Talk:Ebenezer Scrooge/Archive 1

Archive 1

Scrooge v. Libertarianism

There are three ways that property changes hands:

1. involuntary transfers
2. voluntary transfers:
   1. unconditional voluntary transfers (gifts and charity)
   2. conditional voluntary transfers (trade)

Libertarians are distinguished by their absolute rejection of the first sort of transfer, even when the agency is the State. Scrooge is instead distinguished by his absolute rejection of sort 2a (gifts and charity). We don't know a whole lot about how Scrooge feels about transfers of sort 1. Does he favor tariffs? Perhaps. British imperialism? Perhaps. Forcing bars to close by a certain hour? Perhaps. Outlawing intoxicants altogether? Perhaps. When the subject of care for the needy is raised, Scrooge doesn't point to private charity, as would a libertarian; he points to a state-sponsored programme — one supported by involuntary transfers. (Scrooge himself indeed might scheme to avoid taxation, but unlike a libertarian he appears to want someone to be taxed.) —75.18.113.152 05:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Scrooge says "I work to support the [involunatary, state-run] institutions that I have mentioned; those who are badly off must go there." (or something similary, from memory having recently watched the 1951 film, which follows the book closely). This suggests that he pays taxes, although some of his grumpiness in that scene may be because he doesn't want to pay them. (The "I gave on April 15." attitude to charity, taken by a lot of poor excuses for liberals.) --Toby Bartels 07:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

True, we can not say for sure what Scrooge thinks about the institutions of taxation; but he doesn't support the state-sponsored workhouse program, as you seem to suggest, so much as he uses it as an excuse not to be charitable. What really emerges in his dialogue is not that he suggests that the government does a sufficient job of helping the people with the workhouses, but rather that he involuntary pays for them and if people wish not to live in the workhouses they ought to starve; "If they'd rather die, then let them - and decrease the surplus population." Additionally, 75.18.113.152 cannot speak on behalf of all libertarians. Objectivists, for example, not only rejects involuntary transfers but unconditional voluntary transfers as well. Ayn Rand thoroughly preaches that people ought to earn their living or earn their death in a sense; she disagrees with the "parasitic" relationship that charity, private or public, provides as a violation of the selfish virtue of the "prime movers," producing "second-handers". In this way, Scrooge's transient advocacy of the workhouses as a means for the poor to earn their living, and the accepting of their death otherwise, could be viewed as a primitively Randian concept in spite of the role of government. But rather that is beside the point. The point is that Scrooge only ever uses public institutions such as taxation to justify his private miserliness and social bitterness, and furthermore he demonstrates absolutely no concern over the wellbeing of others, and thus no concern over whether the public institutions succeed or fail in helping the wellbeing of the poor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.148.97 (talk) 17:13, 3 September 2010

Old comments

some of this can be merged with A Christmas Carol --Melaen 14:25, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Agree. The main plot is handled better here than in the article for A Christmas Carol. Canonblack 04:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Since this is about the character and not the story, shouldn't the events of Scrooge's life be described in chronological order rather than in the order they are depicted? 67.171.170.241 22:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree as well. The bulk of this article seems to be a retelling of "A Christmas Carol". This article could and should be much shorter.--Eddylyons (talk) 18:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

his sister is Fan, not Fran. and it's "injure," not "inure." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.102.2 (talk • contribs) 01:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Recent vadalism: do we need a lock?

This page has been vandalized a bit recently, all in the Christmas Spirit, no doubt. Should we lock it? Let's bring it to an admin's attention. Thanks, Throbblefoot 02:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Probably not. There hasn't been that much looking back at the logs. Tell me if there has been manual fixing of vandalism without an explanation. If we not we can get short term semi-protection. REDskunk 02:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I removed a reference to some firm in Dublin, "where Scrooge [had] set up" shop or something. It sounds like a prank from some employee. --AdjustablePliers (talk) 18:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Story section

Do we really need a recap of the entire book on a character's page? Lord Of Demise (talk) 01:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

There also seems to be a complete absence of citation while some quite strong claims are made, e.g.:

The book (which was written in 1843) does not state how long ago all this happened, or even how old Scrooge is now. It does seem likely, however, that Scrooge is not nearly as old as he is sometimes assumed. At the time of Jacob Marley's death (seven years before the story takes place), Belle is married to another man and still has several young children. Even if Scrooge was somewhat older than Belle at the time they were betrothed, he was still a young (and poor) man when they met. Because of this, it seems the often elderly portrayals of Scrooge are somewhat wide of the mark. --Earlgrey86 21:05, 09 December 2008 (UTC)

Another Portrayer

In the 101 Dalmations animated series, Cruelle DeVille played Srooge. Not going to edit it myself so you guys can go find your sources and have it done the way you like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.27.2.8 (talk) 19:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Born

Wasn't Scrooge born on February 15, 1786?--Martin (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Based on what evidence? It is not stated in the book and is not mentioned in any of Dickens' writings. Jack1956 (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Is scrooge a stereotype of jewish people?

Even though Scrooge celebrate Christmas is it possible that Charles Dickens was thinking about portraying Scrooge as stereotypically Jewish? just look at Scrooge's first name's language of origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.120.241.124 (talk) 00:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

This is very unlikely. Nothing Dickens says about the character indicates that he is intended to be Jewish (unlike Fagin in Oliver Twist). The name Scrooge is not Jewish, and Old Testament names like Ebenezer were commonly used by Christians in Dickens's time. I think rare Old Testament names were most commonly used by Non-Conformists (i.e. non-Anglican Protestants), and Dickens, as an Anglican, may have had a prejudice against non-Conformists, who sometimes had a reputation as killjoy puritans and penny-pinchers. But this is just a speculation, and I haven't read the story with this in mind. 86.157.91.204 (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Added: According to this article http://uudb.org/articles/charlesdickens.html Dickens became sympathetic to Unitarianism in the 1840s (when Christmas Carol was written), which rather complicates matters. Unitarians were the most liberal and undogmatic group of Non-Conformists. (The article uses the term Dissenters instead of Non-Conformists, but Dissenters was a term mainly used by Anglicans) 86.157.91.204 (talk) 15:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

It is doubtful. I agree. So what if his name has Hebrew origins. Names like David, Michael, John, Isaac, Benjamin, etc have Hebrew origins as well. Azn_Clayjar 159.53.78.144 (talk) 16:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Scrooge in Popular Culture

I propose that a section be included about Ebenezer Scrooge in popular culture, presumably which will encompass the English Language section along with. Scrooge has to be one of the most enigmatic and recognizable villains in the English speaking world, and thus his archetype in Anglo-American popular culture ought to be numerous. However, prior to creating such a section we should produce at least three notable examples which can be added to once the section is created.

One example is the Blackadder Christmas special, Blackadder's Christmas Carol, which parodies the conventions of the Christmas Carol and shows a character who is far too nice for his own good (in contrast to the selfish, cruel and miserly Blackadder archetype) who upon being shown the tales of Blackadders past and Blackadders to come eventually re-emerges as the traditional Blackadder reincarnation - in essence the reversal of Scrooge's redemption.

Any other ideas, guys? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.148.97 (talk) 17:13, 3 September 2010

One other reference is the two-man play "Jacob Marley's Christmas Carol" which features the character of Ebenezer Scrooge. The story is from Jacob Marley's point of view and it takes a different approach to the Three Christmas Ghosts and Scrooge's ultimate transformation. Further research will be needed of course which I do not have available at this time, tho' I did see the play a few years back. Greenbomb101 (talk) 16:54, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Meaning of the word 'Scrooge'

I edited this recently in the 'Scrooge and the English language' section to define the word as a noun meaning somebody who is very mean and grasping,who will not spend any money etc. This is how it is commonly used in the English language. Even at the start of the article Scrooge is defined as 'cold-hearted, tight-fisted and greedy man, who despises Christmas and all things which engender happiness'. Yet it has been changed back to 'The name "Scrooge" is used even outside of the UK and the US as a word for a person who is always complaining. ' which looks to me like it is vandalism...I have never heard the word used to denote a moaner. primarily. Could an administrator please find out what is going on please? Frglee (talk) 23:22, 13 December 2010 (UTC) frglee

The name "Scrooge"

I believe the name "Scrooge" to be an invention by Dickens, as in my research, I cannot find it anywhere else, save for this book and its influences. Shouldn't this be mentioned (whether or not the name "Scrooge" is an actual surname?) --Schmendrick 17:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

A quick search through the white pages showed at least 16 people in the US with the surname of "Scrooge" including two people with the given name "Ebenezer" (and one variant spelling of "Ebeneezer") so it does exist as a surname. The genealogy site familysearch shows several people with the surname "Scrooge" including a Marguerta Scrooge daughter of Symonis (Simonis?) Scrooge who was baptized or christened in Apr 1672 in Thornton-Steward, York, England. So it has been proved the surname "Scrooge" predated Dickens by at least 150 years.--BruceGrubb (talk) 07:49, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

English speaking world

"The tale of his redemption by the three Ghosts of Christmas (...) has become a defining tale of the Christmas holiday." I really really think that something like "in some part of the English-speaking world" should be added at the end of this sentence. As a Frenchman, I've never heard of this character before today (and I like to think that I'm an educated middle-aged man). There you go! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.6.186.39 (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Fan later died giving birth to her son, Fred.

The cause of her death is not specified in the novel. You are thinking of at least one of the films (notably, the 1951 version, Scrooge). Kostaki mou (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Relevence of name Ebenezer revisited

There are numerous web sources that suggest Dickens' choice of the name Ebenezer (="Stone of Help") was deliberate. It seems to be a popular idea whether or not it can be verified, so I think it's worth a mention. I won't add anything to the article yet as it appears to have been added before and deleted on at least two separate occasions, with no explanation (that I can see) for the deletions - possibly the previous additions were felt to be too wordy, or improperly cited?

As there is already a Wikipedia page detailing the name's etymology, I suggest adding a brief line or two, probably in the Origins section (next to the existing bit about "scrouge"), with a link to that page as well as a citation... Pastychomper (talk) 11:21, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Change made. Pastychomper (talk)