Untitled

This "article" (which originally came verbatim from the Samuel Richardson article) reads like a book report. I've done a (very) little copyediting, but was unable to improve it much. Hence I append the following notice. - dcljr (talk) 06:33, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

I have removed the "cleanup-tone" notice from here and will add it instead to the actual article. Dr Gangrene 3 July 2005 13:56 (UTC)

Synopsis

I edited the synopsis the other week (sorry for not commenting at the time) as it contained the glaring inaccuracy of claiming that Clarissa is successfully forced into a marriage by her family, when in fact she runs away just before they can do so. It's generally a fairly poor synopsis, I suspect the author had not read the novel. For instance, it implies that Lovelace is forced into raping Clarissa, and also that the rape directly causes her death. Clarissa dies of a lingering illness which is not named, although judging from her symptoms and behaviour the most likely modern diagnosis would be anorexia (this theory is controversial). Most characters and events are left out. I could possibly do a better job given a little time, I'm currently on my third reading of the text and will be running an online reading group for it in January.

Elettaria 18:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Anorexia? No way. She starves herself to death in order to restore her "virtue" lost during the unconscious whore-house raping. To say she has anorexia implies that she had body image issues. I don't think that applies here.

geoffr111 22:52, 18 January 2007 (EST)

The term anorexia doesn't necessarily imply "body image issues"; it can be a reaction to sexual abuse and/or a psychological need to feel in control. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.61.217 (talk • contribs)

Fixed the plot synopsis; someone had apparently deleted a large, random chunk out of the middle such that it no longer made grammatical sense. I restored it as it was two edits ago with the exception that I changed that Lovelace's desire for Clarissa "FORCES" him to rape her to the more appropriate "DRIVES." Also, I changed that she "REMAINS" dangerously ill to "BECOMES" since, as Elettaria has said, the former seems to suggest, erroneously, that the rape causes it.

geoffr111 11:32, 18 October 2007 (EST)

Attempted to clarify the initial situation in Clarissa, why the Harlowes should care so much whom Clarissa marries, but the synopsis is still quite crude; it doesn't at all give Lovelace's perspective on the matter. Dhrichter (talk) 15:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think Clarissa either has anorexia or starves herself to death, and the reasons given here are not adequate to support those hypotheses. I'm not sure that we can make judgments about a diagnosis such as anorexia that may not have had the same currency at the time Richardson wrote as it has now. Clarissa also insists that she refuses to starve herself to death, and in fact, is determined to live, except that she believes herself to have sustained too great a shock by everything that has happened to her for her will to be of much use in keeping her alive. If she dies of malnutrition, which is unclear, it is because she cannot take solid food, which could be for a number of reasons not relating to her will or anorexia. We could say that she dies of grief, but it is all much more complicated than the loss of her virginity. I think Richardson tries to show that what she dies of is the enormous unjust attack on the integrity of her pure and unique selfhood that has been sustained beginning with her family's demands for her marriage and every event following through to Lovelace's rape of her. This is a very complicated book and it is not very useful to try and reduce it to easy answers. Marcsamuelsmith (talk) 01:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

The opening introduction to this article needs revision. The subject of this book is not a young lady whose quest for virtue is thwarted by her family, as this implies that she is not virtuous at the start of the book, and gives too much attention to the role of her family in terms of the relative quantity of content of the novel. The primary subject of the novel is the trials and death of a virtuous young lady who is psychologically and sexually attacked and destroyed by an unscrupulous and abusive young man. I realise this is not appropriate language, will think if i can figure it out. Marcsamuelsmith (talk) 02:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Critical reading

Is there any particular reason this article has no mention to Terry Eagleton and his Rape of Clarissa? --Aphaia 11:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I would presume that it's because no one has been able to write something and source it with reliable sources? McKay 15:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Japanese translation

http://web.archive.org/web/20091003131051/http://yorific.cll.hokudai.ac.jp/

• This is a Japanese translation

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Clarissa (novel)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Can someone please edit this? It does not make sense.

Last edited at 05:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 11:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Sources for "Clarissa"

1.Flynn, Carol Houlihan. Samuel Richardson: A Man Of Letters : A Man Of Letters. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 18 July 2016.

2. Fulton, Gordon D. Styles Of Meaning And Meanings Of Style In Richardson's Clarissa. Montreal: MQUP, 1999. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 18 July 2016.

3.Stuber, Florian. "Clarissa: A Religious Novel?." Studies In The Literary Imagination 28.1 (1995): 105. MasterFILE Elite. Web. 18 July 2016. Sunflower 123 (talk) 23:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Outline for "Clarissa"

I. To add a section titled “Author”

a. Some basic background on the author

b.Examples of how the author’s own ideals and understanding of life and morality play out in the novel.

II. Add some information to the introduction

a. Clarissa as a religious novel Sunflower 123 (talk) 23:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clarissa. 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/20101207000955/http://www.univ-metz.fr/recherche/labos/ecritures/publications/ to http://www.univ-metz.fr/recherche/labos/ecritures/publications/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:27, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Synopsis in confusion?

"Lovelace departs for Europe and his correspondence with his friend Belford continues." How can Belford be Lovelace's friend after threating to cut Lovelace's throat? 62.218.25.131 (talk) 09:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 10 November 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Clear consensus that the novel is not the primary topic. Some support for the name to be the primary topic, but it looks like most believed this to be a WP:NOPRIMARY. (closed by non-admin page mover) estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

---

• Clarissa → Clarissa (novel)
• Clarissa (disambiguation) → Clarissa

– While the novel may be important, it cannot be considered as the primary topic for the name "Clarissa". While there may be an argument for re-assigning the primary topic to Clarissa (given name), the best result would be to use the title for a disambiguation page as is presently the norm for other given names such as Frank, Louis, or Sandra. Loopy30 (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Clarissa (novel) would fit the usual naming convention. 162 etc. (talk) 01:46, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, except that there are two novels named Clarissa (another in 1981 by Stefan Zweig). Loopy30 (talk) 02:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  There is no article for the Zweig novel, therefore Clarissa (novel) is unambiguous. In fact, it has redirected here since 2007. 162 etc. (talk) 02:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  And until such time an article for the Zweig novel is started, a disambiguated redlinked entry is not needed on the dab page. I have amended the proposed move location above to Clarissa (novel). Loopy30 (talk) 03:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  If someone writes an article on the 1981 novel, then the wikipages would need to be distinguished, Clarissa (1981 novel) and Clarissa (1748 novel). However, it is highly unlikely the 1981 novel merits an article. Especially not compared to the older, more influential and famous nametwin. Scharb (talk) 19:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support Clarissa (novel) per nom. The given name is likely to be the primary topic. Tevildo (talk) 20:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Theparties (talk) 20:40, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
• Question: Is there a case for Clarissa; or, The History of a Young Lady, per WP:SUBTITLE? "When the most commonly used name is ambiguous, the full title and subtitle might be suitable to be used as a form of natural disambiguation". Orlando: A Biography is the most analogous title given there. Ham II (talk) 14:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Yes, there is precedent for this - Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded. I would support Clarissa; or, The History of a Young Lady per the above. Tevildo (talk) 21:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support. The novel is certainly significant, but it's not primary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:23, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.