Talk:Omoo

I'm a little confused by the wording on this article, which suggests the book is not a novel but non-fiction, yet Typee is considered fiction. I'll assume it's to be considered a novel for now. 23skidoo 05:13, 19 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

It's an autobiographical novel. It's not non-fiction. john k 23:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Actually it is part fiction, part nonfiction with an ongoing arguement of how much of each. See Melville Unfolding for an indepth analysis of the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.58.18.198 (talk) 01:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate MackyBeth's attention and intelligent work on this and other pages, as well as the thoughtful comments above, but it would be better to avoid a debate on Typee and Omoo's genre, at least in the lede. "Book" is perfectly neutral, but "novel" -- as I recall from a search a few years ago and could be wrong -- is not used in the Northwestern-Newbury "Historical Note." I agree that it should be listed in the WikiProject Novel, however, since it historically led to HM's later novels.

The title of the book simply calls it a "narrative."

There is indeed a significant discussion of the relation of "fiction" and "non-fiction" in these books, but there can be a "non-fiction novel," such as Truman Capote's book whose title escapes me at the moment, and a non-fiction book in which much is made up or uses novelistic techniques. My point is simply that the lede of this article doesn't need to get into all this and should simply say "book."

BTW, I also disagree with the pronunciation "OH-moo," which seems to put the emphasis on the first syllable. No need for pronunciation in any case. Cheers! ch (talk) 21:35, 4 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

From the current page: Many sources incorrectly assert that Omoo is based on Melville's stay in the Marquesas—the novel is, in fact, exclusively based on his experiences in the Society Islands.

If "many sources" are incorrect, we need a source that definitively asserts the experiences are of the Society Islands. As it is currently, there is no definition of "many sources," which are weasel words; and there is no authoritative source refuting these unnamed "many sources." I plan to be bold, but thought I'd give a little chance for other editors to step in. Oswald Glinkmeyer (talk) 14:44, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The Wikipedia Charles Wilkes article says that this 5-volume Narrative was published in 1844. My source, Tanselle's Notes, says 1845. I don't know which is the correct year, I just wanted to inform other editors I made no typo. MackyBeth (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply