This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
Latest comment: 17 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
As a longtime student and occasional collector of American clocks, I was stumped by this novel term and had to ask, "What was the author of this page thinking?" During the period discussed here (mainly the Victorian era), the American clock industry turned out hundreds, perhaps thousands, of clock styles, including tall-case clocks, wall clocks, mantel or shelf clocks, and dozens of other kinds of clock. To suggest that there is any one style representing "The American Clock" during this period would be like suggesting there is any one automobile representing "The American Car" of our own time. It's an absurd simplification in either case, so I'm suggesting that this page either be drastically recast and rewritten, or scrapped altogether. Anyone else with thoughts on this topic? Jack Bethune13:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)Reply
The phrase is used in The Ticket-of-Leave Man, from 1866, which I'm wikifying (slowly), so I needed some place to explain the term. Of course, it's also the title of an Arthur Miller play, but I don't know whether that's relevant to this usage. Remember, we're talking about clocks that were wieldy enough to be exported to Europe, so that's one possible reason grandfather clocks would have been generally excluded. Your complaint may be valid, but it seems to me like an expert on French history claiming that the phrase "French toast" is meaningless because the French made lots of different kinds of toast! :) --Quuxplusone17:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
Quuxplusone, thanks for your reply. I found your citations (even admitting Miller's popular play, set in the American Depression of the 30s) mostly obscure, therefore mostly unknown, and the term so vaguely referenced as to be quite unable to justify any purported definition as "...a particular style of clock design followed by the American clockmakers of the day," whether during the "Victorian era" or "afterward." As a consequence, this ambitious definition appears to be not only a personal opinion (encroaching on original research, a WP no-no) but also an apparently unwarranted imposition on the English language, one that I fear most WP readers may not be ready to accept. :) Jack Bethune20:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)Reply
Because of the lack of published references and, consequently, documentary support for the purported definition of "American clock" as a term referring to a "particular style" of clock, it seems the decent thing now would be to scrap this page. As now written, the term's "definition" is little more than personal opinion and, perhaps, original research at best. "American clock" is nonexistent as a meaningful popular expression, and barely mentioned in a couple of obscure literary quotes. As a result, this page is not helpful to Wikipedia readers in its present form. However, it does contain a useful list of American clock manufacturers of the 19th century, which could lead to a new page perhaps dealing with the American clock industry of that period. If not deleted, perhaps this page could be a starting point for that new topic. Comments from WP contributors are welcome. Jack Bethune01:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)Reply