Talk:Georgie Porgie

Untitled

This was on the page, it wasn't referenced, so I removed it:

Georgie Porgie, Puddin' and Pie,

Kissed the girls and made them cry,

When the boys came out to play

He kissed them too, cos he's queer that way!

--Sbrools ^{(talk . contribs)} 16:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the original rhyme is queer enough. Georgie Porgie is not really suitable for kids! 93.219.161.131 (talk) 15:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Bigotry like Sbrooks should be suppressed eh? All nursery rhymes are queer one way or another.

Now, at the queer version, isn't there perhaps a book, or even just a page that makes general reference to "raped rhymes" (for which I could provide thousands of examples from Mary Had a Little Lamb alone), origin of which are and have been spontaneous amongst vulgar adults, usually teenaged boys, for centuries. 41.13.8.14 (talk) 03:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

And let's not forget Old Mother Hubbard. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:14, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Origin

According to The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes, the rhyme was first recited as:

Rowley Powley, pudding and pie, Kissed the girls and made them cry; When the girls begin to cry, Rowley Powley runs away.

ntennis 03:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

So why, oh why, are we investigating George? The older version was about one Rowley or Powley who was gorgeously cute, seeded his village and disappeared. -QED

The later version was a mother who was changing her baby's nappy singing him Humpty Dumpty, Thunder. Thunder by ACDC and ad libbed the words to the song about the town stud, changing the name to that of her baby. -QED 41.13.8.14 (talk) 03:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Eek-a-Mouse

Reggae artist Eek-a-Mouse made a song named Georgie Porgie; should it be mentioned here? --oKtosiTe ^talk 20:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Andrew Dice Clay

Changing "most common lyrics" to the ADC version, as more people know that than the "original" one quoted. Please do not revert; this is a legitimate edit. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.169.1.147 (talk) 05:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

whats the history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.137.117 (talk) 00:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Song!?

Why is this labeled as a song?

It's a poem if anything.

Dartpaw86 (talk) 14:48, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Dartpaw86

I think it originally did have a tune, that has simply become lost. The reverse can also apply. Many British people are surprised to learn that Mary Had a Little Lamb is known in America as a song.

Nuttyskin (talk) 23:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Relation to Brave New World

I think it would be interesting to know the relation of this poem to the one in Brave New World, Orgy-porgy. It would also be interesting to know what was the version at the time of writing. I would be grateful to anyone who shared this knowledge here. Tigre200 (talk) 08:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

The world presented in Brave New World is intended as one in which all cultural remnants are garbled by the effects of social engineering and deliberate obliteration of both the physical past and most literature. Although they know, for example, that all crosses on top of churches have had their vertical arm cut so as to resemble a T (for the Model T, a fetish of Henry Ford, creator of the production line), they are unclear why there were ever any crosses there to begin with, or what their significance might once have been. Nursery rhymes, being "unofficial" poetry, are practically immortal; but they do undergo gradual mutation as their original context is lost. The version Huxley was reading from was the same as our own; which, as various people have pitched in, has long been associated in popular culture with ribald versions. In BNW, the original context, of a sexual subculture flourishing in an environment of sexual shame (Huxley's own time), has been replaced by one of complete sexual freedom; therefore, in an altered context, the rhyme should still persist; but with its function and understood meaning entirely altered.

Nuttyskin (talk) 23:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Toto song

I reinserted my reference to the Toto song which had been deleted by Sweetpool50 with a strange appeal to "original research". Since I am merely stating a fact that is to be found in a Wikipedia article that I am linking to, there is no way I could or should be accused of original research, and certainly not have my content deleted without prior notice. Nikolaj1905 (talk) 09:39, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The editor is new and has no idea about proper sourcing. Wikipedia cannot be cited as a source per WP:CIRCULAR. Sweetpool50 (talk) 12:51, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Please don't use ad hominem arguments about me being new. (Even if I were new, you should go by WP:ENCOURAGE and not simply revert my edit). The page that I linked to is properly sourced, so there is no circularity there. Anyway, even if you were right about my edit not being properly sourced, the proper procedure is to add a "Citation needed"-template, not to simply revert the edit. This is made fairly clear in WP:NOCITE. Nikolaj1905 (talk) 08:00, 12 September 2022 (UTC)