|WikiProject Philosophy||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
I've swapped the page contents so that Classical realism now redirects here, rather than vice-versa, so that the page name reflects the proper capitalization of the word Realism. This unfortunately means that the edit history for Classical realism and the original Talk page have been left back at the redirect page. This can be fixed by a deletion, a move and a recreated redirect, if anyone thinks this is a problem. Clicketyclack 14:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
The link for New York Realism seems to direct back to this article. It's a little confusing that a link in the phrase "not to be confused with New York Classicism" links back to the subject with which it's not supposed to be confused. Grcaldwell (talk) 09:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
puffery and NPOV
this page is very much NPOV & I am very tempted to go through and strip out many of the claims that rely for sources on the proponents of this style.
In particular, I don't think classical realism is realist in any meaningful sense of the word, (and it isn't very classical either). The claim that `Classical Realist artists attempt to revive the idea of art production as it was traditionally understood: mastery of a craft in order to make objects that gratify and ennoble those who see them.' is also pretty dodgy, and so-on. Unless anyone has any objections, I'd quite like to go through and try and weed out many of the very POV phrases used. Keir Leslie (talk) 10:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)