Talk:Howl's Moving Castle (novel)

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

Cheeking[edit]

What does cheeking a witch mean? RickK 06:33, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)

To "cheek" someone is to treat them in an impertinent and disrespectful manner. This being a fantasy novel, the witch is a witch.
(Memo to self: Must pay more attention to what I write in Wikipedia, esp. wrt slang...) —Paul A 06:57, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)
This reminds me of what my english teacher once said. She is American, once we ecountered the phrase "and you have the cheek to tell me that", she said that no American would know what that means, she commented with "Oh, that's so British!" ^_^ . Federico Pistono ✆ ✍ 09:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also that becomes external[edit]

Can anyone explain to me how this text:

* [[DWJWiki:Howl's Moving Castle|Howl's Moving Castle on the DWJ Wiki]]

turns into this external link?

-- Samuel Wantman 9 July 2005 03:30 (UTC)

It's a way to do interwiki linking. The link I just made was another example. Cmouse 9 July 2005 06:10 (UTC)

Poster vandalized[edit]

Can someone please fix the poster?-65.87.32.138
Fixed. --nihon 08:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Steampunk? I think not.[edit]

Someone listed this show as steampunk. Being someone who has watched the film and a follower of Japanime I must disagree. Never has it been stated in the film or by it's creators that Howl's Moving Castle is Steampunk. Whoever is listing these anime series under the steampunk category needs to prove that this movie has been recognised or made with the genre in mind, otherwise I think it is a gross misjudgement to list it under the same categories as other affiliated Steampunk works. 82.155.15.197 17:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is certainly an element of steampunk in the film (and in Miyazaki films in general) in the design of the castle and the airships -- a feel of technology as spun off from Victorian or Edwardian design, replete with, well, steam. Whether or not the category is purist about its members or allows anything with a related vibe to be included is not for me to say, but it does seem to be to fit squarely in the category the steampunk page calls fantasy steampunk. I'd call it no less steampunk than Nausicaa and the Brothers Grimm, which are both listed on that page as examples of the genre. (The book, on the other hand, is not steampunk at all.) Deborah-jl 13:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that perhaps there should be some re-evaluation in terms of what types of works of fiction should be listed as steampunk. In my belief both the steampunk and cyberpunk articles are in a disarray, mainly due to the listing of the fictional works (primarily the media listings). Howl's Moing Castle may possess items of a steam-punk nature such as the castle, but with that in mind we may as well ass everything under the sun that possesses an element of some mechanical construct which is either steam-driven as steampunk. I think there needs to further clarity on the genre itself, because as you have indicated yourself the book is definitely not steampunk - the film is based on the book and may have added imrpovement by Miyazaki, however I am sure Miyazaki along with other anime producers only add elements of "fantasy" to these stories. And even though there is fantastic technology it still does not constitute this film being listed as steampunk simply because it is incorrect to define the movie as such. Rememeber that the book and the movie are if anything, categorised as fantasy whereas steampunk is science-fiction. There is a difference. 82.155.82.215 18:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you make good points. I think before we change this category the right thing to do is get some consensus on the steampunk article. That article clearly allows for fantasy steampunk; after all, it dedicates an entire section to the concept. Under the current wikipedia definition of steampunk, the HMC film (and most Miyazaki) qualifies. Perhaps if you get some bckup for your assertions -- I think the Mamoth Encyclopedia of Science Fiction has steampunk entries, though I don't know what they say -- and bring them to the steampunk page, you can form a new consensus over there? Deborah-jl 15:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Should someone who refers to it as "Japanime" really have any credibility in this matter? There are definitely large elements of steampunk in this film, as in nearly all of Miyazaki films. The classification is perfectly reasonable-- though the fantasy aspect is undeniable, the technology is sci-fi based. The aesthetic is more than just victorian but (especially considering Nausicaa and Castle in the Sky) has a specifically steampunk influence. Steampunk by no means excludes fantasy-- especially considering much of science fiction certainly coincides with fantasy. (talk) 08:40, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Separation?[edit]

Does anyone think it would be a good idea if we separated the "Howl's Moving Castle Studio Ghibli film" and the "Castle in the Air" article, from the "Howl's Moving Castle Novel" article? Alus 23:13, 20 January, 2006 (UTC)

So turn it into three articles? --nihon 07:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that is what I mean but I want to see what everyone else thinks. It seems to be rather smashed in to one article. Alus 10:13, 21 January, 2006 (UTC)
Hmm...I think the article works fine as it is, though if it was expanded quite a bit, Castle in the Air could be it's own article. --nihon 18:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Castle in the Air could certainly be its own article. Right now I feel the film and book having one article works, Deborah-jl Talk 17:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I'm working on an article for Castle in the Air. I haven't quite finished it yet. I'll post it soon. Hope it's okay. Blue Socked Llama 08:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Castle Series Template[edit]

In an attempt to organize the growing number of Castle Series related pages (Ingary, Howl, Calcifer, etc.) I have created a "Castle Series" template to interconnect these articles. It's kind of rough, but this is my first attempt at creating a template. If there are any adept coders reading this than please feel free to streamline it a bit. Eventually I'd like both characters and places to have their own sub-section.

S. Luke 22:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Characters/ Setting spoilers[edit]

I'm rewording the character and setting sections to eliminate any possible spoliers, which I believe should be kept to the Plot Summary section.

S. Luke 22:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I personally think it is difficult to explain the characters' personalities without mentioning their actions. I am following the wikiproject template which encourages us to elaborate on Character sketch, Biographical summary and Relationship with other characters. There are 3 sections that require a spoiler warning (plot summary, characters and major themes). The only way to circumvent this would be to create an article for each character, which I don't think is necessary.
Mfavre 23:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now don't get me wrong, I think that it's wonderful that we're expanding on the characters section, after all only a couple of weeks ago that section was just a list of names and links. However, I think it's relatively common for people to come to Wikipedia and learn about a book they've heard about before they actually read it. If we make half the article contain spolier warnings then the article will only be useful to people who've already read the book, and honestly those people wouldn't need the character summaries to begin with. My suggestion would be to re-insert some of the bigger spoilers, for instance about Sulliman and Prince Justin, into the plot summary instead. If we mention the information there we really don't need to mention it again in the character summaries. Plus a good of the information on Sulliman isn't even about his own actions it's about what the witch has done to him, which being the case, I don't think really sheds any light on his character. So to me, at least, it seems that information would be better suited for the Plot Summary. Could that be an agreeable solution?
S. Luke 02:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ingary Article Deletion[edit]

The article for Ingary was recently deleted and now re-dericts here. The entire discussion regarding the article's fate involved five people and took less than a week. Not a single person who regularly contributes to a "Castle Series" article was asked to participate in this discussion and no notice of this debate was ever mentioned at any of the relevant talk pages. The page deleted was the setting for two novels, and an academy award winning movie I believe it's safe to say that if some of those familiar with the books were made aware that the article's fate was uncertain we could have provided sufficient references to prove its notability. 4.255.43.217 23:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Department Of Overdone Jokes Department[edit]

But seriously, this article has SO much redundancy. So very much. Lots42 (talk) 12:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is an excess of WP:fancruft here. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Calcifer's Saucepan Song Section[edit]

The information in this section is interesting, but I didn’t see the reason why it had a section on its own. Maybe it would be helpful to add a few points about the significance of this song to the book such as how it relates to Howl’s Welsh background or how Calcifer is “bound” to the hearth in the castle. Joeyee10 (talk) 01:44, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It has no references, it will eventually get challenged.Bread Ninja (talk) 12:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology Section/Spoilers[edit]

The chronology section has to go. Way too much detail. I would just delete it outright, but someone put a decent amount of work into that. Overall, the article has way too much unnecessary detail and is rather useless to someone who has never read the text, as there are many spoilers that aren't in the plot section. Most of the spoilers should be in there, rather than in the character section. Someone should take a look at that too. 74.61.87.64 (talk) 11:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also #Characters/ Setting spoilers
I agree that the body of the article is much much too long, especially these three sections (2 Setting, 3 Characters, 4 Chronology).
I don't know anything about the relation of so-called Plot summaries to spoilers, which 2007 and 2011 editors mentioned re these three sections.
As I read WP:SPOILER the section headings Plot, Characters, and Chronology all provide sufficient warning, but Setting and Themes do not, so its desirable that the latter be free of "spoiler" content.
Last hour I revised the lead, infobox (now essentially complete), and current sections 9-12 (Awards and footer), virtually without change to current sections 1-8. That is a major revision of the first and last of *thirteen* pages, using a window size that the lead, Contents, and {|tl|infobox book}} fill once.
--P64 (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inspiration for the book[edit]

The childs name was stephen and is also who the book is dedicated sadly the author lost his name so he is only ever named as stephen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.3.159.21 (talk) 14:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Howl's Moving Castle. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:32, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beauty and the Beast[edit]

Hello fellow editors,

I want to add in a section on Beauty and the Beast and how this story falls in line with the ATU 425 myth archetype. I have compiled some scholarly sources that illustrate how Diana Wynne Jones adds her own twist to this archetype by making Sophie beastly/othered by her curse of being old, while having Howl remain handsome. It is an inversion of the story! I think this section would fit well beside the Allusions and references to other works section (since there are already references to other myths there). I have not only found a good amount of sources that make parallels between the two stories, but a lot of blogs from everyday folks comparing the two. I think it would improve the page overall. If there are any other editors on this page who would like to send me sources or help please let me know! Sleepvertical (talk) 15:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to begin adding the section I have planned into the article. I have a feeling users will see this as I edit the page because they have the article page watched but not the talk page... Please speak now or forever hold your peace! Sleepvertical (talk) 23:41, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Howl's Moving Castle (film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Intertextuality[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sleepvertical (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Gcampbel (talk) 19:54, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More citations needed?[edit]

Wondering why the tag


Is listed. This article seems to have ample citations. What is the purpose of the tag? Slacker13 (talk) 02:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

5 of the 14 citations are clustered in the "Howl’s Moving Castle as New Mythology" section I worked on last semester for the Wiki Education Foundation. That means most of the sources are localized to one section. I'd still say this article needs more citations! Especially in the 2 sections that state "This section does not cite any sources". Hope that helps in terms of clarity. Sleepvertical (talk) 22:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Howl%27s_Moving_Castle_(novel)&oldid=1206424460"