Talk:Sarah Bernhardt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

France Portal
Sarah Bernhardt is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments, explaining the ratings and/or suggest improvements.)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Connection to Edward VII of the United Kingdom

It appears that Bernhardt was a mistress of Edward VII of the United Kingdom for a while. Neither article mentions this, so if someone would like to do the research it would be worth adding. -- Solipsist 09:10, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

If you're going to put someone in the 'gay, lesbian and bisexual people' category, I need some evidence from the article. I have no evidence whatsoever that Sarah Bernhardt isn't a heterosexual. Can someone please put that information in the article? Scott Gall 08:52, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've honestly never read much that suggests that Bernhardt was much of a courtesan, except possibly at the very beginning of her acting career, when she had an affair with Henri de Ligne (have seen it spelled several different ways), the father of her son Maurice. Most of her money throughout her life was made through her work. I've never seen any real confirmation of any supposed affair with Edward, except that she was friendly with at least one of his known mistresses. I don't think she was bursting with the conventional sexual virtue of the period, but overstating her role as courtesan overshadows her excellent business acumen and the fact that she herself tended to support her lovers.
Her career actually began at the French national theater, but legend has it that she was dismissed because she behaved disrespectfully to an established older actress. The story is that Sarah's younger sister Regine was hanging around with her backstage, and during a procession, stood on the train of the gown of an established actress, Madame Nathalie. Nathalie either shoved or slapped Regine, and Sarah slapped Nathalie. Another version of this story has Sarah doing the accidental-standing-on-the-train and being shoved, and Nathalie being slapped. I'm not sure which is more likely, but Regine was very delicate (eventually died quite young), and Sarah was known to have been very motherly towards her, so if someone had behaved violently towards Regine, it seems more likely that Sarah would have risked her career over that than over a personal insult.
4.225.129.36 07:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Icon Project

In my effort to merge the now-deleted list from the article Gay icon to the Gay icons category, I have added this page to the category. I engaged in this effort as a "human script", adding everyone from the list to the category, bypassing the fact-checking stage. That is what I am relying on you to do. Please check the article Gay icon and make a judgment as to whether this person or group fits the category. By distributing this task from the regular editors of one article to the regular editors of several articles, I believe that the task of fact-checking this information can be expedited. Thank you very much. Philwelch 20:11, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jewish 素性

She was of Jewish ancestry but Catholic by religion; she pointedly decried anti-Semitism in the Dreyfus Affair.

[edit] Operas from Bernhardt Plays

Someone claimed that Tosca, La Traviata, Fedora and La Gioconda, "to name a few" were all operas based on plays written for Bernhardt. I noticed that this certainly is not the case for La Traviata, which was written by Verdi in 1848. Since Bernhardt was only born in 1844, it seemed rather unlikely that she would be playing Violetta, the consumptive courtesan, before the age of 4. Someone should check up on the others too, just to make sure. A possible candidate for replacement here is Salome, which I believe Bernhardt performed before Strauss wrote his opera, though I cannot say if Wilde wrote the play specifically "for" her. Someone should check this up too. Also, I changed the operas to links, while before they were only in caps for some reason. eeesh 15:02, 8 May 2006

Wilde wrote "Salome" specifically for Bernhardt; any good biography of her will say so. I'm not sure whether or not he wrote it with her input. But they were friendly with each other.
Tosca was indeed written as a play for her (by Victorien Sardou, IIRC, a dramatist with whom she was closely associated, but the Tosca article should have that info).
The confusion about La Traviata is understandable. First of all, that name - and the name of "Violetta" for the heroine - is peculiar to the opera. The story originated as a novel by Alexandre Dumas fils (the younger), called La Dame Aux Camelias. In the story, the courtesan's name is Marguerite; camelias are her favorite flower, hence "the lady of the camelias." It was much adapted, including into La Traviata" (which means "the woman who strayed"). The version which Bernhardt was known for was dramatized by Dumas fils himself in 1853. I don't know whether he dramatized it for her or not; I don't think he did, but ICBW. It's probably just a case of them having the same source material. Verdi did not write La Traviata as early as 1848: it was produced just after Dumas fils dramatized his own story. So I think the 1848 date might be the publication of the original novel.
I don't know anything about La Gioconda (though I have a poster for it - I'm not sure about its plot and how it compares to the opera) and I'm not certain I was even aware that there was an opera based on Fedora (was the writer perhaps thinking of Theodora?) At any rate, those are minor and would probably be better replaced with Salome - so long as Strauss's version is based on Wilde's text.
4.225.129.36 07:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeah it looks now, to come back to his WAY later, that the Dumas novel was published in 1848 and the opera was performed in 53 or somewhere around there, though I'm not really sure, and sorry for confusing things by anachronistically using the name "Violetta". In regard to some of the other questions raised, I believe that there certainly was an opera called Fedora by Umberto Giordano, and I'm actually at more of a loss to come up with what you meant by your proposed substitution of Theodora; and yes Salome is certainly based on Wilde's text, it is virtually a word-for-word setting (though of course in German instead of English or French, the play's original language). Anyway, my original point still stands, that you shouldn't claim that La Traviata was based on a Bernhardt play, since she was still very young when the opera was written in any case, though she may have later acted in a stage adaptation taken from the same source material which all the same was almost certainly not "dramatized for her" since she was too young if it was indeed written in 1853. Thus, I'm removing "La Traviata" and "Fedora" and "Gioconda" for now, (which have not been justified adequately after all this time), unless that's already been done, which is possible. (Eeesh 01:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Sarah Bernhardt in Popular Culture

I didn't know about Sarah Bernhardt till I heard the song "Practice makes Perfect" by 70s british post-punk band Wire, this is how the lyrics go:

"Practice makes perfect, yes I can prove it Business or pleasure, the more that you do it

Please dress in your best things, this course was unplanned 'Cos you see up in my bedroom I've got Sarah Bernhardt's hand

Practice makes perfect, I've done this before Never for money, always for love

Please dress in your best things, and don't make a fuss 'Cos you see up in my bedroom Sarah's waiting for us"

I don't know if this is so important as to add it on the page but there it is for your judgement.

[edit] Date of birth

Most sources seem to give October 22, not October 23. By the way, "Not to be confused with comedienne Sandra Bernhard" as it says at the top of the page. That's ridiculous -- like saying George V shouldn't be confused with George Burns. It shouldn't be assumed that our readers are complete idiots. Alpheus 08:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ----Sarony----

I am the biographer of Sarony and am compiling a list of known poses of Bernhardt for Sarony. I can b contacted at broadwayhistory@msn.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.205.169.170 (talk) 14:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Removed summary sentence

Removed the sentence that stated she was arguably the most famous actress of the 19th century. Wikipedia Manual of Style defines "arguably" as a Weasel word and states "Weasel words don't really give a neutral point of view; they just spread hearsay, or couch personal opinion in vague or indirect syntax. The consensus of editors responsible for Wikipedia encourages you to name a source rather than assign an opinion to an anonymous source".

More on this can be found at Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words.

The word would be acceptable if a source can be credited to back the statement up. Philbertgray 15:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I think the statement is common knowledge; I would want a citation for the statement that anyone else was *more* famous than Bernhardt. I would simply delete "arguably." --Andersonblog 20:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 08:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright

I think we need to discuss that image of Hamlet. Although the original image was published before 1923 and is now in the public domain, the image as it now stands is claimed to be a new version. Does that mean that copyright on the image, as it has been substantially altered and amended, is renewed? DrKiernan 10:48, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

A reproduction, even if cleaned up, doesn't create a new copyright: "Cropping, removing dust or distortions and other minor changes don't alter its copyright status"; Made a request at Commons to be directed to a page that explains this. DionysosProteus 12:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I see. That makes sense: in the United States copyright rests with the initial act of creativity rather than with an act of reproducing a previously created work. However, the United Kingdom is different: scanning an old photograph creates a new electronic work, with a new copyright. Hence, it is necessary to qualify the license tag on the image to point out that the image is public domain in the US, but not necessarily in other countries. I have made such an amendment. DrKiernan 13:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to provide a link to the commons page that takes us through that distinction? I'm still awaiting a reply from my request. DionysosProteus 14:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Could you please point out where in UK copyright law or in which legal cases it was said that "scanning an old photograph creates a new electronic work, with a new copyright"?? I've never heard of this. If someone takes a photo of an old painting, then yes, there is creativity involved and the photo gets a new copyright in the UK. Even if the photo is a faithful reproduction. (But not in the U.S. Faithful photographic reproductions are not eligible for copyright as per Bridgeman v. Corel.) But I have never ever seen any indication that a scan of an old photograph was eligible to copyright in the UK. You don't get a copyright for xeroxing something either. Please see commons:COM:ART for more information. Lupo 14:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
In general, the Lafayette collection is problematic because according to [1], many of these photos were not published, and V&A indeed has a kind of copyright called a publication right on those for 25 years, counting from the eventual publication. But Image:Sarahbernhardt1.jpg was apparently published in 1899 (see [2] at the bottom). The copyright was registered in 1899, and the photographer was either James Stack Lauder (James Lafayette) (1853-1923) or William Harding Lauder (1866-1918). (See [3].) Both are dead for more than 70 years. See also this chart of UK copyright lengths. It seems to me that this photo is in the public domain also in the UK, and also in the rest of the EU. Lupo 14:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
In answer to your question, the advice given to Higher Education institutions in the United Kingdom is: "Whilst a slavish scan of a photograph with little human intervention is unlikely to be classed as original and so not afforded copyright protection, an image that is scanned, altered and enhanced using a high level of human skill and judgement in order to achieve the effect of the original work may in itself be afforded copyright protection". If this advice is correct then cleaning up the old negative and creating a new digital image may be copyrightable in the United Kingdom. See http://www.tasi.ac.uk/advice/managing/copyright.html for the full document. DrKiernan 14:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
That advice is correct. A scanned image that is a mere copy of an existing photograph cannot attract copyright in the UK if the copyist has devoted "no such labour and skill as conferred an originality of an artistic character"; and there can be no new copyright if the process is "wholly mechanical": see Reject Shop -v- Manners [1995] FSR 870 at 876 per Leggatt LJ. This was a case relating to the use of an enlarged photocopy, but a scan would be treated in the same way. The Court quoted an earlier Privy Council case (Interlego -v- Tyco, [1989] AC 217) where Lord Oliver had said "But copying, per se, however much skill and labour may be devoted to the process cannot make an original work". In one of the practitioners' texts, The Law of Photography and Digital Images, Christina Michalos comments that user selection of lightness/darkness and resolution settings would not be enough, but that copyright could be generated if the scanner were to be used as an art tool - eg to create a totally new work from an original arrangement of existing elements. That much is clear. Whether copyright is generated by post-processing must be a matter of degree. If all that is done is "wholly mechanical" and just needs technical rather than artistic know-how (eg how to use Photoshop to remove dust, tweak contrast etc), then no. But if the processing requires artistic judgement, even if fairly minimal, then yes. It's difficult to be precise, but it could definitely be argued that complex post-processing to enhance and bring out certain features in a selective way is of necessity artistic.
So far as images here are concerned, the problem is that we often don't know what, if any, post-processing has been applied. I would think it reasonable to assume (unless we have evidence to the contrary) that what appears to be a mere scanned copy of an old photograph actually is just that, and should be kept as 'non-original'. Otherwise we will be throwing out large numbers of scans that are actually OK. MichaelMaggs 18:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

rvondeh@dircon.co.uk adds: as the person who scanned the negative and then spent many hours cleaning it, removing cracks, fixing the lighting, adjusting the contrast, reconstructing parts which were missing - I would state most definitely that the Lafayette Bernhardt image is most certainly not just a simple copy. Anyone with a level of training will note that the photograph as displayed on the Wikipedia page is not a scan from a newspaper - it is far too crisp and has none of the duo-tone problems associated (i.e. small dots or lines). I generally feel that when authors add photographs to Wikipedia by copying them from obviously academic (or otherwise) web sites, the use of a small note requesting permission to use an image would be, at the last, polite. I don't believe that Wikipedia advises its authors to remain within the realms of academic politeness but it would be a step in the right direction.

[edit] Alexandre Dumas, pere

Was she not also involved with Alexandre Dumas? I believe I have seen somewhere a photo of the two together. LaCritique (talk) 21:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)