 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Twist Ending
editI read with surprise that this is a 'twist ending which has caused the reputation to decline'. Certainly its full appreciation requires a belief in the non-material that not all may wish to share. But it's of the essence of the allegory - my Headmaster, bless 'im, liked it for that too. Linuxlad 11:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Survivalism
editI am shocked to see the novel described as 'a survivalist novel'. Minimalist, psychological, popular and well known, gruelling, critically acclaimed - take your pick. Just looking at it logically, survivalism is defined on WP as "a movement of individuals or groups (called survivalists or preppers) who are actively preparing for emergencies" etc. i.e. a form of social paranoia, not an individual struggling to survive an unexpected disaster. This appears to have been inserted to bolster Survivalism in fiction which looks suspiciously like original research. I have deleted the references although no doubt they will pop up again. ProfDEH (talk) 09:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Death or survival
editNdstead (talk) 14:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC) I believe it is pretty clear that Martin died (on page 8 of my Faber paperback edition). The information about the seaboots at the end allows for no other interpretation. Also, I don't understand the observation that Martin 'correctly' deduces that the rest of the crew is dead. How do we know they are dead? It is Martin who has been drowned, and the rest of the crew may well have survived.Ndstead (talk) 11:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I disagree that the "information about the seaboots at the end allows for no other interpretation," other than that Martin died much earlier. I think it is reasonably (if not equally) plausible that his mind detached from reality due to his isolation and fear while stranded on the rocks, and that this affected his perception and memory and, ultimately, his credibility as a narrator. To suggest that the text "allows for no other interpretation" is pretty narrow, and deprives the reader of considering other possibilities. (talk) 8:38, 09 November 2015 (UTC)
It is useful to read the following article-https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-16530446/a-matter-of-belief-pincher-martin-s-afterlifeNdstead (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)