Talk:Strangers on a Train (novel): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:07, 1 June 2022

Women writers Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Novels: Crime Start‑class Mid‑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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Crime task force.

Untitled

This page is about the movie not the book. The main character of the book is an architect, not a tennis player.

No, about the novel not the film, that is elsewhere. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 14:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.I. Arrest?

First the plot summary describes the detective as a "private detective", then at the end of the summary it says that the detective arrests one of the murderers. How would a P.I. arrest someone? They are not police officers.

Keith Ellington (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unforgotten, series 2

The key plot element of doing another's murder is the basis for the mystery to be solved in Unforgotten, series 2 [1] Marcas.oduinn (talk) 07:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What homosexual subtext?

Both this article & the article on the film currently say that the novel had a homosexual subtext. The source for this claim, McGilligan/ISBN 978-0-06-098827-2, doesn't justify this. It's a book about Hitchcock. There is only one sentence on the subject in the book: "The homoeroticism that Highsmith hinted at in Bruno’s idolization of Guy would be preserved [in Hitchcock's film]." Nothing to explain why Bruno's idolization of Guy is homoerotic, nor any references to other works which explain why it is homoerotic. McGilligan just states it as fact. Personally, I don't see it. Also, earlier in that same paragraph, McGilligan says "Highsmith’s Bruno is a physically repugnant alcoholic" whereas Highsmith actually describes him as having "...an interesting face, though Guy did not know why" and "The skin was smooth as a girl's, even waxenly clear" so maybe McGilligan didn't bother actually reading the novel or something.

Also there's the part in chapter 12, just after Bruno has killed Miriam, where "He was just heading for a man standing by the door, to ask directions--he knew he shouldn't go there in a taxi--when he realized he wanted a woman. He wanted a woman more than ever before in his life, and that he did pleased him prodigiously. He hadn't wanted one since he got to Santa Fe, though twice Wilson had gotten him into it." So since meeting Guy (like two weeks, give or take), he's gone to bed with two women, and now he really wants to go to bed with a third. Sounds super-gay to me.

McGilligan does cite Carringer/doi:10.1632/s0030812900105255 (which is indirectly cited in the article on the film), which might seem to discuss the issue, but I can't tell. I couldn't get a copy of Carringer's original article, but I could get a letter to the editor by one Mervyn Nicholson about the piece & Carringer's reply (doi:10.1632/pmla.2001.116.5.1448) in the same journal. Neither author discusses the novel, only the film.

In any case, it seems to me that allegedly notorious homosexual subtext of Highsmith's novel is not established, so I'm going to take it out of both articles. Feel free to put it back in if there's an actual good source for it though. Dingsuntil (talk) 10:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 The key plot element of doing another's murder is the basis for the mystery to be solved in Unforgotten, series 2 [https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/feb/10/unforgotten-review-a-satisfying-ending-that-lingers-after-the-credits-roll] [[User:Marcas.oduinn|Marcas.oduinn]] ([[User talk:Marcas.oduinn|talk]]) 07:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
+== What homosexual subtext? ==
+Both this article & the article on the film currently say that the novel had a homosexual subtext. The source for this claim, McGilligan/ISBN 978-0-06-098827-2, doesn't justify this. It's a book about Hitchcock. There is only one sentence on the subject in the book: "The homoeroticism that Highsmith hinted at in Bruno’s idolization of Guy would be preserved [in Hitchcock's film]." Nothing to explain why Bruno's idolization of Guy is homoerotic, nor any references to other works which explain why it is homoerotic. McGilligan just states it as fact. Personally, I don't see it. Also, earlier in that same paragraph, McGilligan says "Highsmith’s Bruno is a physically repugnant alcoholic" whereas Highsmith actually describes him as having "...an interesting face, though Guy did not know why" and "The skin was smooth as a girl's, even waxenly clear" so maybe McGilligan didn't bother actually reading the novel or something.
+Also there's the part in chapter 12, just after Bruno has killed Miriam, where "He was just heading for a man standing by the door, to ask directions--he knew he shouldn't go there in a taxi--when he realized he wanted a woman. He wanted a woman more than ever before in his life, and that he did pleased him prodigiously. He hadn't wanted one since he got to Santa Fe, though twice Wilson had gotten him into it." So since meeting Guy (like two weeks, give or take), he's gone to bed with two women, and now he really wants to go to bed with a third. Sounds super-gay to me.
+McGilligan does cite Carringer/doi:10.1632/s0030812900105255 (which is indirectly cited in the article on the film), which might seem to discuss the issue, but I can't tell. I couldn't get a copy of Carringer's original article, but I could get a letter to the editor by one Mervyn Nicholson about the piece & Carringer's reply (doi:10.1632/pmla.2001.116.5.1448) in the same journal. Neither author discusses the novel, only the film.
+In any case, it seems to me that allegedly notorious homosexual subtext of Highsmith's novel is not established, so I'm going to take it out of both articles. Feel free to put it back in if there's an actual good source for it though. [[User:Dingsuntil|Dingsuntil]] ([[User talk:Dingsuntil|talk]]) 10:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)