Talk:The Man Who Fell to Earth (novel)

Novels: Sci-fi Mid‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Science fiction task force.

The Man Who Fell to Earth (1987 film) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 26 May 2019 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into The Man Who Fell to Earth (novel). The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Seperate into Book and Film[edit]

I have created a page for The Man Who Fell to Earth (film). This page shall now be solely about the book.

Mikeguy

Added a thing about the 2007 version- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0486859/

aging of Betty Jo?[edit]

The current version of the article says that Betty Jo "ages from her twenties to her fifties during the narrative". That's a bit unclear as the novel takes place over a five-year period so how did she age three decades? Needs elaboration. --Mathew5000 22:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Different editions of the book / revisions made by Tevis[edit]

Although the book was written in 1963, there's a reference to the Watergate scandal near the end (on p. 180 in the Del Rey edition published 1999). Obviously this reference was inserted sometime between 1973 and 1999, but when exactly? And what other revisions were made from Tevis's 1963 edition? I found this quite jarring while reading the book. I tried to find information about this from Google but hit a couple of dead ends: a query on Amazon.de that was never answered and a televised panel discussion which mentions the issue and seems to refer to a comparison of a new edition with an original edition "on the web site" but I could not locate that. In particular I would like to know whether Tevis authorized the changes. --Mathew5000 22:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Manwhofelltoearth book.png[edit]

Image:Manwhofelltoearth book.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:56, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watergate[edit]

The edition I have mentions Watergate. So I guess it was rewritten or updated at some point ? 86.208.18.123 (talk) 10:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I've seen it as well. Watergate was 10 years after the publishing date. The only thing I can think of is something was added when the copyright was renewed in 1991. Planetary (talk) 18:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you think the revision was done at the same time as copyright renewal? More likely it was in the 1980s or late ’70s. The original edition of the novel was set in the years 1972 to 1976. In the revised edition, the setting is 1985 to 1990. Considering that it’s supposed to be the future, it makes no sense to suppose that this revision was made in 1991. There are various other changes in addition to the years and the mention of Watergate. For example, the original edition contains this paragraph:

Suddenly Newton began to laugh. Bryce was astonished; he had never heard him laugh before. Then, still trembling with the fag end of laughter, Newton said, “It’s a good thing. She won’t be lonely now. Where is she?”

In the revised edition, the paragraph reads as follows:

Suddenly Newton began to laugh. Bryce was astonished; he had never heard him laugh before. Then, still trembling with the wave of laughter, Newton said, “It’s a good thing. She won’t be lonely now. Where is she?”

—Mathew5000 (talk) 04:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So there were other changes. I thought so. Very subtle. Planetary (talk) 04:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I had to guess, I'd say that the revisions were done for the first British edition, which was published in 1976, which would explain the reference to Watergate. The following website echoes that. http://bookfails.livejournal.com/66008.html?thread=1461464 Agent Cooper (talk) 15:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another version[edit]

The 1997 Australian film 'Epsilon' (Alien Visitor in the U.S.) has many parallels with TMWFTE including a sole, naked traveler visiting earth to assist with its impending doom. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112974/?ref_=tt_urv https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_(film) Dan Bollinger (talk) 15:26, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]