Talk:An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge/Archive 1

Archive 1

Popular Culture

The section about references in popular culture is yet another example of this kind of Wikipedia section. What is so valuable about popular culture that it is worthy of inclusion in a Wikipedia article? My conviction is that Wikipedia panders to the adolescent mind.Lestrade 14:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

Because it's usually a reference of note, and gives the reader some further insight into the significance of the piece--the fact that it was mentioned on Lost, for instance, tells the reader that it's important enough to be mentioned on one of the highest-rated shows on television at the time. Wikipedia shouldn't be so stuffy about what belongs in the article and just put useful information that a large number of people will want to read. -Mance 22:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Some of the works listed in the article are only very tangentially related to this story -- does that Scrubs episode really belong here? Perhaps only works that specifically reference this story or whose authors have stated a specific connection should be listed. Djkuula (talk) 16:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention that many of those comparisons aren't really apt in the first place and show a poor understanding of the story. The events of Owl Creek Bridge took place entirely within the mind of a dying man, yet there are claims that the story "influenced" ghost stories like the TZ ep "The Hitch-Hiker" and Carnvial of Souls. I'd really like to see some citations on this one, because stories like that are more closely aligned with the old folk tale, "The Choker", which Irving adapted to "The Adventure of the German Student". I think most of these so-called "references" should be deleted. Andellyon (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I would agree the section Works inspired by the story or employing a similar plot device ought to be more specific about which were inspired by the story (and identifying how) and which used a similar plot device. I'm not sure the latter belong here at all, and might be better off in an article on the plot device, if there's a name for it. Шизомби (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

What about works that are confirmed to be directly inspired by the work (e.g. the Heroes episode "Cold Snap" as confirmed by episode writer Bryan Fuller in the episode commentary)? eb (talk) 01:46, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

IMHO, it would be better to have a section citing literary criticism rather than which sitcoms copied the idea. Kortoso (talk) 16:52, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion: A special spoilers protocol for mega-twist endings

Ouch!! That's a heck of a spoiler! There are certain narrative works (films, novels, stories) where the surprise ending is so essential to the work, I think either the spoiler protocol as a whole should be altered to make it near impossible to inadvertently stumble upon a spoiler, or at least a special class of spoiler protocol should be created for such works.

As it is, the spoiler warning is only a few lines above the spoiler itself, making it much too likely that in the typical web-reading style of rapid skimming that one uses to get a quick idea of what one is looking at, the spoiler will be perceived at about the same time one realizes there is a spoiler warning.

I don't feel familiar enough with Wikipedia editing conventions to start rearranging this article to put the spoiler at the end or some other quick and dirty solution like that. It seems better to adopt a consistent method to hide spoilers better, at least for stories like this where the concluding jaw-dropping revelation is the heart of the reader-writer interaction.

A simple solution would be to have a link to the spoiler-containing plot synopsis as part of a spoiler warning sentence on the first screen or two of the article. The synopsis could be at or near the bottom of the article, and the link takes you there. I'm assuming it would complicate Wikipedia's structure to put the plot on a separate page, thus my suggestion to have it on the same page. Those wise and experienced in the wiki way would have a better idea than I do about the most practical and efficient solution.

Two other examples of narratives needing similar surprise-ending protection are the ghost film "Sixth Sense" and any O. Henry story. --Delysid 20:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC) Delysid

YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 04:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Conflicts

You write "When the soldier leaves, it is revealed that he is a Union soldier who has tempted Farquhar into a trap." This is wrong, the text says about the soldier "He was a Federal scout", nothing more. In my opinion, having read the story again and again for 10 years now, I come to the conclusion that the political situation is unclear. Maybe this is even on purpose. --ThorstenStaerk (talk) 11:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Another?

Isn't there a short story by French writer Guy de Maupassant that has exactly the same plot, but involving a Frenchman and the Prussian army during the Franco-Prussian War? Tim in Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.73.131.132 (talk) 15:19, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Owl Creek Bridge falls under a sort of naturalistic psychological drama. Lovecraft wrote about a French conte cruel where a prisoner escaped, only to discover his "escape" and recapture were planned as part of his torture. (looked it up: Villiers de l'Isle-Adam "The Torture of Hope", or "A Torture by Hope" in M.P. Shiel's 1891 trans.) And Poe's "The Pit and the Pendulum" involved an escape from one peril--the pendulum--only to face another--the pit. Bierce's is a classic twist on the idea, but the trick is only in the escapee's mind. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 21:11, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304113755/http://www.ambrosebierce.org/journal1hand.html to http://www.ambrosebierce.org/journal1hand.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160312181242/http://www.twilightzoneradio.com:80/template/store.cfm/ses_/details.cfm,list,x,0,0,5015-9,x,x,x/ to http://www.twilightzoneradio.com/template/store.cfm/ses_/details.cfm,list,x,0,0,5015-9,x,x,x
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222132036/http://www.ayoungblog.com/post/28347543077/why-i-call-myself-owl-city to http://www.ayoungblog.com/post/28347543077/why-i-call-myself-owl-city
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120130113904/http://www.ambrosebierce.org:80/evans.html to http://www.ambrosebierce.org/evans.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:36, 12 October 2016 (UTC)