Talk:Philosophical fiction

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

unclear text removed from article

I removed this from the end of the (currently) last paragraph, since it was ungrammatical, unclear in general, and unclear re how it related to the preceding information: "This kind of script is to use a normal story to explain easily difficult, or dark, ways of human life. For example, in "The lie of god", the English version of the French author Laurent Granier, "Le Mensonge de dieu", you can discover through the life of the hero an allegory for the acts of all mankind." Hope this helps, "alyosha" (talk) 18:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I fixed the first sentence, and added it back (ie. I fixed the grammar; I hope it says something intelligent, because I'm no expert on Philosophical fiction). I left out the rest as being references to non-notable works. -- TimNelson (talk) 03:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Camus?

Why is Camus not mentioned in here, when The Stranger is practically a requirement for any High School curriculum? He wrote some of the most important philosophical novels of the 20th century, and I'm very disappointed to not see a mention. 68.21.207.50 (talk) 15:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

• Then mention him yourself. 64.85.228.98 (talk) 03:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what it was like then, but now it mentions "Most of the novels by Albert Camus". -- TimNelson (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. This list is imcomplete. I also feel that Jean Paul Sartre, Andre Malraux, Marcel Proust. Stendhal and Hermann Hesse need to be mentioned. Pratinavanil (talk) 12:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Hesse was mentioned as "most of the novels by ... Hesse". I've added the others. Please feel free to improve things! Remember, WP:BOLD!

-- TimNelson (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

List/Table Format

I think this lends itself more to being divided into a table by title, genre (relating to the philosophy(s) it represented), and author rather than the haphazard string provided. There are a lot more out there, and it would be easy to tack on and take away, than it would be to edit the structure of the paragraph on the page. What do we think?

Done. Badly (but better than not at all). Feel free to improve. -- TimNelson (talk) 02:32, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Article Title / topic

why philosophical novel? isn't this simply a sub-category of philosophical fiction? (there is no page "philosophical fiction") and there is no significant reason for saying a novel is the primary form for philosophical fiction, as a lot of the mentioned writers also publish collections of short stories, etc. Nnnudibranch 09:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Moved. -- TimNelson (talk) 02:18, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Zarathustra

It shouldn't be mentioned because it's not a novel at all, and more than Plato's dialogues are plays. It's never shelved as fiction. I will remove it unless someone has a persuasive argument for its inclusion.KD Tries Again (talk) 16:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)KD Tries Again

WP:BOLD -- TimNelson (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

discursive philosophy

Could we put a definition for this somewhere? --Epochwolf (talk) 17:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Meaningless Categorization

Given that most literature outside of "formula fiction" goes about expressing something true, isn't it meaningless to attempt to distinguish "philosophical fiction" from anything other fiction of literary merit? I'm not grasping the parameters or defining elements that makes a novel "philosophical." Why is "The Sound And The Fury" or "The Sun Also Rises" any less philosophical than "No Exit"?Pass-a-fist (talk) 23:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Problems with the Introduction

The present Introduction seems to contain some problems:

• Isn’t fiction not just prose novels but also poems and plays?

• To count as philosophical fiction, should the discussion of philosophical issues be overt not implicit?

• In addition to the useful list of topics given, which could perhaps be condensed, what about other areas which philosophical fiction addresses like the cosmos, time and space, human existence, the human mind and language?

• Isn’t a significant proportion of science fiction and utopian/dystopian fiction not philosophical but rubbish?

In an effort to overcome these problems, here is a suggested rewrite:

Philosophical fiction refers to works of fiction, such as novels, poems and plays, in which a significant proportion of the work is openly devoted to a discussion of the sort of questions normally addressed in discursive philosophy. These might include the cosmos, time and space, human existence, the purpose of life, the human mind, knowledge and language, human values, the functioning of society and the role of art. Philosophical fiction works can include the so-called novel of ideas, including some science fiction and utopian/dystopian fiction, and the Bildungsroman. The basic modus operandi is to explore some of the more difficult or dark parts of human experience through a conventional medium.

--Hors-la-loi 13:09, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Star Trek - and film/TV in general

I noticed that STAR TREK is not mentioned anywhere in this article.

Just because STAR TREK has gained mainstream status in pop culture does not change the fact that originally it was a medium through which Gene Rodenberry was able to teach his philosophy --- and that is something that the early STAR TREK is *known* for.

As a matter of fact, even before STAR TREK, it was known that being a philosopher was what set Gene Rodenberry apart from the other screenwriters in Hollywood.

This makes me wonder if any other TV shows were overlooked regarding the genre of philosophical fiction. Though honestly, I don't know of any other TV shows that do it to the same level as the original STAR TREK. For that matter, even the later STAR TREK doesn't do it at the same level as the original STAR TREK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.16.186.171 (talk) 04:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

LOL. From all movies and episodes I've watched, old and new, there is Nothing philosophical about it. At least not anymore than ANY other random sci-fi book, story, or movie. The fact that it might have been intended to include philosophical concepts, or that original shows stimulated you personally to think about random ideas, does not change the fact that Star Trek has evolved into and IS pretty much a TYPICAL, almost definitive example of what sci-fi is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.130.198.234 (talk) 07:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

What about "Ferdydurke" (1937) by W. Gombrowicz? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.240.30.39 (talk) 09:16, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Wittgenstein’s Mistress Authorship

Wittgenstein’s Mistress is by David Markson, not Wittgenstein Amber12177 (talk) 08:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)