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 |
MdArtLover 18:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
RebusDuplex999 ( talk) 15:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
In the second half of the 20th century there was a distinct division of imagery between the western and eastern United States, especially between the metropolises of Los Angeles and New York. Just before and during World War II many European artists travelled to New York. But not all. For example the German artists Max Beckmann ended up in St. Louis, and Hans Hoffman in Northern California, while the Armenian artist A. Gorky ended up in New York. The latter, Gorky, was a major influence on the New York Abstract Expressionist School, which included such artists as Pollack, De Kooning, and Rothko. Beckmann is much more appreciated today than ever before. In the west coast we have great, and under appreciated, Bay Area Figurative school, which included David Park, Nathan Olivara, and Elmer Bischoff. Mark Faraday 05:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Each of the above should be a section -- written by someone who knows a lot about it.
-- Mountshang 00:02, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
The closing statement, "Perhaps the most influential 20th-century American contribution to world art has been a mocking playfulness, a sense that a central purpose of a new work is to join the ongoing debate over the definition of art itself," is questionable. What American art could be more important or in more profound, mystical earnest than Rothko? Where is the mocking playfulness in Whistler's nocturnes or in his ashy grey portraits? What could be more American or less unserious than Jane Frank's brooding inscapes? MdArtLover 14:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
If European art (very much alive actually) doesn't get its own article, American Art shouldn't either. Merge with Western art history article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.118.137.186 ( talk) 20:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
"After World War II, New York replaced Paris as the center of the art world." While formerly true for the avant garde, this has now become debatable in recent years. Berlin is also considered the new centre of the art world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.118.137.186 ( talk) 20:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:WhistlersMother.jpeg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC) |
Since my attempt to change it was reverted, I open for discussion that the categories for this page are improper. While *related*, "Visual arts in the United States" is NOT an American art museum, a museum in New York, a native american art museum in Washington, D.C., etc, and thus does not belong within those categories, rather within a higher, related category. The tags on this page are categories for this *article*, not links to the subject matter. For those, please see Category:American art and its relevant subcategories. Thanks. Morgan Riley ( talk) 18:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
(starting a new thread) Actually, it may be a neat idea, if reliable sources can be found, to have a subsection devoted to the very thing you mention, namely the general history of the critical reception, appreciation, and collection of American art. Morgan Riley ( talk) 15:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Your interpretation of NFCC#8, no valid article-specific NFCC rationale - is dead wrong and verges on vandalism. The policy states Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. These paintings precisely need to be seen to increase readers understanding of the topic. Don't do it again. The images are specifically mentioned in the text about the art of the southwest, and the New York School, the images are of important works by important artists, who played an important part in the visual arts of the USA and in case you don't know - this is an article about the visual arts of the USA. Visual art needs to be seen - please read WP:NFCC more carefully... Modernist ( talk) 22:19, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Visual art of the United States. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Before deleting important 19th century images achieve consensus and have a valid reason... Modernist ( talk) 03:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
How is A Ride for Liberty – The Fugitive Slaves an important inclusions?
(Admin note: let's all refocus on the question of inclusion and depersonalize this. At this time, there is a consensus to include the image, so any further removal without a change in consensus will be considered disruptive. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC))
You are correct it is a continuation of my comment immediately above in which I try to and point to, deride and criticize by means of satire "Modernist" points by showing the irony of his argument to others. Trying to make the once who supported his comments to reflect. Not being as clear as to make other think and give their perspective as this is "art," like you did. Modernist seems to give the impression that his morals and intention are clear, pure and mean nothing by it. Will it could be argue he is participating in a manner in the same way as to what he deems were "terrible time; it was an unbelievable tragic set of circumstances" by trying to change the narrative and in a way in slaving the Angles community in much the same way as the slaves fleeing. Given another painting could be place illustrating the black community in more color or others as the Native American people whos history may be more important on the bases given. Instead modernist focuses on highlighting episodes to advance the narrative by the joke he made. Lastly, the comment about contemporary art is to point our that Modernist is not as Modern as he holds to the past and is no Joe Biden that is centres or care for unity. Don much care for this particular pies of art but will not remove given Johnbod threat of "polocy" but call to others or an amendment by being more inclusive. USA Eagle01 ( talk)
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 |
MdArtLover 18:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
RebusDuplex999 ( talk) 15:25, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
In the second half of the 20th century there was a distinct division of imagery between the western and eastern United States, especially between the metropolises of Los Angeles and New York. Just before and during World War II many European artists travelled to New York. But not all. For example the German artists Max Beckmann ended up in St. Louis, and Hans Hoffman in Northern California, while the Armenian artist A. Gorky ended up in New York. The latter, Gorky, was a major influence on the New York Abstract Expressionist School, which included such artists as Pollack, De Kooning, and Rothko. Beckmann is much more appreciated today than ever before. In the west coast we have great, and under appreciated, Bay Area Figurative school, which included David Park, Nathan Olivara, and Elmer Bischoff. Mark Faraday 05:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Each of the above should be a section -- written by someone who knows a lot about it.
-- Mountshang 00:02, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
The closing statement, "Perhaps the most influential 20th-century American contribution to world art has been a mocking playfulness, a sense that a central purpose of a new work is to join the ongoing debate over the definition of art itself," is questionable. What American art could be more important or in more profound, mystical earnest than Rothko? Where is the mocking playfulness in Whistler's nocturnes or in his ashy grey portraits? What could be more American or less unserious than Jane Frank's brooding inscapes? MdArtLover 14:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
If European art (very much alive actually) doesn't get its own article, American Art shouldn't either. Merge with Western art history article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.118.137.186 ( talk) 20:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
"After World War II, New York replaced Paris as the center of the art world." While formerly true for the avant garde, this has now become debatable in recent years. Berlin is also considered the new centre of the art world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.118.137.186 ( talk) 20:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:WhistlersMother.jpeg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC) |
Since my attempt to change it was reverted, I open for discussion that the categories for this page are improper. While *related*, "Visual arts in the United States" is NOT an American art museum, a museum in New York, a native american art museum in Washington, D.C., etc, and thus does not belong within those categories, rather within a higher, related category. The tags on this page are categories for this *article*, not links to the subject matter. For those, please see Category:American art and its relevant subcategories. Thanks. Morgan Riley ( talk) 18:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
(starting a new thread) Actually, it may be a neat idea, if reliable sources can be found, to have a subsection devoted to the very thing you mention, namely the general history of the critical reception, appreciation, and collection of American art. Morgan Riley ( talk) 15:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Your interpretation of NFCC#8, no valid article-specific NFCC rationale - is dead wrong and verges on vandalism. The policy states Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. These paintings precisely need to be seen to increase readers understanding of the topic. Don't do it again. The images are specifically mentioned in the text about the art of the southwest, and the New York School, the images are of important works by important artists, who played an important part in the visual arts of the USA and in case you don't know - this is an article about the visual arts of the USA. Visual art needs to be seen - please read WP:NFCC more carefully... Modernist ( talk) 22:19, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Visual art of the United States. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Before deleting important 19th century images achieve consensus and have a valid reason... Modernist ( talk) 03:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
How is A Ride for Liberty – The Fugitive Slaves an important inclusions?
(Admin note: let's all refocus on the question of inclusion and depersonalize this. At this time, there is a consensus to include the image, so any further removal without a change in consensus will be considered disruptive. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 22:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC))
You are correct it is a continuation of my comment immediately above in which I try to and point to, deride and criticize by means of satire "Modernist" points by showing the irony of his argument to others. Trying to make the once who supported his comments to reflect. Not being as clear as to make other think and give their perspective as this is "art," like you did. Modernist seems to give the impression that his morals and intention are clear, pure and mean nothing by it. Will it could be argue he is participating in a manner in the same way as to what he deems were "terrible time; it was an unbelievable tragic set of circumstances" by trying to change the narrative and in a way in slaving the Angles community in much the same way as the slaves fleeing. Given another painting could be place illustrating the black community in more color or others as the Native American people whos history may be more important on the bases given. Instead modernist focuses on highlighting episodes to advance the narrative by the joke he made. Lastly, the comment about contemporary art is to point our that Modernist is not as Modern as he holds to the past and is no Joe Biden that is centres or care for unity. Don much care for this particular pies of art but will not remove given Johnbod threat of "polocy" but call to others or an amendment by being more inclusive. USA Eagle01 ( talk)