Talk:The English Patient

Major Edit

Going to majorly edit this article in the next few weeks hopefully- I'm currently studying the book at university. Is there any objections or wishes from people for me to include in my research and composition of the edit? R.J. Croton (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC).

I'm planning another edit of the article, focusing primarily on the plot section. I've already begun to add citations where I could, and will add more from the text once I track down my copy of the book. I just wanted to echo R.J. Croton's inquiry for objections or suggestions for this edit before I start major revisions. --FacultiesIntact (talk) 04:53, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Caravaggio as "Canadian"

I'm not sure I agree with Caravaggio's classification as "Canadian," since the book frequently makes note of the fact that he was Italian. We know that he lived in Canada, since he knew Hana and her father, but he says himself (about the British recruiting him) "Here I was, an Italian and a thief. They couldn't believe their luck." I am hesitant to make major changes to the main page, though, so I was hoping someone could weigh in: should he be called Italian-Canadian or something like that instead of just Canadian? Sam927 05:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Unknown whether this is for protection or as a metaphor

I think it is pretty clear it is for protection... He was specifically questioned as a Nazi. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Clapre (talk • contribs) 02:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

First edition

The true first edition should be the (UK) Bloomsbury edition (http://www.amazon.co.uk/English-Patient-Michael-Ondaatje/dp/074751254X/ref=ed_oe_h) rather than the slightly later and simultaneous American and Canadian first editions (Knopf and Mcclelland & Stewart respectively). The UK edition was published Sept 1 1992, while the US and CAN editions were Sept. 29 (http://www.amazon.com/English-Patient-Michael-Ondaatje/dp/0679416781/ref=ed_oe_h). The cover is also the Knopf rather than Bloomsbury cover.Shane Lin (talk) 03:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Translated into 300 languages?

Really? This needs a citation.

129.240.157.176 (talk) 09:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Ditto. Added "dubious" tag. --71.111.194.50 (talk) 21:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Pop Culture

Does this add ANY value to the article? And secondly it is about the film and not the book. Elncid (talk) 09:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

TEP tells his story --Use of morphine

Suggested wording:

"Plied by morphine, the English patient begins to reveal everything ......"

REF: Chapter 9: "Each swallow of morphine by the body opens a further door, or he leaps back to the cave paintings or to a buried plane or lingers once more with the woman beside him under a fan, her cheek against his stomach."

There is elsewhere [Chap. 6] reference to a Brompton Cocktail used on TEP developed at aLondon on Cancer patients.76.170.88.72 (talk) 23:44, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Chap's for the following Plot statements

Almásy escapes but realises that he will be too late to save Katharine. It is because of this realisation that Almásy allows himself to be captured by the Germans. Eventually he collects Katharine's body, but is found by the Germans.76.170.88.72 (talk) 08:20, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Have yet to find any reference to Almasy escaping the hold of the British except for the falling off the truck of his "willow prison."76.170.88.72 (talk) 02:27, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Chap. 9: "wicker prisons" when in El Taj on a truck.76.170.88.72 (talk) 08:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Obviously if Almasy was arrested at El Taj he somehow had to be out of the hold of the British but I am coming to the conclusion that this action is never definitively stated in the book as an escape. Of course it could be speculated that since the British had Almasy under surveillance from the beginning of his affair that the powers that be allowed his release as a double/triple agent in order to allow continued results from monitoring his activities.

Chap. 6: "Let me tell you a story,” Caravaggio says to Hana. “There was a Hungarian named Almasy, who worked for the Germans during the war..... when war broke out he joined the Germans. In 1941 he became a guide for spies, taking them across the desert into Cairo..... ‘Cicero’ was a code name for a spy. The British unearthed him. A double then triple agent. He got away. ‘Zerzura’ is more complicated. In the early part of the war I was working in Cairo—the Tripoli Axis. Rommel’s Rebecca spy— What do you mean, ‘Rebecca spy’? In 1942 the Germans sent a spy called Eppler into Cairo before the battle of El Alamein. He used a copy of Daphne du Maurier’s novel Rebecca as a code book to send messages back to Rommel on troop movements. Listen, the book became bed¬side reading with British Intelligence. Even I read it. You read a book? Thank you. The man who guided Eppler through the desert into Cairo on Rommel’s personal orders—from Tripoli all the way to Cairo—was Count Ladislaus de Almasy. This was a stretch of desert that, it was assumed, no one could cross. Between the wars Almasy had English friends. Great ex¬plorers. But when war broke out he went with the Germans. Rommel asked him to take Eppler across the desert into Cairo because it would have been too obvious by plane or parachute. He crossed the desert with the guy and delivered him to the Nile delta. You know a lot about this. I was based in Cairo. We were tracking them. From Gialo he led a company of eight men into the desert. They had to keep digging the trucks out of the sand hills. He aimed them towards Uweinat and its granite plateau so they could get water, take shelter in the caves..... It took them three weeks to reach Cairo. Almdsy shook hands with Eppler and left him. This is where we lost him. He turned and went back into the desert alone. We think he crossed it again, back towards Tripoli. But that was the last time he was ever seen. The British picked up Eppler even¬tually and used the Rebecca code to feed false information to Rommel about El Alamein. ..... When you crashed in the desert—where were you flying from? I was leaving the Gilf Kebir. I had gone there to collect someone. In late August. Nineteen forty-two. I had made the journey to Cairo and was returning from there. I was slipping between the enemy, remembering old maps, hitting the pre-war caches of petrol and water, driving towards Uweinat ..... where I knew there was a buried plane. ..... He [Caravaggio] says you are not English. He worked with intelligence out of Cairo and Italy for a while. Till he [Caravaggio] was captured. ..... She had been injured. In 1939..... The only chance to save her was for me to try and reach help alone. ..... I crossed the dry bed of the lake towards Kufra Oasis, carry¬ing nothing but robes against the heat and night cold, my Herodotus left behind with her. And three years later, in 1942, I walked with her towards the buried plane, carrying her body as if it was the armour of a knight."76.170.88.72 (talk) 01:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Found burning:

Chap. 1: "I fell burning into the desert..... I flew down and the sand itself caught fire. They saw me stand up naked out of it. The leather helmet on my head in flames..... The Bedouin knew about ..... planes that since 1939 had been falling out of the sky. Some of their tools and utensik were made from the metal of crashed planes and tanks..... I was perhaps the first one to stand up alive out of a burning machine. A man whose head was on fire.'"76.170.88.72 (talk) 02:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Parachute aflame:

Chap. 6: "I started the motor and it rolled into life. We moved and then slipped, years too late, into the sky..... the engine missing turns as if losing a stitch, her shroud unfurling in the noisy air of the cockpit, noise terrible after his days of walking in silence. He looks down and sees oil pouring onto his knees. A branch breaks free of her shirt. Acacia and bone. How high is he above the land? How low is he in the sky? The undercarriage brushes the top of a palm and he pivots up, and the oil slides over the seat, her body slipping down into it. There is a spark from a short, and the twigs at her knee catch fire. He pulls her back into the seat beside him. He thrusts his hands up against the cockpit glass and it will not shift. Begins punching the glass, cracking it, finally break¬ing it, and the oil and the fire slop and spin everywhere. How low is he in the sky? She collapses—acacia twigs, leaves, the branches that were shaped into arms uncoiling around him. Limbs begin disappearing in the suck of air..... He goes up and down now like a well bucket. There is blood somehow all over his face. He is flying a rotted plane, the canvas sheetings on the wings ripping open in the speed. They are carrion..... lifts his legs out of the oil, but they are so heavy..... He slips into the harness of the oil-wet parachute and pivots upside down, breaking free of glass, wind flinging his body back. Then his legs are free of everything, and he is in the air, bright, not knowing why he is bright until he realizes he is on fire."76.170.88.72 (talk) 02:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Use of "as of" versus "as at"

Regarding as at, this source:

• Garner, Bryan (2016). "as at". Garner's Modern English Usage. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-063237-3. OCLC 953456227.

indicates: as at (= as of) is characteristic chiefly of BrE financial jargon ... It's a construction best avoided.

• Garner, Bryan (2016). "as of". Garner's Modern English Usage. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-063237-3. OCLC 953456227.

The same source has this for as of:

as of.

A. Generally.

As of should be used with caution. Originally an Americanism, the phrase frequently signifies the effective date of a document, as when the document is backdated, postdated, or signed by various people at different times <this contract is effective as of July 1>.

I submit that the phrase As of August 2021, the novel is currently in early development ... fits this usage as described by Garner, as the phrasing could be rewritten The novel is effectively in development as of August 2021 ... & still would mean the same thing.

Besides, to remove the {{As of}} template is to remove a time and date maintenance template. Peaceray (talk) 06:57, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

A US style guide is the wrong place to determine whether a British English phrase is correct or not. Your translation of what is written in Garner does not parse into British English. I have no idea what your point is in your final sentence. 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:D933:8A2C:3F8A:39A4 (talk) 09:28, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

"As at" is in common use in BrE, and "as of" is widely regarded as an Americanism. The current edition of Fowler allows the latter but advises caution in its use. In my view "as at" is clearly preferable here. Tim riley talk 14:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Tim riley: Are you referring to to Butterfield's Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage 2015 edition or his Fowler's Concise Dictionary of Modern English Usage 2016 edition? Peaceray (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Garner's Modern English Usage is published by Oxford University Press. I accessed it via the Oxford Reference database. It indicates that as at is chiefly of BrE financial jargon. MOS:JARGON advises Minimize jargon, or at least explain it or tag it using {{Technical}} or {{Technical-statement}} for other editors to fix.

I have asked for a citation indicating that as at is valid British usage & that as of is not. As of this edit, no one has offered a specific citation to counter the Oxford University Press citation. Peaceray (talk) 16:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

1. Do not be so disingenuous as to call edits "disruptive" when they are removing an Americanism in a British English article;

2. Garners was published in the US. A search on the version I have (also published in the US) uses "color" and "favor", among other Americanisms. This should NOT be used to try and settle a choice of term in British English;

3. It is not true to say it is "chiefly of BrE financial jargon" - Garner has that wrong. Although it may sometimes be used in connection with financial jargon, it is not the sole and only use, nor is it "chiefly" of that use.

4. Your points on "MOS:JARGON" are a straw man. We are talking about basic British English use here.

5. So far two British English speakers are pointing out to you that you are trying to use an Americanism in a BrEng article and one of those users has pointed you to the advice of Fowler. Please stop being disruptive. Please stop thinking you know more about British English than native speakers.

6. The article was changed earlier to avoid further nationalistic errors in grammar; it is strongly advised that this (actually more accurate rendering) remains, without the reversion back to a clumsy Americanism. 2A00:23C7:2B86:9800:385D:7CA2:E812:78 (talk) 16:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

That is broadly right, in my view. I should not wish to Anglicise an article written in Amerenglish, nor do I think it right to seek to Americanise an article written in the Queen's English. There is a place for both, but not in the same article. I see the article has been lightly redrawn to avoid any further argy-bargy and we can all thankfully turn our attention to more productive input. Tim riley talk 19:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

@Tim riley: Please see my question above. Peaceray (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The answer is the former, but this discussion is now well past its best-before date. Tim riley talk 21:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I was not aware that consensus discussions & dispute resolution had a best-before date.

Thank you for letting me know what edition. I have ordered a copy of that edition so that I may review what it says. Peaceray (talk) 21:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Oh, for goodness' sake! If you're so desperate I can give you the page number, but getting a life might be a better priority. Tim riley talk 22:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I think this would be useful for me in the future. I can always stand to be corrected, & I may well have other occasions to use or cite it. Peaceray (talk) 22:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Money spent on Fowler is money well spent, even for those whose varieties of the language are not the Queen's English. The third edition was edited by a New Zealander and the current edition tries to embrace many non-British variants. Tim riley talk 22:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)