Talk:Ethan Frome

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plot Summary[edit]

This plot summary doesn't actually track - it looks like it's missing a number of paragraphs, as it skips around to a few specific points but doesn't actually summarize the story. (talk) 15:20, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chivalrous affair?[edit]

What is a "chivalrous affair"? Joyous 14:08, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Hey everyone, this book is the worst book I've ever read. Also I think by "chivalrous affair" it's supposed to imply that their affair wasn't purely physical but Ethan deeply loved Mattie (none of this matters; the book is god awful). -- 06:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That you think the "book is the worst book [you've] ever read" and "god awful" is irrelevant; this isn't "Critics Corner". Rent the movie; it's brilliant. And please respect this forum and delete your critical comments. (And you may delete mine regarding the film as well. ;)
Cheers, Rico402 (talk)

I edited the line about Ethan's mother dying during autumn. She died during the winter: "He had often thought since that it would not have happened if his mother had died in spring instead of winter.” No mention of autumn.

Also, for some reason the Engineer was mentioned as Jordyn (a female) in the plot synopsis. Since the Engineer was never given a sex or name, this should be erased. Who the hell wrote this article?

Merge request[edit]

And the point of the Starkfield article was? Can't see it myself. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 14:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Should we include details of the film here, or have a separate article ? -- Beardo 08:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

seperate. Its a different thing, plus it needs a lot of space for whoever writes the article to fit in the laughing at how retarted that one scene where ethan and mattie sled down the hill at 2 miles an hour and then somehow get hurt. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 03:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
If you're going to criticize a novel as "retarded", learn how to spell the word and what it means: it's an illness, not a synonym for "stupidity". It doesn't help your credibility as a critic when you misuse a single word twice. 2001:558:6011:1:1CA0:8880:2F90:A2F5 (talk) 05:55, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We should also mention that Ned Hale opens the film by greeting the Minister (Engineer in the book). The problem with this is that Ned Hale is dead in the book by the time the Minister (engineer) arrives.

I don't know if there is enough material to require two articles at this point. While in general I support having separate articles for a film versus a book, I am not sure what the major differences are except that the book goes into greater detail about some things. There didn't seem to be any major plot differences that I recall. Also, it's probably easier to contain vandalism this way. So long as this book is taught in high school (as it is in many places), there is going to be a seasonal influx of vandals. Not to slam the story exactly, but the concept of trying to kill yourself by slamming a sled into a tree is outlandish enough for a serious reader to do a double-take (and the less serious reader to have a real good laugh). I would advocate having a section listing the film's differences from the primary story and if it had enough of its own material of interest (production details, plot differences, etc) then to split it off. Benjamid (talk) 23:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just last month, a 47-year-old Indiana man died after his sled hit a tree. In January 2009, two girls in Haverstraw, N.Y. struck a tree on a snowtube; one died, the other had serious injuries. While those were accidents, maybe suicide by sledding isn't so far-fetched after all - maybe all it takes is a long slope, a large tree, and the will to steer into it. 05:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)


Josh, please discontinue vandalising this page. Everytime you vandalise a page, someone has to go out of their way to revert the page in question. This sort of behaviour is unacceptable when we are trying to make this a reliable encyclopedic source. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 22:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]


Are references just when the book is mentioned on TV or in other books and stuff? Because Regina Spektor mentions the book in her song, "2.99 Cent Blues," but I'm not sure if I should add it. Should I? MusicEqualsLife (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the "References" section several times because it's unencyclopdic. Unless the information is pertinent to the subject matter, it does not belong in the article. María (habla conmigo) 00:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I heard that there was an allusion to the book in the Simpsons. I'm not sure what episode/season, but Lisa was holding a book seemingly a few hundred pages long, when the actual text is barely over 100. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone wants to seriously approach a section like this, it is probably more appropriate to have a "Cultural Influences" section. This is a pretty old book at this point. Rather than listing offhand references from the Simpsons (which refers to almost anything under the sun at this point), I would think somebody with a literary background would be better suited to say what novels were influenced by this or how it had any contribution to the field as a whole. I mean, Wharton was a pretty famous lady. I'm willing to bet somebody had to study this stuff once upon a time. Benjamid (talk) 23:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pulitzer prize[edit]

I heard after this book was written that they took away her pulitzer prize and the prize people broke her knees and cut of her finger, is it true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the dumbest thing I ever heard. It's beyond ignorant rumor and that's saying something. Good luck repeating the 7th grade and thanks for playing! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:30, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real Life analogues?[edit]

If Ethan represents Edith herself, then who was Mattie? Wm James? Dawud (talk) 02:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry I rolled back this edit. The content seems to be mostly innocuous but the overall effect seems to be undeniably detrimental to the credibility of the article.

==Plot summary== -> --Tmarklo-2 (talk) 17:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)==Plot summary==[reply]
After the story is told, the narrator is shown inside Ethan's home, where he finds two old women, one of whom complains in a whiny voice of the coldness. The whining woman turns out to be Mattie, and the other woman is a healthier Zeena who now looks after Ethan and Mattie.
-> After the story is told, the narrator is shown inside Ethan's home, where he finds two old women, one of whom complains in a whiny voice of the coldness. The whining woman turns out to be Mattie, and the other woman is a healthier Zeena who now looks after Ethan and Mattie. Ethan and Mattie go to a dance together like the beginning of the book. After the dance is when they end their life

As I said, the content may well be a very great improvement (which is why I reproduce it here for discussion) but the edit in itself messed up the article. A typographical error. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 19:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot changes 3/5/10[edit]

I edited the plot summary and symbolism today to provide a more clear plot summary and break out the section on symbolism into a new section. Poeticmotion80 (talk) 22:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC) Ben Bjostad[reply]

Symbolism and Themes are original research[edit]

I have marked the Symbolism and Themes sections as consisting of original research. Wikipedia is not the place for people to share their opinions of what literary works mean. If no one has added reliable citations to support the opinions expressed in those sections within a reasonable time, like a month or so, I plan to remove those two sections entirely. By reliable citations I mean analyses of Ethan Frome from published academic or other reputable sources, not blogs and not simply references to specific passages in Ethan Frome itself that seem to support the opinions.--Jim10701 (talk) 20:21, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plot spoilers?[edit]

I read the Novels Project page and didn't see any guidance on this, so maybe I'm out of line, but I'm really surprised to see the ending described in the plot summary. Is that usual practice? (If so, I'll remember NOT to look at the Wikipedia article for any book I have not already read!) Thanks. Regina Terrae (talk) 18:38, 9 December 2011 (UTC) Regina Terrae[reply]

Delete "Themes" section?[edit]

This entire section is unreferenced and mostly subjective. Who the says, "The novel is all the more remarkable for its forbidden impressions ..."? It's long past July 2011, the date given in the "original research" tag. Therefore I nominate this section for immediate deletion. Please allow me also to suggest that those opposed provide the necessary references or otherwise make your case for retention. Cheers and Happy Holidays to all!! Rico402 (talk) 09:18, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support notion. I think a themes section would be good if expanded but "Ethan’s character is one that comes full circle, moving from silent desire to action to quiet submission, ordered by life’s circumstances. The novel is all the more remarkable for its forbidden impressions of the rural working class in New England, especially given that its author was a woman of leisure. The name of the small Massachusetts town represents a bleak, cold and dismal environment." is against wikipolicy, if still a bit incitefull- It's here on the talk page now for people who look- but has no place in the article. Deadagain33 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Cuando, cuando, cuando?[edit]

When is the story set? The love affair between Ethan and Mattie, I mean? Thanks, Maikel (talk) 15:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ethan Frome. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add

{{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]