Talk:Sculpture of the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Posting this article

I posted this entry -- while realizing that it focuses on my area of interest (20th Century modern classical figure sculpture)

Hopefully those more interested in the 19th century --- as well as those interested in other directions of modernism, cowboy art, and monster art -- will make their contributions. Mountshang 22:39, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Much good work here, but you need to cite your sources. See WP:NOR. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On stumbling upon this page

As is often the case, I have recommendations on editing. So, I am going to disregard the Wikipedia standards and start to present them here. My first suggestion is that the article be indexed so that it can be worked on in smaller chunks. My divisions are going to be a bit arbitrary, simply taking what is here and adding some sort of title to each paragraph. I am not particularly possessive about these, but I believe that it will make editing this article easier. Carptrash 17:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


I like your idea of the index and the divisions -- though I took the liberty of resorting to fewer artists and gallery entries. I prefer seeing larger pictures embedded in text -- rather than smaller pictures coming in a gallery at the end --- but I guess that everyone does not agree. I tried to include all of the sculptors for whom you, Carptrash, made entries. Please add any others whom I missed. There are some more pictures and divisions that I will add next weekend. Mountshang 02:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I did not think that I was doing a particularly good job of chopping the article up - but it seemed like a good starting place. I saw the discussion about picture placement and decided to keep on the subject. My earlier articles had the pictures spread out throughout the article but there are folks who are much more comfortable with a more defined [regulated?] layout - and anyway my usual policy is if somewone puts time and effort into an article, it's okay with me. I am about to add a bibliography section [I am a book person - but only use books in my collection] and am going to limit myself to books that are surveys, as opposed to monographs on one artist. Does that sound right? Also I have many more articles on sculptors than what you included, but am not sure about just dumping them all in. There is also a Category:American sculptors list - something like that - that is a better place for that. Carptrash 04:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm so glad to see this article getting attention. Cheers! Durova 07:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] So . . . . ........?

So are silver sugar bowls and creamers [or whatever] really "sculpture?" If so, then we need to start this article off with a definition of sculpture, becasue I don't think that you will find them in other "sculpture" discussions or studies. Carptrash 08:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you will find it difficult to defend a definiton of sculpture as Neutal-point-of-view that is any narrower than "3-D objects recognized as art" (the one currently in Wikipedia)
Today, sculpture includes many things that are non-figurative, as well as many things that are fabricated without carving or casting - and once considered nothing other than some kind of decorative or functional art.
Today, at the Art Institute of Chicago (where most of the pictures on this page were taken) the same room in the wing of American art which had the silver bowls also had sculpted figures (cigar store Indians, ship figureheads, other folk art figures )from the same period -- as well as period portrait paintings on the walls. None of this stuff was called 'art' back when it was made -- but that's also true for everything else in the museum made before 1500. It's called art now and it's displayed in art museums -- and institutional use probably has to set the standard for what gets called 'art' or 'sculpture'.
I would also like to eventually include outstanding examples of furniture, pottery, glass, dolls --- and everything else that people (including museums) collect because of how they look.
Maybe there should be a separate Wikipedia entry called "Figure sculpture of the United States" ? What do you think ? There is still going to be the problem of things -- like dolls -- that may not have been considered sculpture back when they were first made.
Unlike a published book -- there is no limit on the size of an internet encyclopedia --- so including all the stuff that you don't consider to be sculpture does not limit how thoroughly this project covers all the stuff that you do.Mountshang 21:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
I suspect that we are approaching one of the more slippery slopes around in trying to define "sculpture" and this is, in my opinion, a fine thing. Although my personal interest in sculpture is pretty much in the figurative realm I have no issue with including abstract sculpture in this article. I am leery about including any/all 3D man-made objects that someone finds to be artistic. Of course there are always Cellini's Salt Cellars or a wide variety of lamps or book-ends as well as andirons by all sorts of sculptors that are both utilitarian household objects as well as being considered "sculpture," so there is to me no clearly defined line, but I find objects such as Paul Revere's creamers to be 3D art and still not "sculpture." However, as in instant reply in sports, I need "clear and irrefutable evidence" [or something] and not just my opinion before over ruling your decision. Carptrash 02:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I find many museums classify these "non-sculptural" objects as decorative arts. Rmhermen 05:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Representative?

I wonder how representative these images and names are of U.S. sculpture. I immediately notice the lack of Gutzon Borglum, Alexander Calder, Claes Oldenburg and perhaps Dale Chihuly. In monumental sculpture - I don't know why Lorado Taft's sculpture is there and there are no iconic images like Lincoln who is in another section, not a single mounted general, no French's Minute Man, Rudolph Evans' Jefferson, Prometheus or Atlas at Rockefeller Center or Marshall Fredericks' Spirit of Detroit. No image of Stone Mountain, Crazy Horse or Mt. Rushmore - a fairly unique American technique. No art deco section. The Late 20th century revival has two images - one from 1954, hardly late in the century. Rmhermen 05:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I just removed

Rod Patterson since I tend to do that with red links added by non-registered users. There is also a picture of his work in the gallery that is not visable because it's not entered right. Carptrash 01:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I also just went into the Public monuments section and removed the pictures of museum works by Taft and MacMonnies and replaced them with a couple of detail shots from actual public monuments by Taft and MacMonnies. Carptrash 06:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sculpting Mountains

Does Mount Rushmore, Crazy Horse Memorial, and Stone Mountain fall under "Sculpture" if so I think these would be excellent additions, as examples of Sculpture of the United States. I can add them - but I didn't know what section they would come under. Lmielke359 22:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

They are sculpture (opinion) and might as well be their own section. Carptrash 14:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
OK I added a section called "Carving mountains" to the Public Monuments section. However, I am not a sculptor and know very little about sculpture as a discipline so this section may need to be cleaned up - especially to fit with the prose in the rest of the article. A citation would also be nice for this section. Are there any other mountain sculptures in the US that I missed? Lmielke359 20:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the edit and reference help Carptrash. Lmielke359 00:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)