Talk:Thomas De Quincey

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Greater Manchester Low‑importance

	Greater Manchester portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester 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.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Literature Low‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Writing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Writing, a WikiProject interested in improving Wikipedia's coverage of content related to the fields of rhetoric, composition, technical communication, literacy, and language studies.WritingWikipedia:WikiProject WritingTemplate:WikiProject WritingWriting articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

The English sounds rather old-fashioned. Did you write it? If not, is it old enough to be out of copyright? Can you give credit to the author anyway? (if it isn't you). Thanks!! -- Marj 07:37 Dec 29, 2002 (UTC)

Quote

Does anyone have a reference for the qoute from his schoolteachers from Bath please? 87.65.205.164 18:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At this late date, I think none will be forth-coming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.103.14.52 (talk) 13:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a reference to Robert Morrison, but that probably just goes back to family tradition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.103.14.52 (talk) 13:39, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

Have there been any criticisms of his influence on the world, given that his books glorified opium and murder?Lestrade 13:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)Lestrade He did not exactly glorify murder, but he knew that accounts of it sold well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.202.155 (talk) 12:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There were complaints that, in de Quincey's description, the pleasures of opium seemed to out-weigh the pains. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.202.155 (talk) 10:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His pernicious effect continues to be felt. The world would have been a better place if he had never lived.Lestrade (talk) 12:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

Criticism

The biography portrays De Quincey in such a manner that he seems grim and heavy hearted. And while many aspects of his life were hard, this seems to misrepresent the nature of De Quincey. A completely different sense of the man is found in the short introductory bio of De Quincey found in volume 5 of Gateway to the Great Books edited by Robert M. Hutchins, Mortimer J. Adler and published by Encylopǣdia Britannica, Inc. William Benton Publisher, 1963. For example:

De Quincey moved from one rented room to another, each so full of books and papers that he could hardly turn around in it. He loved both solitude and society, and could never get enough of either. He had a great fondness for the human race in all its varieties, and the human race repaid him in kind. His children were enchanted with him. His friends found him a delightful companion. If there had been no creditors in the world, De Quincey might have been that monster of nature, a completely happy man. [p. 356.]

And while this sketch may paint an overly rosy picture of De Quincey, it certainly calls into question the dour feeling evinced by the current biography. e.gajd Canada 04:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization

When using his last name by itself, is it proper to capitalize the "de", or to leave it in lowercase (as in similar words like "di", "du", "zu", "von", "of", etc.)? 12.71.155.26 (talk) 10:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to De Quincey, the "d" needs to be capitalized in any context. Not only was this the convention in the publication of De Quincey's writings during his lifetime, but it continues to be the dominant convention within the critical tradition, as evidence most clearly in the 21 vol. Works of Thomas De Quincey, published by Pickering & Chatto from 2000-2003.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.91.159.45 (talk • contribs)

Agreed, "De" always capitalized (in this special case). Green Cardamom (talk) 06:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up question: When writing his full name, should it be "Thomas De Quincey" or 'Thomas de Quincey"? The article uses both forms, and sources seem divided. However, the illustration carrying his autograph clearly shows him using a lower-case "d", so I would have thought his own preference should be the deciding factor. Colonies Chris (talk) 12:46, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It still needs to be "De", (i.e., capitalized in any context). His signature is one thing, but scholarly convention has ignored that since at least the middle of the nineteenth century. I think the scholarship that went into the 21 vol. Pickering & Chatto edition—the most authoritative complete edition of De Quincey's works since the the late-1800s—should set the precedent here, not De Quincey's signature. De Quincey himself was notoriously inconsistent with his own preferences on capitalization, anyway, so using one example as a guide is a bit problematic.

De Quincey's influence on Dostoevsky

Dostoevsky may have used De Quincey's essay as a guidebook for his central character in Crime and Punishment:

ON THE KNOCKING AT THE GATE IN MACBETH. MISCELLANEOUS ESSAYS BY THOMAS DE QUINCEY. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/10708/10708-8.txt "Now it will be remembered that in the first of these murders, (that of the Marrs,) the same incident (of a knocking at the door soon after the work of extermination was complete) did actually occur, which the genius of Shakespeare has invented . . . Murder in ordinary cases, where the sympathy is wholly directed to the case of the murdered person, is an incident of coarse and vulgar horror; and for this reason, that it flings the interest exclusively upon the natural but ignoble instinct by which we cleave to life; an instinct, which, as being indispensable to the primal law of self-preservation, is the same in kind, (though different in degree,) amongst all living creatures; this instinct therefore, because it annihilates all distinctions, and degrades the greatest of men to the level of "the poor beetle that we tread on," exhibits human nature in its most abject and humiliating attitude. Such an attitude would little suit the purposes of the poet. What then must he do? He must throw the interest on the murderer. Our sympathy must be with _him_; (of course I mean a sympathy of comprehension, a sympathy by which we enter into his feelings, and are made to understand them,--not a sympathy[1] of pity or approbation.) In the murdered person all strife of thought, all flux and reflux of passion and of purpose, are crushed by one overwhelming panic; the fear of instant death smites him "with its petrific mace." But in the murderer, such a murderer as a poet will condescend to, there must be raging some great storm of passion,--jealousy, ambition, vengeance, hatred,--which will create a hell within him; and into this hell we are to look . . . The murderers, and the murder, must be insulated--cut off by an immeasurable gulf from the ordinary tide and succession of human affairs--locked up and sequestered in some deep recess; we must be made sensible that the world of ordinary life is suddenly arrested--laid asleep--tranced--racked into a dread armistice: time must be annihilated; relation to things without abolished; and all must pass self-withdrawn into a deep syncope and suspension of earthly passion. Hence it is, that when the deed is done, when the work of darkness is perfect, then the world of darkness passes away like a pageantry in the clouds: the knocking at the gate is heard; and it makes known audibly that the reaction has commenced: the human has made its reflux upon the fiendish; the pulses of life are beginning to beat again; and the re-establishment of the goings-on of the world in which we live, first makes us profoundly sensible of the awful parenthesis that had suspended them."

Compare to this scene: "Raskolnikov stood keeping tight hold of the axe. He was in a sort of delirium. He was even making ready to fight when they should come in. While they were knocking and talking together, the idea several times occurred to him to end it all at once and shout to them through the door. Now and then he was tempted to swear at them, to jeer at them, while they could not open the door! "Only make haste!" was the thought that flashed through his mind." http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2554/2554-h/2554-h.htm (post by Richard Scalper) Dick Scalper (talk) 15:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question on phrase used in his Wikipedia entry

From the entry:

Psychologically, he had what Alethea Hayter has called the "pariah temperament" typical of drug addicts.

Is the use of the phrase "pariah temperament" simply a way of saying that he preferred to be alone? I am (or, at least, fancy myself as being) fairly well-read, but I have never come across that phrase before in my *cough* years on the planet.

I'm afraid that Alethea Hayter is, as near as I can make out, a fairly obscure writer for 21st century readers. Is there, perhaps, another way to convey the same idea, but with different (and less opaque) verbiage? If not, I would be grateful if someone could at least confirm with certainty that the aforementioned phrase means what I understand it to mean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.18.168.230 (talk) 03:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move (January 2012)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Should it be "Thomas De Quincey" or "Thomas de Quincey"? The article uses both forms, and sources seem divided. However, the illustration carrying his signature clearly shows him using a lower-case "d", so I would have thought his own preference should be the deciding factor. Therefore I propose to rename this article to 'Thomas de Quincey' and standardise on that form throughout the article. Colonies Chris (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move (January 2012)

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: Move, no opposition in two weeks. Feel free to open another RM if other evidence comes up . Jafeluv (talk) 07:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas De Quincey → Thomas de Quincey – Relisted. Jafeluv (talk) 20:51, 19 January 2012 (UTC) The article uses both "Thomas De Quincey" and "Thomas de Quincey", and sources seem divided. However, the illustration carrying his signature clearly shows him using a lower-case "d", so I think his own preference should be the deciding factor. Therefore I request that this article be renamed to 'Thomas de Quincey'. [This proposal has already been in place for 5 days (see above) without objection.] Colonies Chris (talk) 23:53, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Looking at this ngram, it appears that the capitalised 'D' is about twice as common as the uncapitalised. That said, I agree the subject's preference should carry some weight, so I'm not going to oppose. I'll see what others have to say. Jenks24 (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2012 (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.

Requested Move (May 2012)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I'll argue that the article title "Thomas de Quincey" should be corrected to "Thomas De Quincey". See reasons in the Capitalization discussion section. Or, see any scholarly book or peer-reviewed essay published on De Quincey in the last hundred years. The capitalized "De" is used with extremely little exception. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.91.159.134 (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having spent 10 minutes checking sources. I agree. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:21, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography article has him as "Quincey, Thomas Penson De", so I agree with the renaming. Malleus Fatuorum 01:02, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 2

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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 11:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas de Quincey → Thomas De Quincey – The move from January was rather a strange one contradicting the consensus in the Capitalisation section above it and at the same time claiming 'the illustration carrying his signature clearly shows him using a lower-case', this is a bit bewildering because the illustration in the article could just as easily be a capital 'D' as a lowercase one. The source of the illustration http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16026/16026-h/16026-h.htm repeatably used "De Quincey" in the text. Also the comment by User:Jenks24 pointed to material which suggested an oppose of the move. The previous move aside a check through sources(on google books and from article) shows a greater amount of 'Thomas De Quincey'. Sources aside because this person is English and 'de' is common from French, it is easy to understand how mispelling of the capitalisation has arisen. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:46, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support – After quickly reviewing the previous remarks, it looks like most sources use uppercase, so that seems to be his WP:COMMONNAME. In regard to his signature, to me it looks like "Thomas Jr Quincey" or "Thomas 8c Quincey". Unless there is some consistent pattern of what he used in multiple signatures, I suggest not to worry about that too much. I also see what you meant about the text that accompanies that signature. –BarrelProof (talk) 01:11, 23 June 2012 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Thomas De Quincey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Thomas De Quincey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:42, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be a reference here to the Chetham Society volumes of the admissions register of the Manchester Grammar School, where the Vol II entry on de Quincey (written mainly by a Manchester Anglican clergyman who didn't approve of opium, or much of de Quincey himself), indicates that his father was a substantial Manchester West Indian merchant and confirms that the "de" was the author's own embellishment of his family surname, QuinceyDelahays (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

The Journalist section needs a better rewrite. In particular, the final sentence:

"While some people wrongly think that De Quincey was an abolitionist, a quick read of his West Indies essays would reveal that he was in fact a racist who believed white people to be physically and morally superior."

This isn't really up to standard:

- The writer takes a position without any citation or evidence - "a quick read" isn't a very good summary of anything - "racist" needs contextualizing - "believed white people to be physically and morally superior" whose words are these? I don't think they are De Quincey's, but if they are, they must be cited. - the depth of discussion isn't very good — Preceding unsigned comment added by Even978 (talk • contribs) 07:26, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]