Talk:The Town Mouse and the Country Mouse

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

Untitled[edit]

This was not written by Aesop but Ovid in Metamorphosis

my mistake, Horace not Ovid

Cakes and Ale[edit]

I have removed the reference to 'cakes and ale' becoming an idiom. The wording was originally from Shakespeare's Twelfth Night [1] and imported into a translation of Aesop because it had already become idiomatic. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of film adaptation of The Town Mouse and the Country Mouse[edit]

Hi Mzilikazi. Most articles of this type do include a section on film adaptations and the like. Why, in your view, is it relevant that there was a dramatization at the Merseyside Young People's Theatre in 1987, but that this Canadian film adaptation seven years prior is not relevant? I would in fact argue that a film adaptation by an Oscar-nominated animator is more relevant and a local youth theatre adaptation... Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the mention was a little too brief as it stood?? You can see the animated short here: http://www.nfb.ca/film/town_mouse_country_mouse/
--Annielo gue (talk) 19:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's also still in the article as an External link, which Mzilikazi chose not to remove. I don't think it merits any more than a short mention in the article, frankly. But do I think film adaptations are one way for this Start-class article to grow. There have been two, according to IMDb: this one, and a TV series more loosely based on the fable. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could mention perhaps be reinstated as something like:
In 1980, the fable was adapted as a 1980 animated short by Evelyn Lambart for the National Film Board of Canada (NFB). It was her last film with the NFB,[1][2] and the last of her seven morality tales for children, among which was also an adaptation of another Aesop's fable, The Lion and the Mouse, rendered with the same style of paper cut-outs transferred to lithograph plates, painted and animated.[3]
  1. ^ Kilmer, David (16 April 1999). "Evelyn Lambart, 1914 - 1999". Animation World Network. Retrieved 23 February 2011.
  2. ^ The animated short can be watched at the the NFB website (Requires Adobe Flash)
  3. ^ "article on Evelyn Lambart". Canadian Film Encyclopedia. Retrieved 25 February 2011.
?
--Annielogue (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's great, imo. I don't know if this answers Mzilikazi's concern but I do see now that the relevance is much more evident. (but the link to the film, which uses rich media and is a primary source, should be best left as an external link, per our guidelines. no?) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:40, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of what happens here, I'm importing your text into Evelyn Lambart. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My main objection to the deleted inclusion was that it was lazy, gave no reference and was more concerned about the film as genre and its creator than with the subject of the article. Another objection was the insensitivity of putting it in the adaptations section, where it doesn't fit. There's nothing particularly novel about this piece of rather childish whimsy, it's purely derivative and anecdotal. On the other hand, it does seem to go better with the other cartoon in the External Links. Both I and Annielogue are not happy with crowding in mention of each and every popular allusion to any fable (of which there are ultimately thousands). I'm glad you've worked out a strategy with him/her for dealing with this kind of genre. I'm sympathetic to widening the scope of material with which WP deals but am restive when it is forced into a context where it adds nothing to the understanding of the topic. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 22:26, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what's "insensitive" about putting a film adaptation, in chronological order, in a section devoted to adaptations. I also take exception to my work being called lazy, of course. Oh, and "the the other cartoon in the External Links" is the same film: you can't have looked at my edit very carefully. I get the distinct impression you have some WP:OWN issues regarding this and I don't care for the attitude. Annielogue, thank you for your kind efforts to help. I'll be on my way and won't be responding to any further comments or insults. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:18, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shawn, I though you might be happy to learn that mention of the Evelyn Lambert film has now been added to the article and given context among all the other film adaptations. My criticism of the former mention as being more concerned with the film as film rather than as an illustration of the article still stands, however. Annielogue is less forthright than myself, but in fact it was he who recently suggested guidelines for articles on the subject at the Aesop's Fables discussion page. Take a look at item 6, which suggests that instances of the fable in popular culture should not be 'a mere list of small bit-part appearances'. I hope you'll understand where we were both coming from in our various ways. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 09:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Intrusive tagging[edit]

I have very little patience with critical tags appearing at the head of articles. There has been discussion among Administrators about the appropriateness of this practice, especially since the backlog of work means they are not revisited or revised for months, if not years. In this case it questions differences of referencing by multiple editors and seems more a bureacratic piece of self-righteousness than a help to readers or contributors. I noticed the use of subjunctive mood; the style 'may' have this or that result. It's open to interpret this as an open possibility...it may not also and I've therefore deleted the tag. The courtesy of explaining why it matters and what might be done to remedy the situation would be helpful too. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 22:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Town Mouse and the Country Mouse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:10, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Town_Mouse_and_the_Country_Mouse&oldid=1208560030"