Talk:Ophelia

Theatre Mid‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shakespeare Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Denmark Mid‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move (1)

Ophelia (character) → Ophelia – Ophelia is a redirect to Ophelia (character) with a page history. (Disambiguation page is at Ophelia (disambiguation)). Per KISS principle, Ophelia (character) should be at Ophelia. --Zoz (t) 21:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Support - Makes sense. - dharmabum 23:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Aldux 20:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SupportPaul B 10:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC) Plus of course a "for other uses..." comment[reply]
Support - I agree, when most people say "Ophelia", they will mean Hamlet's beloved - 140.177.205.91 01:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Brutally Murdered"

I'd say being accidentally stabbed behind a curtain once isn't brutal. I've removed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.110.220.88 (talk) 12:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Discussion

Add any additional comments

Page moved. Eugène van der Pijll 21:05, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ophelia Syndrome

Should we not mention the current idiom, of "ophelia" being a feminist representation of women who don't think for themselves. I hate feminism, and am not representing such in my argument. But when I hear the word "ophelia", it is always used in the sense of "ophelia syndrome," "ophelia learns to swim," "reviving ophelia," etc. --Mrcolj 13:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about the Ophelia Complex?

? 76.195.74.133 (talk) 17:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ophelia in art and literature

In Gustav Meyrink's The White Dominican, the play it's about Ophelia. Sorry I'm not speak English. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.78.40.43 (talk) 10:54, 25 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Too many influences?

The list of influences is longer then the article about the character. Maybe some of the less significant influences should be removed? It seems alot of relatively unknown bands mention Ophelia, do we really need a list of every single one? --darkskyz 12:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think almost all of it would be better placed in References to Hamlet, with a summary and a {{details}} link here. Some of it already is in that article. —Cel ithemis 06:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I split it into a diffrent article, maybe it should be merged with the Hamlet article. darkskyz 12:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"mad Ophelia"?

Rufus Wainwright's version of 'Halelujah' doesn't sound like 'mad Ophelia'.. deleted it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.69.92.145 (talk) 10:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Anne Rice Novel

In the anne rices novels Blackwood farm and Blood canticle the character Mona Mayfair calls herself Ophelia Immortal, should this be added to the Art and Literature? James Castle 15:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's basically trivia which Wiki frowns on. Pop Culutre references should only be included if they are a) notable, and b) significantly affected how people perceive the original work (and include a sourced description of how the reference did so). 24.190.34.219 (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

goon

yous a good but whats a goon o a goblin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.150.195.34 (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probable copyright violation

http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/get-thee-nunn-ry contains a substantial portion of the middle section of the article; which was the original and which was copied?#### —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.246.191.57 (talk) 09:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've nuked the offending text. The text appears wholesale, and word for word (character for character, actually; even the punctuation is identical), in this edit by 65.114.182.10 on May 13th, 2008.

Note that this is not necessarily clear cut. The Internet Archive has no version of this text on the enotes.com page up to February of this year (last version is August 30, which does not contain the relevant paragraphs).

It seems clear either Wikipedia or enotes.com copied the other, but further investigation is required to determine who did the copying. --Xover (talk) 11:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or, we can just accept that this was a rather flowery piece of WP:OR that we don't particularly want to restore to the article anyway. Encyclopedic language doesn't speak of "this heartbreaking scene..." etc. AndyJones (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phrase.

The name "Ophelia" itself was either uncommon or nonexistent; the only known prior text to use the name (as "Ofalia") is Jacopo Sannazaro's Arcadia.

How exactly was the name inexistent?

Warrington (talk) 00:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Does "Gertrude's announcement of Ophelia's death is one of the most poetic death announcements in literature" violate NPOV? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.146.69 (talk • contribs)

Not if it has a reliable secondary source to back it up, though changing it to "is considered one of the" would also probably help allievate any NPOV issues along with the source. 24.190.34.219 (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ophelia (character) → Ophelia — By far, this article is the primary topic and the character is the inspiration for most, if not all, of the items listed on the disambiguation pages. Googling "Ophelia" brings this article up as the first result. And, from a page-view perspective, this trounces all the other articles except for the painting: 700 views per day for this article, 435 for the painting, 227 for the disambiguation pager (which you need to go through if you search Wikipedia for "Ophelia"), 55 for the album, and 13 for the moon. (using stats.grok.se for July 2009). As this nearly almost gets as many page views as the rest combined (albeit for two spikes in viewing for the painting), this should take preference. Sceptre ^(talk) 19:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support – clear primary use from looking at the other articles. --Xover (talk) 07:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support — WP:PRIMARYTOPIC
— $V = I * R$ (talk) 22:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Ophelia is a not so uncommon given name, and a less than 2:1 viewing edge isn't enough. 76.66.192.144 (talk) 06:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The point is, of all the disambiguation items, nearly all of them (hell, I can assume all of them) draw inspiration from Shakespeare. Shakespeare, for all intents and purposes, invented the name. Hell, the painting, which is the only serious competitor in pageviews, is of the character! Sceptre ^(talk) 14:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The character is primary topic, though it's not as obvious as I thought it would be. The painting is also a common search target, and a reader looking for that article will probably use just "ophelia" as a search term. The fact that the painting also depicts the character makes it less of a surprise for the reader in my opinion if they end up on the character page. I suggest that the painting be added to the hatlink in addition to the disambiguation page, since it's a common search term as well (This article is about the character. For the painting, see Ophelia (painting). For other uses, see Ophelia (disambiguation)). This would ensure that a reader looking for the painting will also find the article they are looking for with minimal trouble. Jafeluv (talk) 09:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Added a few ^{[original research?]} tags

A few sentences in the plot summary are clearly interpretation. Unless these interpretations are found in secondary sources, they are considered original research and can't be included in the section. I added ^{[original research?]} tags in hopes someone can find a source to support these claims, or else they will have to be removed.24.190.34.219 (talk) 20:37, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

News on June 8

News on June 8 stated she was based on a cousin on Shakespeare. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nunnery scene

I thought that all references to a "nunnery" in Shakespeare actually refer to a brothel, the article doesn't mention this, and the link is actually misleading. PatGallacher (talk) 21:28, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hamlet's statement that his dark clothes are the outer sign of his inner grief demonstrates strong rhetorical skill (artist: Eugène Delacroix 1834).

@PatGallacher: It's not so simple as "all references to nunnery actually refer to a brothel". Even if we accept that nunnery == brothel in Elizabethan slang—and there is some scholarly disagreement over the evidence for this—if Shakespeare had simply meant "go to a whorehouse" he would have written "go to a whorehouse". The point there is the pun, the double entendre: Hamlet is outwardly speaking piously, suggesting Ophelia take religious orders and live in a convent; but the coarser part of the audience will hear the doubled meaning, that Hamlet condemns her to go live in a whorehouse. Hamlet, particularly, is all about this inner meaning vs. outer appearance stuff (cf. the illustration I've cribbed from Hamlet).

In fact, Shakespeare was so fond of punning that Samuel Johnson, in the Preface to The Plays of William Shakespeare (I quote the 1778 edition edited by George Steevens), writes:

“

A quibble [pun] is to Shakespeare, what luminous vapours are to the traveller; he follows it at all adventures; it is sure to lead him out of his way, and sure to engulf him in the mire. It has some malignant power over his mind, and its fascinations are irresistible. Whatever be the dignity or profundity of his disquisition, whether he be enlarging knowledge or exalting affection, whether he be amusing attention with incidents, or enchaining it in suspense, let but a quibble spring up before him, and he leaves his work unfinished. A quibble is the golden apple for which he will always turn aside from his career, or stoop from his elevation. A quibble, poor and barren as it is, gave him such delight, that he was content to purchase it, by the sacrifice of reason, propriety, and truth. A quibble was to him the fatal Cleopatra for which he lost the world, and was content to lose it.

”

All that being said though, this article could beneficially cover this, and even in more depth than the main Hamlet article. --Xover (talk) 03:46, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, to provide an immediate patch I've clarified this point, with a note referring to Hamlet#Language. A more scholarly revision will be welcome. . dave souza, talk 19:21, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In non fiction - Mary Pipher

This section has a tenuous relationship with the subject matter at best. Frankly looks like it was inserted by Ms. Pipher herself. I'm no editor here, but I would delete the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KingdeInternet (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coined as "Ofelia"?

This article currently states that the original Italian of Sannazaro had "Ofelia". But all the old copies I was able to find online had "Ophelia":

1514: "Ophelia in contrario diceua eſſer ſuo, et con ambe le mani ſi tenea per le corna il guadagnato ariete."
1524: "Ophelia in cõtrario diceua eſſer ſuo, & con ambe le mani ſi tenea per le corna il guadagnato ariete."
1534: "Ophelia in contrario diceua eſſer ſuo, & con ambe le mani ſi tenea per le corna il guadagnato ariete."

If anyone can find an earlier copy with "f", that would be interesting to see. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 17:24, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]