Talk:To the Lighthouse

The Plot Summary

It's almost a joke on plot summaries, that this novel's page features one. I encourage anyone who has not done so, to read the book, and then return here and read the plot summary, especially of the long first section. If you're anything like me, you'll think, "That's not it at all." Is it what "happened"? Maybe. I guess. But the entire point of the book is...

Never mind. My point is that that plot summary - any plot summary - not only fails to accurately describe the book, what it is about or how it is about it, but it actually misrepresents the book. It's like describing what happens in Ulysses (which I'm sure is also done on that book's page). I mean what is the point? What value is added to an encyclopedia entry of a book like this by posting what are, at best, notes on "real world" events in the novel, in order, that could conceivably be of use only to author or student in helping to keep organized the real world events and order of events in his head? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.77.90 (talk) 07:20, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree, Wikipedia plot summaries tend to be a bit too much. But "helping to keep organized the [...] events" is a useful end in itself, in particular since there is no efficient reference system for novels and many other long texts. If you have outlined the events, then at least you have something. But a rough outline is all you should try to do.

This article has many qualities though. Who came up with this sentence in the Narration section? "Shifts can occur even mid-sentence, and in some sense they resemble the rotating beam of the lighthouse itself." I don't know if it's perfectly suitable for a WP article, but it's a beautiful description. Does anyone know if there is a documented source for it other than WP? 77.105.196.184 (talk) 10:23, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

"Modernism"

Deleted the modernism section as it was vague, unperceptive, misleading and poorly written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.204.87 (talk) 23:20, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Original research

The mind map featured seems to be original research. No citation is given. 86.181.132.25 (talk) 08:41, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

To the Lighthouse (improvements)

Plot

The plot is very small and doesn't provide much background information. While it paints a clear picture of the setting and the inspiration for said setting it barely mentions the books characters. Most characters are mentioned throughout the plot summary, however, most are mentioned only once and some are not mentioned at all. The article overemphasizes the setting and doesn't provide much information in other subjects. Despite the characters not being the main part of the story they are the medium the story is told and taking some out of the equation makes it impossible to understand this novel.

The summary also skips details that add up to a major event and explain why and how events happen throughout the story. Even though it is a summary, it still needs explanation and analysis; the article doesn't provide it. The analysis is barely there and just states the obvious key points just scratching the surface level. It doesn't allude to literary techniques or the significance of some events in the story, nor the impact the events have on it.

Themes

The articles does provide the main themes and explains why they are the main themes but it does not give examples. Again, the issue here is analysis. The themes are stated as a fact, they aren't introduced and then proved, making them unreliable and confusing.

Narration and Autobiography

The perspective is provided the exact amount of discussion needed. It connects the story to Woolf's life really well, providing an explanation for the creation of this book and what inspired it.

Bibliography

It has a lot of unbiased resources, which are all cited and paraphrased.

Dani.riverad (talk) 01:08, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Dani.riverad

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:To the Lighthouse/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.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

"Large parts of Woolf's novel don't concern themselves with the objects of vision, but rather investigate the means of perception, attempting to understand people in the act of looking." --This appears to be lifted from a critic (Davies presumably), without being recognizable as a characteristic of TtL. I don't see how this is at all helpful in any "encyclopedia" sense. If we're doing lit crit here, then I could certainly unload my notions about the book -- but we're not supposed to be doing criticism, are we? Similarly, the notion that the book has an "omniscient narrator" is inadequate, as if Woolf were Dickens. The narrator's perspective travels from one character to another, so that we're given a look into their thoughts without moving into first person or direct transcription. "Free indirect discourse," if you will. --Andersonblog 21:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC) "To the Lighthouse follows and extends the tradition of modernist novelists like Marcel Proust and James Joyce, where the plot is secondary to philosophical introspection, and the prose can be winding and hard to follow." --I don't have a problem with "winding prose," but I do have a problem with "hard to follow;" this is a critical and not a detached or objective passage. CapnFafhrd (talk) 19:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 08:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)