This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
--all art is expressionist. all art projects a subjective view of the world, at the very least as the artist necessarily experiences the world subjectively
the article should be changed therefore :)
The last paragraph of this article needs some serious clean-up, and the article as a whole could use some stylistic editing. I'll get around to it eventually, but if anybody else wants to give it a go they should feel free. Junjk 13:47, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've added a template feel free to add new articles to it. Stirling Newberry 00:33, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Why is this article is illustrated with "On White II" by Kandinsky?
Isn't that painting better considered a pure abstraction -- or an arrangement of geometric shapes-- rather than exhibiting a "tendency of an artist to distort reality for emotional effect" ?
Can anyone tell us which piece of reality was being distorted ? The title ( "On White II" )would suggest that if the painting is supposed to refer to some thing real, that thing is itself as an arrangement of colored shapes on a white background.
Even the Wikipedia entry for Kandinsky does not mention expressionism except as among the relevant categories listed at the very end.
Can't we put "The Scream" -- or something else like it -- at the beginning of this page ?
Mountshang 00:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Meanwhile -- sculpture should be added to the list of expressionisms -- though I don't yet know of pictures that are in the public domain. Mountshang 22:20, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't the photos be on the right, coding isn't correct. anyone know how to do it? Artybrad 03:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
-- yo for some reason, this article won't print, at least into a PDF file. Something is wrong with this article that causes the browser to freeze. Please fix! Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.211.177.88 ( talk) 15:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I've just taken a shot at rewording the Birth of Tragedy section. It was like this:
There are obvious problems here; it confuses N's argument. The article was wanting to utilize his opposition between Dionysian and Reason, but this is Dionysos vs. Socrates, which he develops towards the end of the book, not Dionysos vs. Apollo. Apollo was the god of Dreams; the Oracle at Delphi sat astride intoxicating vapours! Not Reason, but Form, Identity, Tranquility. In pop culture terms, Apollo is marijuana and Dionysos is ecstasy (though not really, of course). Neither are rational. Tragedy is the union of these two principles; it's Euripides that introduces realism and Socrates that, in N's opinion, destroys tragedy. DionysosProteus 16:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Helli —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.19.87.26 ( talk) 05:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of Bertolt Brecht under Expressionist theatre? Lithoderm ( talk) 20:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I've checked this out and believe that I was mistaken. The strongest connection I can find in library sources say that his Distancing effect is similar to the goals of Neue Sachlichkeit, which is little more than an analogy. Lithoderm ( talk) 18:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Category:Expressionism is itself a category within Category:Art movements. — Robert Greer ( talk) 17:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
The statement: Abstract Expressionism, of the 1950s represented primarily of American artist such as Arshile Gorky can be confusing. It is perceived that he was the father of American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s. The name could be added with clarification. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 13:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC))
Lyrical abstractions are deleted since they had no formal or representational elements. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 16:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC))
Replenished the stricken text including the author and citation. Deleted Lyrical abstraction on that basis. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 23:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC))
Please revert the deleted response that I made to you earlier, The fact still remains that Lyrical abstraction is placed in a great number of articles. In this article it has no place based on the well-researched citations and numerous cited examples. Expressionism is not synonymous with the word expressing. It is my intention to be accurate and to serve the public. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 00:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
Thank you for your civil request. The response remains the same: According to Marilyn Stokstad, the British art historian:
In response to your request on my talk page I added the page numbers to the article for complete citation. For Reference number 12: pp. 46-49; pp. 62-65; pp. 70-73; pp. 74-77; pp. 94-97; 262-264 it already existed. For reference number 13: pp.24-27; pp.28-31; pp.32-35; pp.52-53; pp.72-75; pp. 112-115 I added ( Salmon1 ( talk) 01:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
In response to your last request on my talk page I am copying quotations from the book: American Abstract and Figurative Expressionism: Style is Timely Art is Timeless, ISBN 9780967799421
The quotations substantiate the point that there were Abstract Expressionists who took part in Figurative Expressionism. The referenced page numbers include two reproductions from the work of each artist: one figurative and one non-representational. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 02:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
You deleted the added citation for the third time at the paragraph: Expressionist groups in painting. According to Marilyn Stokstad, the British art historian:
From the
Tate definition: "Expressionism: Specifically, and with a capital letter, the term is associated with modern
German art, particularly the
Brücke and
Blaue Reiter groups, but in this narrow sense is best referred to as German Expressionism. Expressionism as a
general
term refers to
art in which the
image of
reality is more or less heavily
distorted in
form and
colour in order to make it expressive of the artists
inner
feelings or
ideas about it." The reference cited from the
Tate is almost
identical with that of
Marilyn Stokstad, the
British
art historian:
We are talking about having Lyrical Abstraction be represented in the article as part of Expressionism. According to the reference provided by Tyrenius- BNET Art Publications-concise Oxford Dictionary of Art and Artists, January, 2003 by Ian Chilver:
From the Tate definition:
Copied from: Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Visual arts] [5]
Deletion of Lyrical Abstraction from the article Expressionism
There is a strong opposition by some to the deletion of Lyrical Abstraction from the article, Expressionism. This has been expressed by successive reversion of Lyrical Abstraction to the article and a warning to block me from editing.
I would like to make the argument for the deletion as part of the process of working toward consensus.
There is a paragraph about Lyrical Abstraction that has been placed repeatedly in several Wikipedia articles:
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, 1971, Lyrical Abstraction
The same paragraph is repeated in another topic:
Section: Washington Color School, Shaped Canvas, Abstract Illusionism, Lyrical Abstraction
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, 1968, Lyrical Abstraction
Once again the same paragraph is repeated in another topic:
See also: Modern Art, Modernism, Contemporary art, Western painting, History of painting materials and new ways of expression.
Section: Shaped canvas, Washington Color School, Abstract Illusionism, Lyrical Abstraction
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, 1971, Lyrical Abstraction
Indeed Lyrical Abstraction was associated with Color Field painting not with Expressionism:
Section: Color Field Movement
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, Rite of Spring, 1985. Ronnie Landfield's work emerged during the 1960s. His works are reflections of both Chinese landscape painting and the Color Field idiom. His paintings bridge Color Field painting with Lyrical Abstraction. [7]
Section: In the 1960s after Abstract Expressionism
Section: Abstract painting and sculpture in the 1960s and 1970s.
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, Garden of Delight, 1971, Lyrical Abstraction from the early 1970s
In order to consider the exclusion of Lyrical Abstraction from the article Expressionism one must consider the definition of Expressionism:
In the late 1939, at the beginning of World War II, New York welcomed a great number of leading European artists.
Relying on the definition of Expressionism and considering all the above repeated Wikipedia segments it should become evident that Lyrical Abstraction should not be part of Expressionism.
There is further consideration for its deletion from the article: Clement Greenberg’s Definition of Modernism according to Barbara Rose:
’’Similarly narrative (a literary device), figural representation, and certainly illusionism were strictly proscribed.’’
Argument for the deletion of Lyrical Abstraction, Tachisme.
The movement emphasized expressive paint handling. It evolved in direct response to American action painting.
For clarification according to the Webster’s New World Dictionary:
Expression: a picturing, representing, or symbolizing in art, music etc.
Expressionism: an early 20th century movement in art, literature, and drama, characterized by distortion of reality and the use of symbols, stylization, etc.
According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Art and Artists, 2003 © Ian Chilvers, the definition of Lyrical Abstraction:
A rather vague term, used differently by different writers, applied to a type of expressive but non-violent abstract painting flourishing particularly in the 1950s and 1960s; the term was evidently coined by the French painter George Mathieu who spoke of ‘abstraction lyrique’ in 1947. European critics often use it more or less as a synonym for Art informel or Tachisme; Americans sometimes see it as an emasculated version of Abstract Expressionism. To some writers it implies particularly a lush and sumptuous use of colour.’’
The above references provide the justification to delete Lyrical Abstraction from the article Expressionism.
I hope this argument will clarify my intention to serve the public with well researched, clearly referenced articles reflecting a Neutral Point of View. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 01:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC))
and added the definition of Expressionism. According to you:
Still the added definition was deleted (which I added again) and Lyrical Abstraction was reverted without explanation but a threat, "stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Each case should be looked at individually with the intention to reach consensus which is the power of Wikipedia. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 12:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC))
I presented the study, titled:
in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts. An argument made for the:
The same day I received a reply in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts by Tyrenius where he stated:
Following the reply the same day 21:42, 26 August 2009 I deleted Lyrical Abstraction from Expressionism with the description of action:
According to Tyrenius:
Freshacconci 00:17, 27 August 2009 - replenished deletion of Lyrical Abstraction. The description of action:
Johnbod 21:16 22 August 2009 - on Revision history of Talk:Expressionism. The description of action:
Modernist 04:39, 22 August 2009 - deleted quote of Expressionism by Marilyn Stokstad and replenished Lyrical Abstraction. the description of action:
Modernist 13:41, 22 August 2009 - The description of action:
Modernist 16:44, 22 August 2009 - deleted quote. The description of action:
I don’t see the fourth party against the deletion. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 14:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC))
Since you named yourself as a participant in the above
dispute, please read the information below:
Administrators assume these responsibilities as volunteers; they are not employees of the Wikimedia Foundation. They are never required to use their tools, and must never use them to gain an advantage in a dispute in which they are involved.
Respect and civility is a necessary feature in communication. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 00:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC))
It just seems kind of immensely disproportionate towards american artists when they don't even have much importance to art history, comparing to german or austrian (who ridiculously only get two) expressionists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.101.215.194 ( talk) 13:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
--all art is expressionist. all art projects a subjective view of the world, at the very least as the artist necessarily experiences the world subjectively
the article should be changed therefore :)
The last paragraph of this article needs some serious clean-up, and the article as a whole could use some stylistic editing. I'll get around to it eventually, but if anybody else wants to give it a go they should feel free. Junjk 13:47, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've added a template feel free to add new articles to it. Stirling Newberry 00:33, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Why is this article is illustrated with "On White II" by Kandinsky?
Isn't that painting better considered a pure abstraction -- or an arrangement of geometric shapes-- rather than exhibiting a "tendency of an artist to distort reality for emotional effect" ?
Can anyone tell us which piece of reality was being distorted ? The title ( "On White II" )would suggest that if the painting is supposed to refer to some thing real, that thing is itself as an arrangement of colored shapes on a white background.
Even the Wikipedia entry for Kandinsky does not mention expressionism except as among the relevant categories listed at the very end.
Can't we put "The Scream" -- or something else like it -- at the beginning of this page ?
Mountshang 00:30, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Meanwhile -- sculpture should be added to the list of expressionisms -- though I don't yet know of pictures that are in the public domain. Mountshang 22:20, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't the photos be on the right, coding isn't correct. anyone know how to do it? Artybrad 03:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
-- yo for some reason, this article won't print, at least into a PDF file. Something is wrong with this article that causes the browser to freeze. Please fix! Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.211.177.88 ( talk) 15:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I've just taken a shot at rewording the Birth of Tragedy section. It was like this:
There are obvious problems here; it confuses N's argument. The article was wanting to utilize his opposition between Dionysian and Reason, but this is Dionysos vs. Socrates, which he develops towards the end of the book, not Dionysos vs. Apollo. Apollo was the god of Dreams; the Oracle at Delphi sat astride intoxicating vapours! Not Reason, but Form, Identity, Tranquility. In pop culture terms, Apollo is marijuana and Dionysos is ecstasy (though not really, of course). Neither are rational. Tragedy is the union of these two principles; it's Euripides that introduces realism and Socrates that, in N's opinion, destroys tragedy. DionysosProteus 16:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Helli —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.19.87.26 ( talk) 05:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of Bertolt Brecht under Expressionist theatre? Lithoderm ( talk) 20:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I've checked this out and believe that I was mistaken. The strongest connection I can find in library sources say that his Distancing effect is similar to the goals of Neue Sachlichkeit, which is little more than an analogy. Lithoderm ( talk) 18:09, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Category:Expressionism is itself a category within Category:Art movements. — Robert Greer ( talk) 17:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
The statement: Abstract Expressionism, of the 1950s represented primarily of American artist such as Arshile Gorky can be confusing. It is perceived that he was the father of American Abstract Expressionism of the 1950s. The name could be added with clarification. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 13:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC))
Lyrical abstractions are deleted since they had no formal or representational elements. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 16:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC))
Replenished the stricken text including the author and citation. Deleted Lyrical abstraction on that basis. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 23:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC))
Please revert the deleted response that I made to you earlier, The fact still remains that Lyrical abstraction is placed in a great number of articles. In this article it has no place based on the well-researched citations and numerous cited examples. Expressionism is not synonymous with the word expressing. It is my intention to be accurate and to serve the public. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 00:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
Thank you for your civil request. The response remains the same: According to Marilyn Stokstad, the British art historian:
In response to your request on my talk page I added the page numbers to the article for complete citation. For Reference number 12: pp. 46-49; pp. 62-65; pp. 70-73; pp. 74-77; pp. 94-97; 262-264 it already existed. For reference number 13: pp.24-27; pp.28-31; pp.32-35; pp.52-53; pp.72-75; pp. 112-115 I added ( Salmon1 ( talk) 01:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
In response to your last request on my talk page I am copying quotations from the book: American Abstract and Figurative Expressionism: Style is Timely Art is Timeless, ISBN 9780967799421
The quotations substantiate the point that there were Abstract Expressionists who took part in Figurative Expressionism. The referenced page numbers include two reproductions from the work of each artist: one figurative and one non-representational. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 02:56, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
You deleted the added citation for the third time at the paragraph: Expressionist groups in painting. According to Marilyn Stokstad, the British art historian:
From the
Tate definition: "Expressionism: Specifically, and with a capital letter, the term is associated with modern
German art, particularly the
Brücke and
Blaue Reiter groups, but in this narrow sense is best referred to as German Expressionism. Expressionism as a
general
term refers to
art in which the
image of
reality is more or less heavily
distorted in
form and
colour in order to make it expressive of the artists
inner
feelings or
ideas about it." The reference cited from the
Tate is almost
identical with that of
Marilyn Stokstad, the
British
art historian:
We are talking about having Lyrical Abstraction be represented in the article as part of Expressionism. According to the reference provided by Tyrenius- BNET Art Publications-concise Oxford Dictionary of Art and Artists, January, 2003 by Ian Chilver:
From the Tate definition:
Copied from: Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Visual arts] [5]
Deletion of Lyrical Abstraction from the article Expressionism
There is a strong opposition by some to the deletion of Lyrical Abstraction from the article, Expressionism. This has been expressed by successive reversion of Lyrical Abstraction to the article and a warning to block me from editing.
I would like to make the argument for the deletion as part of the process of working toward consensus.
There is a paragraph about Lyrical Abstraction that has been placed repeatedly in several Wikipedia articles:
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, 1971, Lyrical Abstraction
The same paragraph is repeated in another topic:
Section: Washington Color School, Shaped Canvas, Abstract Illusionism, Lyrical Abstraction
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, 1968, Lyrical Abstraction
Once again the same paragraph is repeated in another topic:
See also: Modern Art, Modernism, Contemporary art, Western painting, History of painting materials and new ways of expression.
Section: Shaped canvas, Washington Color School, Abstract Illusionism, Lyrical Abstraction
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, 1971, Lyrical Abstraction
Indeed Lyrical Abstraction was associated with Color Field painting not with Expressionism:
Section: Color Field Movement
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, Rite of Spring, 1985. Ronnie Landfield's work emerged during the 1960s. His works are reflections of both Chinese landscape painting and the Color Field idiom. His paintings bridge Color Field painting with Lyrical Abstraction. [7]
Section: In the 1960s after Abstract Expressionism
Section: Abstract painting and sculpture in the 1960s and 1970s.
Image caption: Ronnie Landfield, Garden of Delight, 1971, Lyrical Abstraction from the early 1970s
In order to consider the exclusion of Lyrical Abstraction from the article Expressionism one must consider the definition of Expressionism:
In the late 1939, at the beginning of World War II, New York welcomed a great number of leading European artists.
Relying on the definition of Expressionism and considering all the above repeated Wikipedia segments it should become evident that Lyrical Abstraction should not be part of Expressionism.
There is further consideration for its deletion from the article: Clement Greenberg’s Definition of Modernism according to Barbara Rose:
’’Similarly narrative (a literary device), figural representation, and certainly illusionism were strictly proscribed.’’
Argument for the deletion of Lyrical Abstraction, Tachisme.
The movement emphasized expressive paint handling. It evolved in direct response to American action painting.
For clarification according to the Webster’s New World Dictionary:
Expression: a picturing, representing, or symbolizing in art, music etc.
Expressionism: an early 20th century movement in art, literature, and drama, characterized by distortion of reality and the use of symbols, stylization, etc.
According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Art and Artists, 2003 © Ian Chilvers, the definition of Lyrical Abstraction:
A rather vague term, used differently by different writers, applied to a type of expressive but non-violent abstract painting flourishing particularly in the 1950s and 1960s; the term was evidently coined by the French painter George Mathieu who spoke of ‘abstraction lyrique’ in 1947. European critics often use it more or less as a synonym for Art informel or Tachisme; Americans sometimes see it as an emasculated version of Abstract Expressionism. To some writers it implies particularly a lush and sumptuous use of colour.’’
The above references provide the justification to delete Lyrical Abstraction from the article Expressionism.
I hope this argument will clarify my intention to serve the public with well researched, clearly referenced articles reflecting a Neutral Point of View. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 01:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC))
and added the definition of Expressionism. According to you:
Still the added definition was deleted (which I added again) and Lyrical Abstraction was reverted without explanation but a threat, "stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Each case should be looked at individually with the intention to reach consensus which is the power of Wikipedia. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 12:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC))
I presented the study, titled:
in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts. An argument made for the:
The same day I received a reply in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts by Tyrenius where he stated:
Following the reply the same day 21:42, 26 August 2009 I deleted Lyrical Abstraction from Expressionism with the description of action:
According to Tyrenius:
Freshacconci 00:17, 27 August 2009 - replenished deletion of Lyrical Abstraction. The description of action:
Johnbod 21:16 22 August 2009 - on Revision history of Talk:Expressionism. The description of action:
Modernist 04:39, 22 August 2009 - deleted quote of Expressionism by Marilyn Stokstad and replenished Lyrical Abstraction. the description of action:
Modernist 13:41, 22 August 2009 - The description of action:
Modernist 16:44, 22 August 2009 - deleted quote. The description of action:
I don’t see the fourth party against the deletion. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 14:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC))
Since you named yourself as a participant in the above
dispute, please read the information below:
Administrators assume these responsibilities as volunteers; they are not employees of the Wikimedia Foundation. They are never required to use their tools, and must never use them to gain an advantage in a dispute in which they are involved.
Respect and civility is a necessary feature in communication. ( Salmon1 ( talk) 00:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC))
It just seems kind of immensely disproportionate towards american artists when they don't even have much importance to art history, comparing to german or austrian (who ridiculously only get two) expressionists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.101.215.194 ( talk) 13:51, 8 October 2009 (UTC)