Talk:British art

Redirect

This page should redirect to Art of the United Kingdom. Someone searching on "British art" might be looking for any number of things, and there is a far wider range of links there than here. It is not appropriate to keep such a term on a disam page, and Art of the United Kingdom is clearly the primary use of the term. If people want Irish art or Scottish art of after 1707 that is what they will search for, and the use of "British art" for earlier periods is unusual and not really correct. Johnbod (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. As I understand it, "British art" refers to all art, over all time periods, that has been produced in the island of Great Britain. "Art of the United Kingdom" is therefore a subset of "British Art". People who search using the term "British art" will not find it difficult to find the link most appropriate to what they really to find out about from the list available. Your point that there are more links in the "Art of the United Kingdom" article can be easily rectified by adding them to the British art disambiguation page. Whether or not most people are looking for "Art of the United Kingdom" or not when they search for "British art" is actually not the question - part of our function should be to help educate readers. Redirecting "British art" to "Art of the United Kingdom" may give the false impression that the two terms are synonymous. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 20:10, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I disagree - British art as it stands is an incomplete list that offers basically a road directory; Art of the UK as it stands is the main article that covers the territory and I support the redirect...Modernist (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

If you want an article "that covers the territory", then 'British art' should be the main article and 'Art of the United Kingdom' should redirect to it. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 22:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

One way or the other, lol...Modernist (talk) 23:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

• In normal art history usage art is "British" ("ancient British") in ancient & "Romano-British" times, and then for a bit afterwards until the Anglo-Saxons pushed the British out, and then there is a brief period of Insular art but after that it is Anglo-Saxon art followed by English art, Pictish followed by Scottish art, & Irish art, until 1707 or later. There is very little talk of "British art" in the Middle Ages, & you will find 50 books on medieval English art for every one on "British". The term does not usually cover "all art, over all time periods, that has been produced in the island of Great Britain", and indeed includes much art produced outside the island, whether in Ireland or the early Empire. I have no great objection to swopping the two titles around, making AotUK redirect to BA, but although the present post-1707 scope is awkward in some ways, I think it should be kept. "British art" is the more common of the two terms, & should not go to a disam page. I still fail completely to understand your arguments for keeping that, nor how a brief list will do more to "educate" people than a proper article. Johnbod (talk) 00:57, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Johnbod. I do not claim any great knowledge of art, and defer to what you say about the history of art on this island. My concern is really about consistency of approach. For example, the intro of British literature makes clear that it covers all time periods within the island of Britain, and Literature of the United Kingdom redirects to it. I thought it made sense to have the same approach here...but maybe not! Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well the issue there is a bit different - Hemingway is obviously "English literature" but not British literature, which in fact seems to cover all Irish literature as well. My German art takes that line as well - art produced within the modern borders at all periods - but apart from anything else we wouldn't have the room here, and there would be protests from the non-English nations if this became the main article for Scottish art etc. Consistency is good but we can't be a slave to it. I notice incidentally that the category here is Category:British art. Can we all agree to switch the article to that? Johnbod (talk) 17:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I personally prefer the Art of the United Kingdom so as to more comfortably accommodate the various Islands, Irish, Scottish, and Welsh inclusions, some of which should be added, imo, the redirect and category proposal meets my agreement as well...Modernist (talk) 18:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well British includes all of them, & they are all included, although post-1707 London was so much the centre that it tends to read like "English art" for stretches. I've kept an eye on Scotland for the 18th century (now better covered than in Scottish art) & Wales will be included when I cover the landscapists. But the artists usually moved to London in the end. I removed O'Doherty because he is post-independence Irish Republic, then US. Johnbod (talk) 23:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering why you moved Brian, thanks for the explanation I didn't understand...Modernist (talk) 04:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I put him in Irish art - the edit summary said. Johnbod (talk) 04:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I saw that you moved him to Irish art I just didn't know why until I read your explanation here...Modernist (talk) 04:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• Now see Talk:Art_of_the_United_Kingdom#Requested_move Johnbod (talk) 19:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)