Talk:The Swiss Family Robinson

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

Cheese[edit]

swiss chees family robinson? is that real or is it vandalism? -moonfroggy

It was a Mighty Mouse episode and is therefore for real: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0152778/
Maikel (talk) 09:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of Information[edit]

This article is lacking in many areas including character names, complete plot info, etc. Just a thought. Kornfan71 13:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The plot is wrong at the end, it is from the movie. They do not find a girl hiding from pirates masquerading as a boy. Instead, the mother and Francis are captures by natives and taken to a nearby island. They are rescued with the help of a missionary, and find with him a woman and her daughters who had been shipwrecked. These daughters later marry two of the boys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.78.40.172 (talk) 03:57, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What I was looking for was criticism, which the article also lacks. I wondered about the prospect of finding ostriches on an island in the East Indies, for example... 76.208.120.38 (talk) 03:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When the book was written, what many people heard of the region were tall tales from sailors. I'm about 1/3 of the way through and thought they were in the Caribbean somewhere until I read this article, based primarily on the inclusion of potatoes and rubber trees on the island. Potatoes are native to Peru and rubber trees to Brazil.
No you wouldn't find tigers in the Caribbean, but you wouldn't find penguins either. Peccaries, muskrat, moose, capybaras, and iguanas are native to the New World; dingoes, wombats, platypuses, kangaroos, and koalas to Australia; ostriches, zebras, giraffes, jackals, hippopotamuses, rhinoceroses, leopards, and flamingos to Africa, camels to Northern Africa and the Middle East; penguins to the Antarctic region; walruses to the Arctic region; bison to North America and northern Europe, and so forth.
Still, the author's state of knowledge of natural history were reasonable for the time, especially as he was a minister and not a botanist or biologist. If I were to criticize it I would do so for the heavyhandedness of its moralizing, which is also pretty standard for the time. It's not that far off in tone from Pilgrim's Progress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.213.209 (talk) 04:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Family surname was not "Robinson"[edit]

This was new and surprising to me when I read it in the article just now, but I checked two different online versions of the book, and the family name was indeed never stated in the text to be "Robinson". The explanation for the name of the book itself (and why this would not be the actual name of the family) make sense, so I have reverted the recent edit that refers to the family as "the Robinsons" and replaced it with "the (unnamed) family".

It's possible but unlikely that somewhere in the book their actual surname is given, but I freely admit I didn't pore over every word to check. All I can say for sure is that the only uses of the word "Robinson" in the two online versions are references to Robinson Crusoe.--NapoliRoma 21:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only characters named seem to be the four sons and the domestic animals. The introduction to my edition says, however, that a large number of different versions have been published, so one or another might contain their surname. It is most definitely not Robinson, as is stated correctly by the article at this moment. I have to disaggre it is truley their name. da 76.208.120.38 (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basis for TV show?[edit]

Lost in Space is known to be based on Swiss Family Robinson. In LiS, the family's surname was even Robinson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.213.209 (talk) 04:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Repeats in article[edit]

  • I noticed it repeats two of the sections. It's probably already fixed, but I wanted to note it.

172.131.67.79 (talk) 18:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)AlexanderTG (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translators and Illustrators Sections[edit]

It would be very useful to have a complete list of all English translations listed by translator and date.

Since some editions of this book have been printed without mention of the translator, it would also be useful to know the page count of each translation to help our readers to identify the translator of their copy of this book.

Perhaps another separate section might list illustrators along with some comment on their artistic merit. Thanks for a great article! Rumjal --rumjal 14:56, 31 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumjal (talk • contribs)

The Swiss family Robinson[edit]

The Swiss family Robinson is a great book and and doesn't deserve any terible commens about it if you have read it then you will agree with me if you haven't read it then you get a life — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.154.192 (talk) 11:45, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Type of family[edit]

The entire family is Christian. That is not my "pov" but is made plain by even a cursory reading of the book.

Your decision to conceal the fact is an example of bias. Calling the kettle black is poor camouflage for your bias.

Please avoid making ideological reverts of correct information. --Uncle Ed (talk) 22:24, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly how important to the plot and notability of that book is it that they were christian? You are seeking to insert your interpretation and religious POV into the article. Provide cites backing up your assertion that this should be included in the lede. Heiro 22:27, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are you kidding me? The family is obviously Christian. They are a missionary family, which makes it important to the story. Plus it explains why they are constantly praying to the point of it being monotonous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.213.209 (talk) 04:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am reading the book now (1949 Junior Library edition) and though they certainly are Christian and pray often, there is no reference to them being missionaries, and the only religious references are to "God" or "Our Creator." This is conventional for the place and time the book was written. I'd say they take comfort from their devout faith, but that's a universal value, not specifically Christian.--Furrycat66 (talk) 07:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Zermatt" bogosity[edit]

Good catch, User:Cactus Wren! It was introduced on 2013-02-18 by User:83.77.184.8, who never returned. There was a spike in IP edits trying to place vanity edits into the list of characters, and somehow this one slipped through. Thanks for being alert! Reify-tech (talk) 02:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lost in Space[edit]

Added to adaptations. The fact it's based on the story has long been acknowledged. And anyway, if the Space Family Robinson comic strip can be mentioned, so can Lost in Space (apparently the TV series was not based on the comic, though they later rebranded the comic to tie in with the TV show, so they are separate adaptations). 68.146.52.234 (talk) 23:50, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Al-Ṭurfa al-Šahiyya fī aḫbār al-ʿAʾila al-Swīsiyya (c. 1900)" almost certainly a long-standing hoax[edit]

This purported Arabic translation was added in Revision 203037157 on 3 April 2008 by an IP editor, listed under "Other Adaptations" (which was not at that time a format-specific category) as, I believe, a text translation? It was then, as it remains, unsourced.

It ended up under "Film Versions" when the categories were redone in Revision 351249411 on 7 April 2010 by @Dutchmonkey9000. As its purported date (c. 1900) predates both talkies and subtitles, its status as an "Arabic translation" film is clearly erroneous.

(English) Google produces no results for "Al-Ṭurfa al-Šahiyya fī aḫbār al-ʿAʾila al-Swīsiyya" prior to April 3, 2008 (and the post-'08 results are blatantly sourced from Wikipedia). Furthermore, while I myself do not speak Arabic, Google Translate can make no sense whatsoever of the purported title, and efforts to translate "Swiss Family" result in nothing resembling "al-Swīsiyya".

I believe the entry to be entirely fictional- blatantly so as a film adaptation, and overwhelmingly probably as a print adaptation. I have removed it entirely; if any industrious Wikipedian can produce a source for its existence in any format, I welcome their input.

Thepsyborg (talk) 06:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The swiss family Robinson[edit]

Answers 105.216.67.77 (talk) 15:47, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another movie based on this story?[edit]

Could the Disney Movie "Meet the Robinsons", from 2007, be considered based on this story? 58.187.184.90 (talk) 15:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That film was loosely based on a different novel, A Day with Wilbur Robinson.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 22:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Swiss_Family_Robinson&oldid=1194929139"