Jump to content

Talk:Nathan Barley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Momus

[edit]

"...and supposed by some to have been inspired by the postmodern performance artist Momus."

I've removed this passage as a) I've never heard this claim made anywhere else b) it's weasel-worded c) it's unreferenced and d) it's potentially libelous. FrFintonStack 17:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed at the end of the first sentence of the "Second Series" section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.245.73 (talk) 21:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POFV

[edit]

"The series features two other central characters, siblings Dan (Julian Barratt) and Claire Ashcroft. Dan – an instantly recognisable Brooker point-of-reference – dislikes everything Nathan Barley stands for, while Claire seeks to highlight the plight of the inner city's homeless and drug-dependent. Ironically, while Dan sees a clear distinction between himself and the "idiots", he's frequently forced to compromise his own ethics in order to earn a living, and seems to be fighting the dawning realisation that he may actually be the very thing he despises. At the same time, Claire, who clearly wants to see herself as socially responsible and philanthropic, ultimately only seeks to further her own career. This sets the scene for an unusually open-ended, and certainly introspective, satire-bordering-on-social-commentary."

Seriously, have any decent wikipedians ever seen this article? Keshidragon (talk) 06:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The writing isn't up to much, but it is a pretty accurate summary of the characters and their motivations/actions. Nick Cooper (talk) 14:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree this section= dreadful POV. Anyone who ever bothered to tarry near an 'O'-level English class would know that you can't summarise characters objectively (beyond listing appearance) and an encylopedia at least aspires to be more than just a 'lit-crit' blog.

It's utterly stupid having this section- or did I miss this being a nascent-post-post-modern joke??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.236.146 (talk) 09:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rumours of a second series

[edit]

I've altered the reference to the Nicholas Burns' interview in Loaded magazine. It just said "the October edition" so I've added "2008" - I'm assuming this is the right year but I'm not a Loaded reader so it's just an educated guess on my part. Please feel free to alter this if I've got the year wrong Dom Kaos (talk) 13:15, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]