Talk:Proletarian literature

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): FuuHouji, Nakita Pike. Peer reviewers: MishaGriego, Shoujess.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

No facts. No logic.

Just a piece of text full of hatred.

By the by, Orwell was a socialist.

The beginning started out well, then someone hijacked this article and made it very one sided. Interesting that the user has never created or contributed to anything else (not with the same ip anyway). Even if Orwell was criticized by the communist party, you couldn't exactly call him a capitalist. Especially not by modern standards. If one were to compare the 'department of love and peace' with 'operation enduring freedom' for example. Sometimes when people use art to express dissatisfaction with the status quo, or to illustrate the unneccessary inequality in society, it is easy for those who have a personal stake in the systems maintaining course to paint a picture of victimized whiners who want something for nothing. I guess sometimes reading something will not guarantee understanding. Of all the time I have spent on this site, this might be the article that forces me to finally sign up. I just can't believe this hasn't been fixed yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.244.59.67 (talk) 10:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

As of now, I removed that awful piece of text under the general definition. Many things said were outright wrong (Something about Marxian solutions seeking to divide a "new proletariat", whatever that means, or the (excuse my tone) stupid right-wing populist assertion that "Fascism is the other side of the 'socialist coin'") and also non-neutral. I added an POV dispute for the sources since I don't know who added them and I'm not sure in what way they promote the said false, non-neutral statements. 217.88.220.199 (talk) 05:52, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Major edit reversal effects

I understand that this subject is controversal. I may understand why some editors at some points have restored much older versions, e.g., here - although I'm not sure that this is the best way to cope with these items. However, when you do such changes, please take some care to restore uncontroversial but essential material; such as the interwiki links. Best, JoergenB (talk) 19:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Only published by the communist party?

Surely it isn't true that working class literature is only published by the communist party; or is proletarian literature just a sub genre of working class literature? If not, the reference here to the communist party needs to be deleted. I note British working class literature isn't included in this article. Rwood128 (talk) 20:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Proletarian novel

Isn't this article and the Proletarian novel article more or less duplicating things? Wouldn't a merging be sensible? Rwood128 (talk) 23:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

• I will undertake this merge unless there's objection.Rwood128 (talk) 12:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk page from deleted Proletarian novel article

Merging this article and Proletarian literature?

The Proletarian novel article duplicates the Proletarian literature article, so that it would be helpful to readers if they were merged, and the Proletarian novel title placed in disambiguation. Any comments? Rwood128 (talk) 15:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Dickens

It's not clear if the page is saying Dickens was or wasn't a working class author. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC).

It does say "by middle-class authors, like Charles Dickens's ", but perhaps the sentence could be improved. Rwood128 (talk) 13:27, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

The pair of commas also read as parentheticals. I have removed the second one, and replaced the "like" with "such as". Dickens, famously, started work as a waged employee in a bootblack factory, which is why the sense is not immediately apparent. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:34, 23 October 2016 (UTC).

Potential Contributions!

Hello! I would like to make some contributions to this article. I am currently taking a class that deals with Japanese and Korean culture and would like to expand upon Japanese and Korean Proletarian Literature! Below I have some sources compiled for future use. If anybody has any suggestions, feel free to respond!

-The Proletarian Gamble by Ken Chester Kawashima, 2009.

-Re-casting Red Culture in Proletarian Japan: Childhood, Korea, and the historical Avant-Garde by Samuel Perry, 2014.

-Literature and Film in Cold War South Korea: Freedom's Frontier by Theodore Hughes, 2012.

-Important Dates in China, Korea, Japan, and Taiwan in Proletarian Arts by Carolyn Eisenberg, 2006.

-Proletarian Sensibilities: The Body Politics of New Tendency Literature by Kimberly Chung, 2014.

-Imperial Genus: The Formation and Limits of the Human in Modern Korea and Japan by Travis Workman, 2016.

-Tales of Seduction: Factory Girls in Korean Proletarian Literature by Ruth Barraclough, 2006.

-Mass Politics and Visual Culture: Proletarian Literature of 1920s and 1930s Colonial Korea by Kimberly Mee Chung, 2011.

-Bridging the Colonial Divide: Japanese-Korean Solidarity in the International Proletarian Literature Movement by Nikki Dejan Floyd, 2011.

FuuHouji (talk) 22:45, 23 February 2018 (UTC)FuuHouji

Adding to this in a non-bibliographical manner, we would like to make the addition of a section on Korean proletarian literature on this page. This would include some of the more famous and prominent works, along with information on the role Japan played within this literature and the situation as a whole. The above texts are potential sources that we may use towards adding this section to the page.
Nakita Pike (talk) 05:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Korea

Hi Nakita Pike, Thanks for the new section. However, this deals mainly with political, cultural and social movements and says very little about Korean proletarian literature. Not a single novel, short story, poem, or play are mentioned, and only one writer, Song Yŏng–Pak Sok-Chong is described as an artist. While some background is invaluable, most of this section is off the topic. Hope this is helpful. Rwood128 (talk) 10:34, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

This may be of interest: "Modern literature is often linked with the development of hangul, which helped spread literacy from the aristocracy to the common men and women. Hangul, however, only reached a dominant position in Korean literature in the second half of the 19th century, resulting in a major growth in Korean literature. Sinsoseol, for instance, are novels written in hangul." Found under literature on the Korea page, but there's no citation and the article on Sinsoseol is only a stub! Rwood128 (talk) 11:34, 14 April 2018 (UTC)