Talk:Caspar David Friedrich

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

Contents

[edit] Selected Works

The titles of the linked works may not correspond to the images provided.


I, too, am reporting a problem with titles being incorrectly assigned to images. In particular, a painting labeled as "Cloister Graveyard in the Snow" (1810) is actually a similar but altogether different painting called "Abbey in the Oakwood" (1810). "Cloister Graveyard in the Snow" was painted 1817-1819, and that image is not displayed here. Sorry I couldn't fix it myself.

[edit] The Sea of Ice (Das Eismeer)

I wanted to compliment whoever comtributed the information on Friedrich's "Sea of Ice" (Dad EismeeR -- it is accurate, and so many sources make the mistake of confusing it with "The Wreck of the Hope."

But as to the caption:

"The sea of ice, 1824 (mistakenly known as "The wreck of the Hope" which was destroyed in 20th century)"

I am most curious about this -- so far as I had known, "The Wreck of the Hope" had been lost ages ago, some saying it was buried in the bowels of the Hermitage, others that it was looted by the Nazis -- if the person contributing this information could contact me, I would be grateful. I hope to add a paragraph about "The Sea of Ice," which I've been studying for years, to the wiki article on Friedrich, but want to make sure I have every detail correct. Profrap 14:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


Werner Hofmann's monograph of Friedrich asserts that "The Sea of Ice" is in the Hamburger Kunsthalle, Hamburg (p 230). Hofmann agrees with the user above that "The Wrecked 'Hope'" (as Hofmann calls it) was 'lost' (p 228). Whether this means destroyed is left ambiguous. The book is: Hofmann, Werner, Caspar David Friedrich, London: Thames and Hudson, 2000. Jack Haddow, 18 August 2007.

[edit] Friedrich's work

I love his paintings. 69.40.255.11 20:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First Paragraph

Does anyone want to clarify the first paragraph, because I am not clearly able to tell what movement he was the finest member of? It might be the American Romantic, but I actully have no idea. And the paragraph for his life is missing too.Sursikeohsechsee 20:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

About Friedrich portrait's caption: IMO stating the lifespan of Gerhard von Kügelgen in a corner where you usually would find a box with a summary of the biographed individual is rather confusing. Ersalo (talk) 15:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You're looking at a different portrait and caption than the original poster (a year and a half later), but you're right, it is confusing. The local editing crowd here is not much for "infoboxes", though, if that's what you're suggesting. I'll tweak the caption. –Outriggr § 20:25, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Uncredited Source

With the exception of the very first sentence, the entire Life section was copied vervatim off of Webmuseum. Radioactive afikomen 23:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Major rebuild

OK, i've spent a couple of hours with this article. I used one specific book to include new data and check the old material (just corrected a few dates, but most of the old text is still here, don't worry). I expanded the article with a Motives & Philosophy section, added a references section where i included both my book and the website whence the old material was claimed to come from in this talk page.

I hope everything is OK. It's been my biggest contribution to the wikipedia so far. ;)

El edgar 21:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please document the destruction of "The Wreck of Hope" and provide a link, if possible to an image of that painting

The cryptic note about the "Sea of Ice" being mistakenly referred to as "The Wreck of the Hope" needs to be documented not only with a footnote or two, but also with copy telling the story of that destruction. Mark David Anthony 06:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some claims need substantiation

Why is "The Cross in the Mountains" controversial? The article describes the painting, but doesn't indicate why it was cause for alarm.

Why did Schinkel give up painting after seeing "The Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog"? Did he see Friedrich as possessing such talent that he felt he could never attain it? Etc.

How is the "Tetschen Altar" his first stylistically mature painting? It seems sort of snobbish, unless someone can indicate what characterizes Friedrich's maturity.

Why was "Sea of Ice" not well received?

These questions don't require lots of verbiage in order to address them, but as they stand, the claims seem somewhat random. And anyway, are the interpretations in the article widely accepted? I'm no Friedrich expert, but something about the way this is all written makes me dubious.

In general, the article seems like it was written initially by a non-native English speaker and needs further cleanup. (Sorry if that sounds mean.) RKlassen 07:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ceoil's and Outriggr's and Ceoil's working pad

  • "F. W. Murnau, C. D. Friedrich, and the Conceit of the Absent Spectator" Kenneth S Calhoon, MLN; Apr 2005; 120, 3;
    • seemingly compulsive symmetry
    • painted with no trace of brushstrokes
    • in 1830 executed "transparent" painting with two pictures, lit front or back
    • Monk by the Sea 1809 discussion; two prominent ships were painted out - IR analysis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Outriggr (talk • contribs) 04:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copy edits and reorganization

I've done some fixing up and moving around: there seemed to be a lot about his work in the 'life' section, and some repetition of material between these sections, so I attempted to meld these. Similarly, a passage under 'work' fits better under 'legacy', so it has landed there. The' cross in the mountains' had previously been mentioned under both life and work, but by two different titles. Other minor miscellaneous changes as well. If any damage was done, please revert or amend as need be. JNW (talk) 01:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks JNW. Ceoil and I are planning an overhaul here, so we ask for everyone's patience regarding large-scale issues like organization and flow while we pour in the raw ingredients. Of course, your participation is welcome. Outrigger (talk) 02:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Okay. I dug up some more biographical information, but I am happy to hold off while you and Ceoil have at it. Apologies if I jumped the gun on the restructuring. JNW (talk) 02:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Should a sandbox be considered? Outrigger (talk) 02:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Any help from JNW would be greatly appreciated. Please add bio detail as you find it.....Ceoil (talk) 21:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Legacy

Reference to Friedrich's influence on 19th century American landscape painting needs to be cited. If true, it contradicts the concurrent neglect of his reputation in Germany, and begs the question as to how his work would have been known in the U.S. JNW (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Suspect claim; can you cut. Ceoil (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I might, but would like to try a little research first. Maybe Bierstadt saw a painting. But barring a source, one wonders whether certain similarities in style and spiritual content were not arrived at independently in America, rather than as a result of Friedrich's influence. JNW (talk) 16:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
An essay by Colin Eisler [1] states that Friedrich's landscapes anticipate those of certain 19th century American artists, but does not assign direct influence. Still looking. JNW (talk) 20:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Whose Self-portrait?

In my text - Guillaud, Maurice and Jacqueline:Casper David Friedrich, line and transparancy, exhibition catalogue, The Centre Culturel du Marais in Paris, Guillaud Editions, Paris, Rizzoli, 1984, ISBN 0-8478-5408-6 it reproduces the self-portrait drawing (in the article lead) on page 171 with the additional information of it being in the collection of the Royal Museum of Fine Arts, Copenhagen. However the image as it appears in Commons says the drawing is in the collection of the Museum of Prints and Drawings, Berlin. My text is from 1984 and I've left the Berlin Museum Collection for now. However if anyone knows for certain it should be changed. I'll look into it. Modernist (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Not certain, but I'd trust the catalogue over the Commons listing any day. The more famous self-portrait done when he was older is in Berlin, so my guess is that the Commons listing is a mistaken ref. to that. JNW (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Confirmed here [2]. JNW (talk) 19:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Fantastic. Thanks - Modernist (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] German Romantic

For what its worth I agree with Outriggr that Friedrich is the most important German Romantic painter. The consensus of art historians that I've read over the last thirty years are also in agreement with that opinion. Modernist (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Modernist. I think this began because the person who claimed "POV" read the sentence in a way that I didn't intend - fair enough. In that sentence, "the period" meant to me the time and locale of the German Romantic period/movement/?, which had just been mentioned. –Outriggr § 23:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Maybe, maybe not. If goes to FA someone will no doubt want a ref, which should not be hard to find. I was always pretty sure that was what was intended, but that was because, despite a certain ambiguity (over "period"), I knew the academic concensus also, and was sure you did, & didn't think he was being compared to Turner or Goya for example. Johnbod (talk) 02:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
A supporting ref has been added, from commentary at the Metropolitan Museum web site. Eventually there can be a less nebulous one, but for the moment...JNW (talk) 02:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)