Talk:James Gould Cozzens

Untitled

Critics praised Cozzens for his seriousness and depth as a novelist. His main weakness, which he acknowledged, was that he was not a lyrical prose stylist. Brief passages from his books are rarely powerful or entertaining when read in isolation. That has probably limited his appeal to today's "sound-bite" generation

I strongly disagree with the comment about brief quotes. See qoutes in Guard of Honor.

It may be a different understanding of "brief".

Peter Reilly 17:56, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:GuardofHonorCozzens.jpg

The image Image:GuardofHonorCozzens.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:50, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Recent Edit

I find the most recent change discussing Cozzen's current standing quite eloquent. I wonder if there is a bit of a POV problem with it though.

12.159.138.194 (talk) 13:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Its POV problem is that it consists entirely of POV, and an ennui about oh the kids today ("SOME fifty years... in the first decade of the new century..."), and a finger-wag, and a huff.
On principle, I have a searing hate for deleting text from entries (and I can't stand deleting entries except in the case of total fabrication or spamming). But this has to go. If it were even in the form of of stating that someone holds this opinion and here's the reference to it, then this might be tolerable.
(Also, the fact that this is from a user who has touched no other articles gives me the odd feeling that he wrote a term paper on Cozzens and then decided that its final paragraph was so grand that it deserves a worldwide audience! and vice versa!)
Since the sentence "Cozzens virtually disappeared from the American literary scene for decades" implicates that that something happened after those decades (but nothing has), I'm tweaking it so that the conclusion is the conclusion. Call it a suture, above an excision. Sean M. Burke (talk) 05:20, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Florence King: Cozzens as Misanthrope

If anyone wants a good laugh in the form of literary criticism and/or vice versa, have a look at Florence King's write-up of Cozzens in her book With Charity Toward None, p154-159, in the chapter named "By Flying Spikes in F-Sharp Possessed". Its first sentence is: "I wish I could say I never met a misanthrope who bored me, but I can't. Three who leave me cold are Ty Cobb, Irving Berlin, and James Gould Cozzens." In a book that celebrates misanthropy's heroes, those three win the game but lose the match. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sburke (talk • contribs) 05:43, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Has Cozzens Disappeared ?

I thought the prose that was cut was pretty good, but I do see the POV problem. I'm not sure that the conclusion we have now is really correct.

Peter Reilly (talk) 16:59, 23 September 2010 (UTC)