Talk:One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (novel)

Should we add this page to Category:Martyrdom in fiction?

Even though McMurphy doesn't directly and technically die as a result of his challenge to authority, I think one could make a case that he, as a character, he is a martyr (certainly at least a quasimartyr).  That said, the matter is not at all cut-and-dry, and would need to be discussed first.

On the one hand…

In the story, McMurphy challenges the powers that be despite a personal toll it was taking on him in order to help his fellow patients regain a sense of empowerment without which they'd never be able to adjust to Outside society again.  Inevitably, he is given a lobotomy.  Although McMurphy's body technically dies as a direct result of it being smothered by Bromden, in every way that matters (in my opinion, at least), the ward did kill him; it killed the man he was, executed the personality that was Randle Patrick McMurphy, leaving a body arguably devoid of personhood.

On the other hand…

Although Ratched threatens McMurphy with a lobotomy after the shock treatments failed to curb his orneriness, the ward does not carry through with this threat until McMurphy strangles Ratched.  Thus, although the case can certainly be made that the ward absolutely executed the person that was McMurphy (leaving behind a mindless body), it could be contended that this doesn't rise to martyring if this execution was performed for "legitimate" reasons as opposed to being performed in order to stifle his problem with authority.  If McMurphy's disregard for authority alone would not have driven the doctors to lobotomizing him, then said execution was solely resorted to because McMurphy had proved himself to be a would-be murderer.  So, would they have resorted to lobotomizing McMurphy even in the absence of his attempted murder?  It was threatened….

As I said, this doesn't seem cut-and-dry.  I don't think many would take umbrage with me calling McMurphy a potential-martyr, and at least a quasimartyr, but does that suffice?

allixpeeke (talk) 09:57, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

What do reliable sources say? That's all that matters, not our own analyses. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 14:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

--

Article Evaluation and Organization

The article is organized in a cogent manner that makes sense. The grammar is correct, and the writing flows nicely. I would ask, however, if the background section could be split into one regarding actual background, and one regarding literary significance. It is a rather small quibble, but one that I think could materially improve the article. Awlkr (talk) 12:23, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorensen

It is not revealed that he was a PT boat captain until after the fishing trip has taken place. He reveals this when Captain Block and the idlers at the dock admire his unorthodox manner of docking the boat. RPM brings him on the trip after Sorensen tells him that he owned a trawler and was a professional fisherman.Roquefortcheesecake (talk) 09:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

inherent Misogyny

It's concerning to me that the tone of this article reflects the same flippant misogyny demonstrated in the book- I think a more appropriate description of the book and its contents would be objective, presenting the author's work within the social context of the 70s, rather than implying current standards, which the book does not fit. 2601:447:CF80:20A0:7D90:B157:FF2C:4C91 (talk) 21:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)