Talk:Vetala Panchavimshati
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notes on 2 anachronisms
[edit]"culminated in the Arabian Nights, and which inspired the "Golden Ass" of Apuleius, Boccacio's "Decamerone," the "Pentamerone," and all that class of facetious fictitious literature." This quote makes no sense; the Golden Ass was written at least 600 years before Arabian Nights.
- The quote doesn't say that Arabian Nights inspired the Golden Ass; it should be read as "Baital Pachisi culminated in the Arabian Nights, and Baital Pachisi inspireed the Golden Ass...". utcursch | talk 12:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Reading the article, the "and which" seems to make it clear that Baital Pachisi inspired the Golden Ass...in other words I didn't have a problem understanding it.--24.46.164.83 04:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
is there any evidence that the work predates Apuleius? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.22.157.31 (talk) 15:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
The above information comes from an introduction by the author's wife in the original published text *edit* sorry, the original published text of "King Vikram and the Vampire", which is alleged to be based on the Baital Pachisi *end edit*. Probably she made it up, or heard it from someone else who made it up, given the Victorian propensity for drawing connections where there are none. Don't know how to participate in this except to come in and edit the page, sorry if I'm breaking some protocol. 66.57.60.99 (talk) 19:45, 25 August 2011 (UTC)me who has no account here
On another point, I think the section about the end, "After 25 stories", is really hard to read. It needs some definite editing. I suspect it was written by someone whose first language wasn't English...which is fine, except that it's hard to understand! --24.46.164.83 04:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Speaking of which - the text referred to (at http://www.scribd.com/doc/44384123/The-Twenty-Fifth-Tale-Of-The-Vetala-erotic-poetry) which is alleged to be a "modern translation" of the Baital Pachisi - has anybody actually gone and READ that thing? Are we REALLY SURE that something that talks about champion masturbators and the smell of different women's "cunt juice" is authentic? The thing makes no sense even if you ignore the obvious crudity of the supposed "translation", and certainly doesn't seem to fit into the text as it has been presented. There is no logical progression to the text, it seems to start in the middle, and it ends without any real resolution without ever having achieved anything remotely resembling internal consistency. Also I can find no reference to the alleged translator outside of links back to the very text - posted on scribd, not exactly a scholarly website - which he is supposed to have translated. Seems this is at the very least a bad translation, if not an outright fraud... Unless this can be verified as an authentic scholarly work it should be removed 19:45, 25 August 2011 (UTC)me who has no account here
Done Just to tie a bow on this conversation: The first bit has been removed (see Isabel Burton, below). The second bit was straight-up BS, and has also been removed. Phil wink (talk) 03:33, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Good Image
[edit]can't we have good picture in the lead? the current one looks like cartoon created by a child
Lokesh 2000 (talk) 04:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- I think it's fine (and quite good actually, atmosphere-wise) — and it appears the uploader drew the image himself. Of course, if you can find a better image that is freely licensed, we can surely use it. Do you have one in mind? Shreevatsa (talk) 05:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Isabel Burton
[edit]I've removed this text from the intro:
According to Isabel Burton, the Baital Pachisi "is the germ which culminated in the Arabian Nights, and which inspired the Golden Ass of Apuleius, Boccacio's Decamerone, the Pentamerone, and all that class of facetious fictitious literature".[1] (In fact, Apuleius' Golden Ass dates to the 2nd Century CE.)
Burton attributes the stories to 8th-century Sanskrit sage Bhavabhuti, but this is probably a mistake. The story appears in the ninth section of the twelfth book of the Kathā-sarit-sāgara.[2]
This is correctly documented and quoted... but her statements are exceedingly dubious and should certainly not be part of the lede. I will, however, reinstate the Kathasaritsagara info (in a corrected form) into the lede. Phil wink (talk) 15:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Title Change
[edit]Title is in Bengali. This is a Sanskrit title, it should be Vetala. Could someone change?
Merge with List of Vetala Tales?
[edit]I don't know any more about this topic than what I've read in Wikipedia, but it looks like this article should be merged with List of Vetala Tales (which seems to be more detailed and scholarly, but also less comprehensible to the general reader). Would anyone agree and if so would someone competent like to do it? Alarichall (talk) 17:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- Can you say why you think it should be merged? It's not uncommon on Wikipedia to have details split off into a separate article (see Wikipedia:Splitting and Wikipedia:Content forking). I think the current organization makes sense, but wondering what your impression is. Shreevatsa (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2018 (UTC)