Talk:Artemisia Gentileschi/Archive 1

Archive 1

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

Needs an infobox and inline citations to truly be a B.

Otherwise, very thorough.

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 07:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

This article is another example of feminist revisionism where they make a mountain out of a mole hill. Sort of like they do with Hypatia, making ridiculous claims with no substance. There is a reason why this female artist was long forgotten and it has nothing to do with her gender. It is the same reason other male artists were forgotten - they had less talent. 67.204.245.52 (talk) 07:15, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

I am afraid that the sentence She was also the first female artist to paint history and religious paintings, at a time when such heroic themes were considered beyond a mere woman's reach is not true. I know at least two Italian woman painters that lived before Artemisia Gentileschi that painted religious subjects. Their names are Sofonisba Anguissola (1532-1625) and Lavinia Fontana (1552-1614). It’s possible to find out some of their religious painting by means of ARTCYCLOPEDIA (http://www.artcyclopedia.com) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mttlcclr (talk • contribs) 21:46, 9 January 2005 (UTC)

I recently took a freshman art course, (by way of describing the depth of my knowledge). However, I did discover one important fact. AG painted Judith Beheading H twice. (The picture in my text showed a different color dress than the picture at wga.hu., which led me to investigate.) The first painting was years before AG was raped; the second not long after. Therefore, the suggestion that the rape was causal in this bit of dramatic violence is not true. The pre-rape painting is no less violent than the post-rape painting. By the by, my textbook also suggested the causality between the rape and the painting, unaware of the earlier painting. I do hope someone with some real credentials will look into this. Meantime, I'm deleting the suggestion that the rape was causal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinRinehart (talk • contribs) 13:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Postscript: Just revisited wga.hu. It now has both paintings but it is much less definite concerning dates. Either or both could be pre- or post-rape. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinRinehart (talk • contribs) 13:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

disambiguation

Someone should create a disambiguation page for "Gentileschi" so that a search for that name doesn't automatically redirect to Artemisia Gentileschi but a page listing both her and her father. I'd do this myself, but I don't know how to.

Well, that wasn't hard. --Sophitus 11:16, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

New Article

Art is hard but someone has to do it. ;)

As requested in the Wikipedia:Translation into English page, I translated the Italian Wikipedia document into english and replaced the old one. The old one was adequate, but the new one is much more detailed and full of information. Please note that even if I know something about art, I am in no way an expert. I simply translated the text from Italian to English. If you find something incorrect, edit it!

Also, I was not able to translate some Italian Art Jargon into English, like "chiaroscuro" for example. Maybe there are some typos left there and there, but hey, I'm not perfect (yet) ;)--Itaguy 21:58, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The word "chiaroscuro" is used in English as well, it is a word that is regularly found in most art history books anyway.

---

Found and fixed a couple of the typos you thought might still be there! Asymtotically reaching for perfection!

On a more substantive note, in the sentence "Today she is regarded as one of the most progressive and expressionist painters of her generation." , I always thought "expressionist" was a specific term in art. Did you mean "expressive" ? -Pinkpedaller — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkpedaller (talk • contribs) 03:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

You're correct, I've changed 'expressionist' to 'expressive' NeoAdamite (talk) 03:52, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Has Artemisia influenced any contemporary artists?

Has Artemisia had a direct effect on any Contemporary artists? I suspect her work or life would but I’m unable to find a direct link. I know Caravaggio heavily influenced her work and I wondered if there was a modern day artist who relates to her work/life. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Claralou (talk • contribs) 17:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

Mabibliophile 01:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Judy Chicago includes Artemisia in her installation piece "The Dinner Party." If we broaden our scope of the word "artist" then we can include the director Agnès Merlet who created a film based on Artemisia's life.

Artemisia Gentileschi apparently collaborated on some canvases with Bernardo Cavallino, for example, the so-called Triumph of Galatea (private collection) is speculated to have involved Gentileschi in painting the demigodess and part of the landscape, and Cavallino painting the muscular, half-manly tritons. (On Seicento Painting in Naples: Some Observations on Bernardo Cavallino, Artemisia Gentileschi and Others, Józef Grabski Artibus et Historiae p41). Virile tritons are present here, yet otherwise I would have said that Cavallino paints the sweetest madonnas of any of the Neapolitan Carravaggisti.CARAVAGGISTI 19:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

'Thank you very much for the information, are you aware of any conection to post 19thC artists? +Claralou+Claralou 11:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really, and it would be hard to distinguish anyway the influence of Gentileschi from that of Caravaggio, Giordano, Guercino, and others in future generations. She was not as novel or independent a force. I do not know what her influence, or the influence of her biography may have had on the small gauntlet of women artists in Italy in the next few centuries. Many of them had somewhat lonely careers.CARAVAGGISTI 23:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Susanna

Why is it that Susanna and the Elders is listed as both an early and a late picture? Did she do the subject twice? If it's a late picture, the portrayal of a naked woman being terrorized by a couple of men could be an obvious reference to the rape and torture. If early, then it's wierdly prophetic of what was to happen to her.

Also, as "Trivia" or "Popular Culture": the TV series JOAN OF ARCADIA had a story in which a young female artist (Helen Girardi) paints violent pictures after being raped. Years later her daughter finds the pictures and Helen has to explain what happened. When I saw that episode I immediately thought of Artemesia's "revenge" pictures, though the episode never mentioned that artist. CharlesTheBold (talk) 11:47, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Trivia is generally frouned upon; but if you would like to add the info the TV series is the most suitable place to edit it in. Ceoil (talk) 13:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Lute player

An IP edit introduced another art work into the list of notables. I've fixed the external link to point at the WP page, but can someone who is more up on Art Hist check the notability of the painting please? EmyP (talk) 15:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Parts of the article read like an essay at times. For example, the last sentence of the section titled “Artemisia and contemporary female painters”: “Longhi's statement that Artemisia was "the only woman in Italy who ever knew about painting" may be questioned, but there is no doubt that Artemisia continues to be among the most highly regarded of women artists, and she has attained her place among the great artists of the Baroque.”

Furthermore, the article refers to unnamed groups – “some” and “many” written throughout – and lacks in citations overall.

The layout of the article is also a bit confusing. The biography section is split into periods; however, the overlap between them and repetition/reintroduction of information can make the reading unclear at times (such as the mention of her mother’s death and discussion of her daughter). Sjs1994 (talk) 06:39, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Infobox

Currently says she died aged 248–249 195.7.32.142 (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks, I believe I've fixed the typo that was causing the problem. (I am disappointed to see an info box has very recently been added to this article though). SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Me too. With a link that was the "This article was created or improved at an Art+Feminism edit-a-thon in 2015." activity, per the tag at the top of the page! Johnbod (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, the editors who have done the most work on it who still seem to be active are: Ceoil, Hafspajen, Mandarax and Modernist. I'd like to see it removed again so, let's see what they say? SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Sagacious for quick response. I was the OP but was unable to fix myself; dunno the infobox syntax for c. 1656. Ceoil (talk) 23:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• I am also disappointed to see an info box has been added to this article. I use infoboxes in articles on single paintings, but not in articles about painters, unless very huge article. They tend to take a lot of place, than can be used to illustrate the article. I am not a big supporter of infoboxes, even if I do use them, mainly in short articles, when it is only one painting dicussed. Hafspajen (talk) 14:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• I am in agreement here regarding an infobox; I don't think it's always needed...Modernist (talk) 18:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Citation Issues

The first and second references currently link to nonexistent pages on The Independent’s online site, so that information is unsourced at the moment. Later this week I would like to find another source for that information and replace the broken links. Ecradu01 (talk) 04:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

They don't really need referencing, being very basic facts in the lead. The whole article is not very well referenced. Johnbod (talk) 14:17, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

I adjusted them a little while ago as one already had an archive link and the other I added an archive for. Johnbod, just as you left the above comment I was in the middle of trying to tidy some of the refs, which I've now saved. I was going to ping you, Ceoil and Modernist as I realise I have changed the ref formatting - please revert if it is a problem. SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

New Sources

I am a college student working on this article for a Women's and Gender Studies class. I would like to make sure that Artemisia's life is presented in as accurate a way as possible according to reliable sources. There are already many great ones used, but here are a few new ones I will be referring to when fact-checking, editing, and adding to the article.

• Bal, Mieke. The Artemisia Files: Artemisia Gentileschi for Feminists and Other Thinking People. Chicago: U of Chicago, 2005. Print.
• Benedetti, Laura. "Reconstructing Artemisia: Twentieth-Century Images of a Woman Artist." Comparative Literature 51.1 (1999): 42. Web.
• Frick, Carole Collier., Stefania Biancani, and Elizabeth S. G. Nicholson. Italian Women Artists: From Renaissance to Baroque. Milano: Skira, 2007. Print.
• Locker, Jesse. "An Eighteenth-Century Biography Of Artemisia Gentileschi." Source: Notes in the History of Art 29.2 (2010): 27-37. Web.

Ecradu01 (talk) 03:58, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Really what we need is use of the larger standard works given in further reading. Johnbod (talk) 13:13, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Could you please clarify this? If you mean that the current sources should be explored more in-depth, I agree! I would like to take a closer look at Mary D. Garrard’s work especially. There are, however, many new sources that I feel could contribute to this page. Ecradu01 (talk) 07:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The ones in "further reading" aren't "current sources" as they haven't been used yet, or haven't been cited at any rate. Actually there aren't "already many great ones used", to judge from the citations in at present. The basic biographical and art historical info needs some work, and book-length sources are generally going to be more appropriate for this, though they take longer to read than articles. Johnbod (talk) 14:11, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

New Section/Addition to Page

I propose that a section explaining feminist perspective on and interest in Artemisia be added or worked into the Historical Artistic Importance section, as it is mentioned but not comprehensive. Here is a draft of the proposed addition, though this is really just the beginning of what could be included:

Feminist interest in Artemisia Gentileschi was sparked in the 1970s when feminist art historian Linda Nochlin published an article titled “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?” in which that question was dissected and analyzed. The article explored the definition of "great artists" and how oppressive institutions, not lack of talent, have prevented women from achieving the same level of recognition that men received in art and other fields. Nochlin said that studies on Artemisia and other female artists were “worth the effort” in “adding to our knowledge of women's achievement and of art history generally.” According to the foreword by Douglas Druick in Eve Straussman-Pflanzer's Violence & Virtue: Artemisia’s Judith Slaying Holofernes, Nochlin’s article prompted scholars to make more of an attempt to “integrate women artists into the history of art and culture.” Artemisia and her oeuvre became a focus again, having had little attention in art history scholarship save Roberto Longhi’s article "Gentileschi padre e figlia (Gentileschi, father and daughter)" in 1916 and R. Ward Bissell’s article "Artemisia Gentileschi- A New Documented Chronology" in 1968. As Artemisia and her work began to garner new attention among feminists and art historians, more literature about her, fictional and biographical, was published. A fictional account of her life by Anna Banti, wife of critic Roberto Longhi, was published in 1947. This account was received well by literary critics but was criticized by feminists, notably Laura Benedetti, for being lenient in historical accuracy in order to draw parallels between author and artist.

Artemisia is known for her portrayal of women in positions of power, like her Judith Slaying Holofernes. She is also known for the rape trial in which she was involved, which scholar Griselda Pollock said is now the “axis of interpretation of the artist’s work.” Her fame, though great among art historians, is deemed by Pollock to be less due to her work and more to the sensationalism caused by the trial. Feminist literature tends to revolve around the event of Artemisia’s rape, largely portraying her as a traumatized but noble survivor whose work became characterized by sex and violence as a result of her experience. A literature review by Laura Benedetti, "Reconstructing Artemisia: Twentieth Century Images of a Woman Artist," concluded that Artemisia’s work is often interpreted according to the contemporary issues and personal biases of the authors. Feminist scholars, for example, have elevated Artemisia to the status of feminist icon, which Benedetti attributed to Artemisia’s paintings of formidable women and her success as an artist in a male-dominated field while also being a single mother. Elena Ciletti, author of Gran Macchina a Bellezza, wrote that “The stakes are very high in Artemisia’s case, especially for feminists, because we have invested in her so much of our quest for justice for women, historically and currently, intellectually and politically.”

Here are my sources:

1. Nochlin, Linda. “Why Have There Been No Great Woman Artists?.” Woman in Sexist Society: Studies in Power and Powerlessness, edited by  Vivian Gornick and Barbara K. Moran, Basic Books, 1971.
2. Straussman-Pflanzer, Eve. Violence & Virtue: Artemisia Gentileschi’s Judith Slaying Holofernes. Art Institute of Chicago, 2013.
3. Pollock, Griselda. “Feminist Dilemmas with the Art/Life Problem.” The Artemisia Files: Artemisia Gentileschi for Feminists and Other Thinking People, edited by Mieke Bal, University of Chicago Press, 2006.
4. Benedetti, Laura. “Reconstructing Artemisia, Twentieth Century Images of a Woman Artist.” Comparative Literature, vol. 51, no. 1, Winter 1999, pp. 42-6.
5. Ciletti, Elena. “Gran Macchina a Bellezza.” The Artemisia Files: Artemisia Gentileschi for Feminists and Other Thinking People, edited by Mieke Bal, University of Chicago Press, 2006.

Let me know if anything seems terribly wrong or unnecessary- if there aren't major problems, I’ll add this to the page (with proper citations!). Suggestions and contributions are appreciated! Ecradu01 (talk) 07:15, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, much better. You could split the not-well-named current section at c. 1960, especially if it gets a lot longer. Johnbod (talk) 14:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion on placement and for the clarification about further reading- I understand now! I'm going to make some changes to the proposed section before adding it to the page. In addition to the five sources listed above, I've started working with these (from the further reading section) as well:

1. Garrard, Mary D. Artemisia Gentileschi around 1622: The Shaping and Reshaping of an Artistic Identity, University of California Press, 2001.
2. Locker, Jesse M. Artemisia Gentileschi: The Language of Painting. New Haven, Yale University Press, 2015.
3. Cropper, Elizabeth. “Life on the Edge: Artemisia Gentileschi, Famous Woman Painter.” Orazio and Artemesia Gentileschi, edited by Keith Christiansen and Judith W. Mann, 2001.

You're right about books taking much more time to get through! Ecradu01 (talk) 23:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Gentileschi in popular culture

"4127: Professional Advice". Questionable Content. 2019-11-04. The reference in the comic may result in more visits to the article than usual. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)