This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
ChloeJBorders.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 19:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
it is they are artists and they have artist eyes.....anyway how the hell can u trace of a mirror when youd have to stand infront of it therefore you would be seeing your own reflection -- User:219.88.118.254 06:27, May 31, 2004
I think a more NPOV about this would be good. It is interesting as an idea regardless of whether it happened (and there are some engravings suggesting that some people did this), and as an issue in the history of technology and art. It probably deserves a seperate article. Justinc 22:23, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Can I add a second (or third) for removing the reference to Art Renewal in this article? They are--to say the least--not a well recognized organization with tenuous connections to the art world. Their critique largely consists of fairly obvious distortions of Hockney's thesis. There are certainly more recognized names that participated in the debate--Keith Christiansen, a curator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Susan Sontag, Linda Nochlin,--as indicated by the following New York Time article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/04/arts/design/04OPTI.html?scp=1&sq=hockney%20sontag&st=cse&pagewanted=1 76.67.16.61 ( talk) 06:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Would I be right in thinking that David Hockeny was involved in a series of artwroks known as the paper pools?
These were IIRC pictures constructed using colored paper pulp?
See Also : http://www.nga.gov.au/BigAmericans/Detail/Diver.htm
i believe that the statement about the hockney theory satisfying the principle of Occam's razor, that the use of optical devices was commonplace among so called old masters to be a fallacious one. anyone who has experience with academic drawing and painting will realize that such devices aren't necessary, or would be auxiliary. however whether they were used extensively as an aid is really a matter which should rest on historical evidence of an empirical nature. furthermore i propose that the idea that using them is a way of cheating is also fallacious, since the production of realistic painting techniques isn't a proof of an absolutely valued artist's skill. such language ascribes literal measurements of skill through objective comparisons. the purpose and function of the vast majority of art pieces produced within human history was not to simulate visual reality, but rather to fulfill certain aesthetic or philosophic/religious/cultural needs. by and large realism was the focus of oil painting during a certain development of european painting, and was later adopted by academic or ecclectic painters who sought to combine techniques in previous painting instead of exploring new aesthetic territory. most art has been about producing an artifact which performs and reflects a social function and that culture's concepts of what the symbolic artifact means. realism in oil painting began when a particular culture decided the valued quality in art was in how well it imitated visual reality. for most of oil painting this was actually considered genre painting, and the highest value was accorded to grand manner painting of mythological and historical subjects. these were no less detailed but involved often a monumentality or sense of composition that is absent in the more photograph-like rendered still lives or portraits of tromp l'oeil. my inclination would be to point out that perhaps there is a congruency between photography and realistic painting, however if there isn't a lot of evidence for his historical claims, and i'm not a historical literatus in this particular field, he may be dreaming.
perhaps, David could explain how Johan Sebastian Bach achieved the intricate sound textures in his works. Or how Michelangelo worked his statues. Yes, not painting, but related anyway: barroque style is highly intricate and detailed, regardless of the artistic expression. Compare that to the simplicity of classic or the gritty and minimalist modernist approach. What Bach used? mirrors too? They could've used mirrors, yes, but highly skilled artists, even today, have not much trouble looking at a scene and reproducing it to perfection, without extra devices other than eye and hand.
Also, I am not sure if individual paintings should get entire articles. Flying Hamster 22:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find a definition for the RA mentioned after Hockney's name? The placing leads me to believe it's short for that Royal Artillery, but I can't be certain. Amphytrite 04:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Yep,it is Royal Academician! All the Best,Jared Harrell
Yes, I did it. It's a good project and I wanted to clean it up to save its little hide. I also removed some of the weasel-ish words and some sweeping statements though I could see it was written with love and enthusiasm which is greattttttt, so didn't wanna be too heavy handed there. You might like to expand about the Pools which was a californianising of Hockney or Hockney's song of praise to Cal - I guess it applies either way. The context is that he was freer to express his lifestyle in LA and he came from cloudy ole England. His experimentation in art history circles is considered a post-modern exercise in working across disciplines and he championed printmaking, simply by churning them out and using whatever, which is normally seen (in an elitist way) as poor cousin to painting. He's quite egalitarian really. Continue having fun, Julia Rossi 01:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
a PS - about oils being his preferred medium, I saw a documentary showing Hockney's assistant madly spraying water across a huge canvas to prevent the acrylic paint from drying out. These paintings were large and very flat in rendering. Did he switch to acrylics, and if so, when? Julia Rossi 01:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Stokes.thomas 16:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Most of this article is taken from the David Hockney biography at http://www.davidhockney.com/bio.shtml -- it is paraphrased to some extend, but very clearly plagiarized. I don't know what steps to take to mark this article as a copyvio; will someone with more knowledge on the matter help me out? CDrecche 22:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
where is the proof that the clark/percy painting is one of the most popular at the tate? that statement is kind of out of place in an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.117.231.144 ( talk) 04:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find an appropriate picture of David Hockney for this article? It seems necessary, especially because of his distinctive appearance (blonde hair, thick black glasses), i.e. the Hockney look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Graymornings ( talk • contribs) 16:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Hockney did not provide a clear explanation of the use of mirrors. He didn't sufficiently emphasize that the mirrors that were used were concave mirrors, not flat mirrors. If you stand in front of a window and point a concave mirror at the window, the image of the objects that are outside the window will be projected onto the wall in front of you. This projection is upside down, but otherwise it is a true image of the objects. The artists duplicated this phenomenon by placing objects inside of a windowed space and projecting them onto a canvas for tracing by using a concave mirror. Lestrade ( talk) 18:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Lestrade
someone thought funny to add "this website sucks!" in the early years part. I removed it. Gigakight ( talk) 04:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
"He also had the audacity to say he hoped this was the end for new labour, therefore showing public support for the Conservatives even though not voting makes his political opinion less valid." Removed for want of NPOV. 71.233.245.97 ( talk) 23:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Looks like an erroneous category to me: he appears to spend most, if not all, of his time in Bridlington. I've removed it. -- Guillaume Tell 22:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
The truth of Dominic's death is completely different, he died from drinking acid after ingesting alcohol, cannabis, temazepan, cocaine and ecstasy NOT from the fall go here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-23885509 please correct data Veryscarymary ( talk) 13:43, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
In 2004, David Hockney was invited to serve as a mentor for the Rolex Mentor and Protégé Arts Initiative, an international philanthropic programme that pairs masters in their disciplines with emerging talents for a year of one-to-one creative exchange. Out of a very gifted field of candidates, Hockney chose Matthias Weischer, a German painter his protégée. [1] RMP2014 ( talk) 14:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
References
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:David Hockney/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I rated the article as start, because I see no references or proper inline citations.-- Yannismarou 20:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 20:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 12:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 19:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 07:22, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Why does "David Hocking" redirect to "David Hockney"? David Hocking and David Hockney are completely different people. 98.149.97.245 ( talk) 19:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Larry Stanton: Paintings and Drawings (1986) is not a "book by Hockney," it's "a book of 39 drawings and paintings by Larry Stanton with writings on Stanton by Arthur Lambert, David Hockney, Henry Geldzahler and others". Martinevans123 ( talk) 09:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:07, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
ChloeJBorders.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 19:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
it is they are artists and they have artist eyes.....anyway how the hell can u trace of a mirror when youd have to stand infront of it therefore you would be seeing your own reflection -- User:219.88.118.254 06:27, May 31, 2004
I think a more NPOV about this would be good. It is interesting as an idea regardless of whether it happened (and there are some engravings suggesting that some people did this), and as an issue in the history of technology and art. It probably deserves a seperate article. Justinc 22:23, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Can I add a second (or third) for removing the reference to Art Renewal in this article? They are--to say the least--not a well recognized organization with tenuous connections to the art world. Their critique largely consists of fairly obvious distortions of Hockney's thesis. There are certainly more recognized names that participated in the debate--Keith Christiansen, a curator at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Susan Sontag, Linda Nochlin,--as indicated by the following New York Time article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/04/arts/design/04OPTI.html?scp=1&sq=hockney%20sontag&st=cse&pagewanted=1 76.67.16.61 ( talk) 06:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Would I be right in thinking that David Hockeny was involved in a series of artwroks known as the paper pools?
These were IIRC pictures constructed using colored paper pulp?
See Also : http://www.nga.gov.au/BigAmericans/Detail/Diver.htm
i believe that the statement about the hockney theory satisfying the principle of Occam's razor, that the use of optical devices was commonplace among so called old masters to be a fallacious one. anyone who has experience with academic drawing and painting will realize that such devices aren't necessary, or would be auxiliary. however whether they were used extensively as an aid is really a matter which should rest on historical evidence of an empirical nature. furthermore i propose that the idea that using them is a way of cheating is also fallacious, since the production of realistic painting techniques isn't a proof of an absolutely valued artist's skill. such language ascribes literal measurements of skill through objective comparisons. the purpose and function of the vast majority of art pieces produced within human history was not to simulate visual reality, but rather to fulfill certain aesthetic or philosophic/religious/cultural needs. by and large realism was the focus of oil painting during a certain development of european painting, and was later adopted by academic or ecclectic painters who sought to combine techniques in previous painting instead of exploring new aesthetic territory. most art has been about producing an artifact which performs and reflects a social function and that culture's concepts of what the symbolic artifact means. realism in oil painting began when a particular culture decided the valued quality in art was in how well it imitated visual reality. for most of oil painting this was actually considered genre painting, and the highest value was accorded to grand manner painting of mythological and historical subjects. these were no less detailed but involved often a monumentality or sense of composition that is absent in the more photograph-like rendered still lives or portraits of tromp l'oeil. my inclination would be to point out that perhaps there is a congruency between photography and realistic painting, however if there isn't a lot of evidence for his historical claims, and i'm not a historical literatus in this particular field, he may be dreaming.
perhaps, David could explain how Johan Sebastian Bach achieved the intricate sound textures in his works. Or how Michelangelo worked his statues. Yes, not painting, but related anyway: barroque style is highly intricate and detailed, regardless of the artistic expression. Compare that to the simplicity of classic or the gritty and minimalist modernist approach. What Bach used? mirrors too? They could've used mirrors, yes, but highly skilled artists, even today, have not much trouble looking at a scene and reproducing it to perfection, without extra devices other than eye and hand.
Also, I am not sure if individual paintings should get entire articles. Flying Hamster 22:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find a definition for the RA mentioned after Hockney's name? The placing leads me to believe it's short for that Royal Artillery, but I can't be certain. Amphytrite 04:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Yep,it is Royal Academician! All the Best,Jared Harrell
Yes, I did it. It's a good project and I wanted to clean it up to save its little hide. I also removed some of the weasel-ish words and some sweeping statements though I could see it was written with love and enthusiasm which is greattttttt, so didn't wanna be too heavy handed there. You might like to expand about the Pools which was a californianising of Hockney or Hockney's song of praise to Cal - I guess it applies either way. The context is that he was freer to express his lifestyle in LA and he came from cloudy ole England. His experimentation in art history circles is considered a post-modern exercise in working across disciplines and he championed printmaking, simply by churning them out and using whatever, which is normally seen (in an elitist way) as poor cousin to painting. He's quite egalitarian really. Continue having fun, Julia Rossi 01:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
a PS - about oils being his preferred medium, I saw a documentary showing Hockney's assistant madly spraying water across a huge canvas to prevent the acrylic paint from drying out. These paintings were large and very flat in rendering. Did he switch to acrylics, and if so, when? Julia Rossi 01:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Stokes.thomas 16:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Most of this article is taken from the David Hockney biography at http://www.davidhockney.com/bio.shtml -- it is paraphrased to some extend, but very clearly plagiarized. I don't know what steps to take to mark this article as a copyvio; will someone with more knowledge on the matter help me out? CDrecche 22:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
where is the proof that the clark/percy painting is one of the most popular at the tate? that statement is kind of out of place in an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.117.231.144 ( talk) 04:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone find an appropriate picture of David Hockney for this article? It seems necessary, especially because of his distinctive appearance (blonde hair, thick black glasses), i.e. the Hockney look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Graymornings ( talk • contribs) 16:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Hockney did not provide a clear explanation of the use of mirrors. He didn't sufficiently emphasize that the mirrors that were used were concave mirrors, not flat mirrors. If you stand in front of a window and point a concave mirror at the window, the image of the objects that are outside the window will be projected onto the wall in front of you. This projection is upside down, but otherwise it is a true image of the objects. The artists duplicated this phenomenon by placing objects inside of a windowed space and projecting them onto a canvas for tracing by using a concave mirror. Lestrade ( talk) 18:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)Lestrade
someone thought funny to add "this website sucks!" in the early years part. I removed it. Gigakight ( talk) 04:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
"He also had the audacity to say he hoped this was the end for new labour, therefore showing public support for the Conservatives even though not voting makes his political opinion less valid." Removed for want of NPOV. 71.233.245.97 ( talk) 23:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Looks like an erroneous category to me: he appears to spend most, if not all, of his time in Bridlington. I've removed it. -- Guillaume Tell 22:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
The truth of Dominic's death is completely different, he died from drinking acid after ingesting alcohol, cannabis, temazepan, cocaine and ecstasy NOT from the fall go here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-23885509 please correct data Veryscarymary ( talk) 13:43, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
In 2004, David Hockney was invited to serve as a mentor for the Rolex Mentor and Protégé Arts Initiative, an international philanthropic programme that pairs masters in their disciplines with emerging talents for a year of one-to-one creative exchange. Out of a very gifted field of candidates, Hockney chose Matthias Weischer, a German painter his protégée. [1] RMP2014 ( talk) 14:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
References
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:David Hockney/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I rated the article as start, because I see no references or proper inline citations.-- Yannismarou 20:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 20:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 12:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 19:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 07:22, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Why does "David Hocking" redirect to "David Hockney"? David Hocking and David Hockney are completely different people. 98.149.97.245 ( talk) 19:36, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Larry Stanton: Paintings and Drawings (1986) is not a "book by Hockney," it's "a book of 39 drawings and paintings by Larry Stanton with writings on Stanton by Arthur Lambert, David Hockney, Henry Geldzahler and others". Martinevans123 ( talk) 09:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 21:07, 3 February 2023 (UTC)