Talk:Emma (novel)

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jkburton. Peer reviewers: Bdahik.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[edit]

"Also, it really should be noted that the father-figure is a particularly villanous version of the generally inept fathers portrayed in Austen's novels."

How so? Mr. Woodhouse is ailing and dependent, but I can't remember him being anything other than kind hearted. He seems to be going senile. Emma's devotion to his welfare is consistent proof of her good nature. Durova 07:02, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Mr Woodhouse could fairly be described as "particularly villainous", but one does have to wonder if he uses is valetudinarianism as a way of manipulating the people and events around him — whether subconsciously or consciously. Ondewelle (talk) 22:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Woodhouse is a particularly toxic parent. --85.222.86.59 (talk) 02:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

external link[edit]

There's something wrong with the External Link to Ye Olde Library or the site seems to have been hacked...

Zee rocks 02:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Does anyone have a problem adding the following link of a hypertext version of Emma, http://www.thefinalclub.org/work-overview.php?work_id=10, to the external links section of this page? There are several other wikipedia links to other content on this site, which is a great resource for academic content and literary commentary. The site also allows any visitors to log in and contribute his or her own commentary. Sorry if I stepped on any toes by just adding the link, but I've posted to talk pages before an no one has ever responded. In fact, I'd be surprised if anyone responded to this. Andrewmagliozzi 02:57, 10 March 2008

Your site has been reviewed several times by editors from the various pages you have posted to, per the comments on your talk page. The general consensus seem to be that the site does not meet the external links guideline. --Ckatzchatspy 18:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

principal characters[edit]

Why aren't Emmas sister Isabella, her husband John Knightley (and their 5 children) not under "principal characters" ? John has to put up with Mr Woodhouse as a father-in-law Hugo999 21:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what? Whether or not a character has to put up with another character does not make that charater a principal character. Mr. and Mrs. John Knightly (and their 5 children) are minor characters. Prtwhitley (talk) 03:34, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

location of Highbury[edit]

if Highbury from the novel is indeed in Surrey, it cannot be the Highbury, Greater London, linked in this article. Furthermore, the novel, 'Emma', states that Emma's sister is settled 16 miles away in Brunswick Square, London, http://www.gutenberg.org/files/158/158-h/158-h.htm#chap01. I think it more likely that Austen's Highbury is fictional in the neighborhood of Weybridge, Surrey, which is approximately 16 miles from Brunswick Square, London.74.245.201.60 (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, so I've removed the link. -Sketchmoose (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'deals with' for 'treats with'[edit]

Ondewelle, please explain your reasoning why the phrase 'deals with', exchanged for 'treats with', improves this passage, particularly in the context given. Thank you.--Jbeans (talk) 08:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A very late response: because 'treats with' didn't seem to me to make sense here. Ondewelle (talk)

Elizabeth attracted to Wickham?[edit]

Isn't it a bit too much to state there was an attraction? It's made clear in the novel that she was never in love with him, and that her partiality wasn't an effect of her feelings for him but his flattering her vanity wounded by Darcy. She’s much more similar to Emma in that than to Marianne. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.222.86.59 (talk) 02:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

character of emma[edit]

emma to me seems to be wilful as we read JANE AUSTEN'S novel. the way how she persistantly continues to do what she does even George Knightly advises her to stop especially when she plans to contiue with her match making habbit.Please am i right when i say so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.199.19.150 (talk) 13:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Emma and the Werewolves, a mashup novel by Jane Austen.. ??"[edit]

1. This terminology is confusing to a typical reader. Even if one is cool to the latest vibes of "mashup", this choice of words --seeming to declare the willing collaboration of a long-dead and defenseless author-- is deceptive or confusing to the rest of the world.

2. I urge our Wikipedia community: clarify to our readers when it reports a mashup title that depicts the original author as a collaborator to the mashup of his/her own creative work.

3. My edit shows one way to explain it neutrally.--Jbeans (talk) 11:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC) (Spacing/separation by --Jbeans (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Emma is a common name —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.19.16 (talk) 17:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent rewrite of Plot summary[edit]

Thank you Anon...110; your rewrite greatly improves this article; an excellent example of reporting the story of the novel--rather than re-telling the story (while wool-gathering and repeating all the maximum details; reader be-damned.). Your economical and skilled writing reported the gist of the plot while cutting the verbiage word-count over ten percent. Welcome aboard and stay with us!--Jbeans (talk) 07:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Page for Emma Woodhouse [the character]?[edit]

First off, I'll just ask: Does Emma Woodhouse have a page of her own that I'm just missing? Let me know, if so. But I haven't been able to find one and so I think it doesn't exist. If that is the case, then I think one should be created. Her importance, as the protagonist of a Jane Austen novel, is such that a page is deserved. Mr. Knightley has a page, after all. I'd be willing to help out, at least some, in making the page--but I have little experience. Not at all sure if this the right place to propose such a thing, so go ahead and tell me if I'm doing this wrong. Alex60466176 (talk) 01:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you! I went ahead and created one, though it needs a lot of work. Emma Woodhouse Cabbers (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone needs to point out all the oblique evidence that Emma is a lesbian at heart: her attraction to a pretty young girl, he indifference to marriage, her strong father fixation up until he dies, etc. She marries at the end, but more to comply with custom and avoid being left an "old maid" than from real love. She seems simply resigned to marriage as a social necessity.98.225.109.243 (talk) 22:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No one needs to point out any such thing. There is as little hint of sexuality in Emma's affection for Harriet as there is love in her attitude toward Frank Churchill, and this implication about her motivations for her marriage with Mr. Knightly is simply not there--Emma is clearly delighted at the time of the proposal and at every time thereafter. One can only only assume this "oblique evidence" is wishful thinking on your part. There are many examples of characters in classic literature that are heavily implied if not stated outright to have homosexual relationships or attractions, and Emma is not one of them. 64.85.227.176 (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Film Version?[edit]

Does this really exist? From the article: 2010: Emma, starring Sarah Cotton as Emma.

I can't find any reference to it anywhere! Not on imdb, as far as I can tell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.173.78.131 (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Summary similar to sparknotes.com[edit]

The plot summary in this article appears to be very similar to the Plot Overview for Emma on sparknotes.com. I thought maybe there should be at least a citation, or maybe the section should be re-written? I don't really have a good understanding of the way these things work (like maybe the author on sparknotes.com also wrote the wikipedia section, so it doesn't need a citation...?) so I figured I'd pose the question here on the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.177.225.180 (talk) 09:08, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just similar, it's identical. Needs to be changed IMO. Anyone up to the task?

Blckmgc (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The current version of the plot summary was inserted on 2 April 2010 by 70.71.217.110 and praised above in section #Excellent rewrite of Plot summary. I think the SparkNotes text dates from August 2002. The plot summary ought to be reverted to the version from 28 March 2010. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

naming[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. At the suggestion of several commenters, I will move the disambiguation page to the base title. Xoloz (talk) 18:20, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Emma → Emma (novel) – too confusing 76.120.175.135 (talk) 18:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, I once dated an Emma, and that is indubitably the first meaning to come to my mind. DeistCosmos (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support highly ambiguous. It should be replaced by the disambiguation page at this location. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 00:58, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, as well as agree that Emma (disambiguation) should be moved to Emma in the event that the proposed move occurs. Steel1943 (talk) 07:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No support - In the English language, this is by and far the most prominent use of the name by itself. Austen simply adds a signfican amount of visibility to this novel. As long as the DAB is linked at the top of the page, there is no reason to redirect to focus people onto that confusing list, Sadads (talk) 17:39, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – or Emma: a novel as the book calls itself. 05:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, with (novel). Or even Emma (Austen novel) to distinguish from the unfinished Emma (Brontë novel) In ictu oculi (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Famous the book may be, but the name is just too generic for the novel to be the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Emma by Jane Austen[edit]

The synopsis needs correcting. From the ages of leading characters to the chronology of the story there are (surprisingly)184.153.40.1 (talk) 21:27, 1 June 2015 (UTC) several errors.[reply]

Richard Cohen 1 June 2015

Which changes exactly do you propose? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:21, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just edited the plot summary a lot. If errors of chronology remain, please fix them. My goal was to remove all the character description in the plot, and in turn, remove plot from the character descriptions. The plot summary still exceeds Wikipedia guidelines on length (about 800 words in four paragraphs) but it is moving in the right direction. The article needs inline citations to sources; many statements are analysis or reference to the past, with no citations at all. --Prairieplant (talk) 08:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have shortened the plot summary which has grown again. The last para of 170 words covers only the last 4 pages, which is stupid. The language veered between Austin's Regency English and American colloquial and needed modifying. Large amounts of detail appear in the character outlines and don't need repeating.
While I was at it, I deleted two sections of blatant OR and moved up the one referenced fact to a more appropriate place. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 10:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
After discussion with the reverting editor, who promises to look into the problem, I have put a tag at the head of the worst section. I hope he will bear in mind the warning that unreferenced material can be challenged and removed. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 14:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maple Grove is not in Yorkshire but near Bristol[edit]

Mr and Mrs Suckling live at Maple Grove in Bristol, mentioned often in Mrs Elton's conversations at Highbury. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.187.156.59 (talk) 10:07, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Emma (novel). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:13, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Early example of a mystery?[edit]

I have the Penguin editions of the Austen novels, purchased some time ago. Penguin Books always have interesting and detailed "Introduction"s written by experts in the field of literature. I believe it is in the "Introduction" to Emma that I read where the sub-plot involving Jane Fairfax and the piano she received as a gift, from an unknown benefactor, was a very early example of a mystery, if not the first example. The townsfolk, especially Emma, were keen to know who the giver was and tried to deduce their identity.

My Austen books are in stacked cartons in a freezing cold garage located down the hill, probably chewed apart by mice by now. Does anyone else have any information on the status of this novel as an early example of a mystery? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 22:27, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'Nikhil Chauhan' is apparently the author...[edit]

Someone has edited the first paragraph to read as the following:

Emma, by Nikhil Chauhan, is a novel about youthful hubris and the perils of misconstrued romance. The novel was first published in December 2008. 3.5964878e33As in his other novels, Nikhil explores the concerns and difficulties of genteel men living in Om prakash residency India; he also creates a lively comedy of manners among his characters.

Before he began the novel, Nikhil wrote, "I am going to take a heroine whom no one but myself will much like."[2] In the first sentence, he introduces the title character as "Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich." Emma is spoiled, headstrong, and self-satisfied; she greatly overestimates her own matchmaking abilities; she is blind to the dangers of meddling in other people's lives; and her imagination and perceptions often lead her astray.


This is also in the info box on the right:

Author Nikhil chauhan

Country India


The links still go to the correct pages, but how can the text be changed? There is no 'edit' function as for the other sections.138.253.79.206 (talk) 13:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emma (novel). 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 12:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emma: review of Wikipedia page[edit]

Hello fellow wikipedians, I have chosen this page as part of a class project to review and update Wikipedia pages relating to Jane Austen. I will be reviewing all sections and proposing updates for those sections that I find could be improved. I will post sections individually as I complete them and welcome comments and suggestions. Jkburton (talk) 17:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just posted a slight update to the initial synopsis and added a section on Minor Characters. Please review to make sure I didn't miss or misstate anything. Jkburton (talk) 21:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just posted a correction to a citation in the opening paragraph. Jkburton (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just posted a revised Reception section with additional quotations and references. Jkburton (talk) 16:38, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just posted a new Publication section with graphic from 1909 edition title page. Jkburton (talk) 20:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just added a link to the Jane Austen in Popular culture site.Jkburton (talk) 19:01, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just posted an update to the introductory paragraph.Jkburton (talk) 17:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just posted additions to the Reception section.Jkburton (talk) 18:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Emma (novel). 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 21:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"last completed novel" contradiction[edit]

This article states (1st sentence) that Emma was "the last of [Austen's] six novels to be completed" (with citation). Our article on Persuasion starts with the sentence: "Persuasion is the last novel fully completed by Jane Austen" (no citation). If someone could figure out which one is correct (with citations) that'd be great.--Philologia (talk) 14:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

The article is very well written; but must we have "Mr" dotted throughout? Tony (talk) 10:38, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is consistent with the style of the novel itself (especially bearing in mind the point in the story about Mrs Elton's faux pas in not using the title), but if there are sentences where you think it goes too far, you are free to amend it. Sbishop (talk) 11:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emma_(novel)&oldid=1194741577"