Jump to content

Talk:The Thirty-Nine Steps

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

spoiler!

[edit]

what's the plot/storyline/ minus the spoiler ;)

made changes to the "Plot introduction" without to much of a spoiler. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The spoiler warning needs to be placed prior to the "Plot Introduction"!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.60.98.133 (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2007

Film or Book ?

[edit]

This article is about the book. Therefore I propose removing the info about the Hitchcock film ( the side bar info ) to a less prominent position where it is clear that that info is film related. There were 3 films anyway.

Hangin' Out

[edit]

Hannay hanging from the minute hand of Big Ben? Who was his stunt double, Harold Lloyd? Trekphiler 06:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By the number

[edit]

I went looking for the Canadian band, The 39 Steps, & got this. Some fan write an article? Trekphiler 06:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Film or Book ? 2

[edit]

I agree with the previous writer that this page is rather a mess - the emphasis is on the 1935 Hitchcock film rather than the novel and the other films are somewhat left out. I would suggest that either the films page be separated, i.e. under a 'the thirty-nine steps' (film) page or each version is given its own section on the page, i.e. the novel, the film, then subdivide the film versions into 1935, 1959, 1978.

Revision

[edit]

This page has now been altered as requested, with a separate film page for the 1935 adaptation, which has also taken with it the 'Hitchcock template' and the picture. This page is now more about the work in general, the original novel first and then a section about each film individually. Plenty of links have been revised to accomodate this change, and the new page site is made quite clear at the beginning of the article to avoid confusion. Bob Castle 01:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC) BC[reply]


The plot summary at the film page was of the book, not the movie. I removed it, but somebody might want to merge it in here (I didn't, because it contradicts the plot here in a few places, and since I haven't read it I don't know which is right). You can grab it out of the history here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_39_Steps_%281935_film%29&direction=prev&oldid=36390309 .—Chowbok 19:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(By the way, is there a Wiki-way to link to an old revision?) —Chowbok 19:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, good idea. Stupidly, I haven't actually seen the 1935 film, only read the book and seen the other 2 films, so if you could write a new (correct) plot summary for the Hitchcock film that would be great. I felt like the above opinions that its dominance over this page was unfair on the novel. Feel free to incorporate the older plot 'summary' into this, but I suspect it was simply copied from elsewhere and was so long that it wasn't really encyclopedic. Bob Castle 21:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Decided to restore the large description of the plot, and keep the shorter one as a 'plot summary'. Thanks for your help. Bob Castle 22:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you don't mind my barging in...I replaced the plot summary sections for two of the films with "Main article" links. If there's going to be a separate article for every film version (sounds like it's headed that way), a summary here would be redundant. This should be just about the book, imho. Her Pegship 05:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Wembley steps

[edit]

Does anyone know whether this was intentional or merely a coincidence? Lisiate 08:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands now, that item, in the 'Trivia' section, doesn't seem to me to have any relevance to the book. Can anyone say why it should be included in the article? Marieblasdell 16:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's been deleted before, but always creeps back in. Worth another try?--Old Moonraker 17:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a plan! Marieblasdell 17:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio play too

[edit]

Orson Welles also seems to have adapted The Thirty-nine Steps in August 1938 for the Mercury Theatre. Maybe this should be mentioned somewhere in this entry? But the only reference for it I have is the link to the (dress?) rehearsal of the radio play in http://www.mercurytheatre.info/. I don't know if the radio play was aired in finished form in the end: the rehearsal seems almost ready for airing. --Calmansi 18:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely was aired; it's uncertain whether a recording of the broadcast exists. —Chowbok 18:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bold text

Canadian

[edit]

Should he not be referred to as a Scottish/Canadian author in the opening paragraph? He was after all, the former Governer General of Canada Canking 12:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buchan was a British citizen; it would be incorrect to call him Canadian to describe his nationality. He was Governor General when such holders of the office were still appointed from the United Kingdom and not from among resident Canadian citizens.Cloptonson (talk) 05:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation

[edit]

The capitalisation looks a little inconsistent. It should probably be consistent to be either The Thirty-nine Steps (as most of the page seems to use) or The Thirty-Nine Steps (as some references use, and which appears correct to me). But given that both appear a number of places I've found and that I'm not familiar with the book, I wouldn't presume to know for certain which of the two should be the standard. - Cafemusique 22:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the page used to be "The Thirty-Nine Steps", which looks more aesthetically pleasing to my eye, but it's difficult to say which is the correct form. I suppose the current form is the most gramatically correct, yet most versions of the book I've seen have the capitalised N, i.e. the Penguin and the Oxford World Classics versions. I propose it should be changed back. Bob talk 01:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thought both halves of hyphenated words were to be capitalised in titles anyway. I really need to buy myself a style guide. - Cafemusique 12:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Version

[edit]

I just listened to the hour-long radio version starring Glenn Ford, apparently aired live on March 23, 1948. This was over the Radio Entertainment Network.

Someone might make an entry about this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neopeius (talk • contribs) 10:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Real 39 Steps....

[edit]

The reference in the section 'the real 39 steps' [1] claims Buchan reduced the number of steps from 78 to 39 'for a more suitable title', while the obituary reference in the background section [2] suggests it was a result of his daughter counting the steps. Which is it? 86.139.62.11 (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.undergroundkent.co.uk/39_steps.htm
  2. ^ "Lord Tweedsmuir: novelist and son of John Buchan", obituary, The Times of London, July 4, 2008 ("In 1990 [William] Buchan published a memoir of his own early life, The Rags of Time, in which he described his family life [...]"), retrieved December 8, 2008

Contradiction

[edit]

Plot introduction says Hannay had just returned from Rhodesia. Character list says it was from South Africa. Never read it so I don't know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.132.27.108 (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The book has "Bulawayo", thus Rhodesia (I think). Be WP:BOLD and change it! --Old Moonraker (talk) 17:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cancel the above suggestion: now reads "southern Africa", covering both. Thanks, User:Dabbler, for the fix. --Old Moonraker (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"References in Literature"

[edit]

The following addition was made on 1 March 2010 by user 76.104.25.75:

The movie is referenced in J. D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye.

This edit was reversed since it refers to The 39 Steps (1935 film). Suggest transferring this data to the appropriate article with citation. The News Hound 14:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by The News Hound (talk • contribs)

More coincidences

[edit]

A recent edit has pointed out that there are 39 articles. Past discussions have agreed that listing various other collections of thirty-nine items here isn't really encyclopedic. I suggest treating this latest example in the same way, and deleting. --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, once again, to User:Dabbler for the fix. --Old Moonraker (talk) 13:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Novel title genesis confirmed by Buchan's grandson

[edit]

See this Daily Mail article of 15 January 2011 by Toby Buchan. The News Hound 05:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The News Hound (talk • contribs)

One individual's recollection of a second hand tale. Anybody have a copy of Memory Hold The Door, the autobiography? --Old Moonraker (talk) 07:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it throws no light on the origin of the title in the autobiography. Dabbler (talk) 11:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for checking. --Old Moonraker (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Thirty Nine Steps Digital Adaption

[edit]

There is a new adaption of The Thirty Nine Steps available as a digital adaption. I tried updating the page but it was taken off. http://thestorymechanics.com/digital-adaptations/the-thirty-nine-steps/ Euanlaw (talk) 13:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Euanlaw (talk • contribs) 11:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I removed it is because it is my unders5anding that your are directly involved with the company which produced it and therefore in a potential conflict of interest position in violation of Wikipedia policy. Dabbler (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The release date is wrong here. April 25 is the release date for the Steam version, but the first release was on March 15: http://www.gameolith.com/game/the-39-steps/ I would edit it myself, but I'm not really savvy of the wiki source codes, so I'd rather not dabble with it.Warfoki (talk) 19:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Louis of Battenberg in the story?

[edit]

I wonder if the portrayal of the First Sea Lord (called in the novel "Lord Alloa"), described in Hannay's narration as being a familiar figure from news pictures with "the grey beard cut like a spade, the firm fighting mouth, blue eyes, square nose and the blue eyes" and had been impersonated at the meeting where Hannay recognized him as one of his former pursuers, was known to be drawn on the real life First Sea Lord of the period of setting, Prince Louis of Battenberg? He was regarded by some as suspect because of his German origins, and ultimately resigned his post under pressure after the war began. (This came as a 'light-bulb' thought as I read the article; I well recall reading the novel at school.)Cloptonson (talk) 05:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on The Thirty-Nine Steps. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.

First link leads to a generic page, the other two are working.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Robert Towne remake"

[edit]

I'm questioning the relevance of the subsection titled "Robert Towne remake". The subsection relied entirely on IMDB as a source before I removed those cites per WP:RS/IMDB. It describes a purported remake of the Hitchcock film that was "announced in 2004" but which has produced nothing in 11 years and hasn't appeared in the news in nine. This is essentially rumor, and WP does not report rumors. Move to remove the subsection. 12.233.147.42 (talk) 23:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of title

[edit]

I removed the section on the meaning of the title because it is not in accordance with the original book. The term "thirty-nine steps" comes from Scudder's notebook to describe the geographic location of the spies' headquarters. Nowhere in the book does it say that this was a code word for the organization itself. The only spy code word is Black Stone for the leader and master of disguise. Unless you can find a very good reliable source that states this, it should not be included again. Dabbler (talk) 11:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Thirty-Nine Steps. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 07:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Works is partial

[edit]

The list at the foot of this and other pages is very incomplete. Its title should be changed, and reference should be made to the extensive page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_works_by_John_Buchan. For example, there is "Julius Caesar" (1932), a 1944 copy of which my left wrist is currently leaning on. 94.30.84.71 (talk) 19:32, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - the full list of works is linked in the word "works". I think the entries in the template are the books that currently have articles. Bob talk 21:44, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Thirty-Nine_Steps&oldid=1211642488"