Jump to content

Talk:Italianate architecture

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 81.159.89.226 (talk) at 15:10, 23 September 2008 (A question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconArchitecture B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Italianate" is an adjective. What is the copyright status of the image? --Wetman 13:34, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm the photographer of all images on the Italianate page. As this was my first entry in WikiPedia, it took me a while to figure out how to get images properly tagged.

Italianate is more than just an adjective. A search on Google will bring up a kazillion web sites that discuss this topic in terms of Architecture. Such as: Italianate --Piko 02:01, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Judging by "what links here", this page should be made a dab and the article should be moved to Italianate (architectural style) or something along these lines. In Russia-related contexts, the epithet is used to refer to structures which use Muscovite Renaissance elements brought to Russia by Aloisio, Fioravanti, Solari, etc. Any thoughts? --Ghirla -трёп- 07:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot to sort out with the whole of the 19th century architectural Wikipedia pages. I am wondering if we did not ought to have a Category: Neo-Renaissance architecture so they can all be sorted out, then we can see exactly what we have, already we have Neo-classical architecture and Greek revival (much if not exactly the same thing). Today I discovered American Renaissance a completely new style to me. I'm wondering what else we have in the 19th century department, and what pages should perhaps be merged. Any ideas? Giano | talk 13:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If I were doing this at home I'd clean off the dining room table [after getting an "Okay" from my domestic partner] and spread everything that I want to look at out on it, let it sink in, mull it over for about a week, and then reassemble it. Which is, i suspect, pretty much what Giano is suggesting. So, what is wikipedia's version of my dinning room table? Carptrash 17:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS the bed in the guest room works too, especially if you don't have a guest.

Move?

In its current form, the article smacks of original research. I want to repeat that "Italianate" should be reserved for a disambiguation. For instance, the entry on "Italianate" in Britannica, 15th ed. reads:

ITALIANATE, group of 17th-century northern European painters, principally Dutch, who traveled in Italy and, consciously adopting the style of landscape painting that they found there, incorporated Italian models and motifs into their own works. Chief among the Italianates were Bartholomeus Breenbergh, Andries and Jan Both, Nicolaes Berchem, and Jan Asselijn. The Both brothers, of Utrecht, were to some degree rivals of the Haarlem-born Berchem. Andries painted the figures that populated Jan's landscapes. Berchem's own compositions were largely derived from the Arcadian landscapes of the French painter Claude Lorrain; a typical scene would contain shepherds grazing their flocks among classical ruins, bathed in a golden haze. Upon his return to Holland, Berchem occasionally worked in cooperation with the local painters and is said to have supplied figures in works of both Jacob van Ruisdael and Meindert Hobbema. --Ghirla -трёп- 19:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Italianate (architectural style) is fine by me. Regarding your last edit summary [1] try looking at the overall design and ethos of Osbourne and what do you see? Giano | talk 19:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a familiar term for Neo-Renaissance residential architecture, we should merge rather than move. Or perhaps insert into Neo-Renaissance a brief summary of what "Italianate" is all about, with a link to Italianate (architectural style) as the main article? --Ghirla -трёп- 19:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is just the confusing sort of thing, I hink we should be debating here User talk:Giano/19th century architecture rather than taking potentially rash decisions by ourselves, for what it's worth I agree with you, but the term "Italianate" seems to have far greater significance in America, and this is an international encyclopedia, so we have to consider all sides of the coin. Giano | talk 20:20, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've just re-read it: This page is a complete mess of contradictions Giano | talk 20:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking for the Americans here-at least until another shows up- I'm fine with moving the Italianate page to Italianate (architectural style). However there should be a redirect or discombobulation or something to send folks who search for "Italianate" there. Or gives them the choice anyway. I feel no need to Americanize [or should that be United Statesize] the article, but it does need to fit our needs. Carptrash 21:44, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Italianate as a disambiguation page

"Italianate" is an adjective. Its use as a noun is jargon, which is intending to appear founded on usage like "the Baroque" or "the Rococo", but which is similar to "an equestrian" when signifying an "Equestrian sculpture" rather than the rider of a horse. "Italianate" is a blurred reference to "the Classical", in cases where the original models have been imperfectly understood by the architect, by his client and sometimes by the writer. Britannica 15th ed. is not a perfect model for Wikipedia. "Italianate", which simply means "classicizing" in some general sense, indistinguishably evokes "Roman" or "Classical" or "Neo-Palladian" or "Cinquecento Mannerist" or "Neo-Renaissance"; it could serve better as a disambiguation page:

"See Italianate architecture, an aspect of Architectural revivals.
"See Italianate painters, among whom are the Northern Caravaggisti"
"See Italianate hairdos" (Gosh! You learn something new everyday here! Giano | talk 06:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

etc. --Wetman 23:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found this on the jargon page that [to me] suggests that Italianate is closer to terminology than jargon.

Jargon can be distinguished from terminology in that it is informal and essentially part of the oral culture of a profession, with only limited expression in the profession's publications.

Certainly there is no problem finding "Italianate" used in publications. However I too have no interest in letting Britanica determine how we deal with this issue. Carptrash 00:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm in favour of having Italainate is a disambig so is it to be Italianate architecture or Italianate (architectural style) - I think I favour the former as it is less confining. Giano | talk 06:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The word Italianate by itself more commonly refers to architecture than anything else it would seem based on, not only my own reading, but also results from a google web search. Italianate painters come in a very poor second and are unlikely to be the subject of the word Italianate by itself - as for hairdos ... I am not sure that a dab page needs to be created but perhaps a dab top link - ie using {{Otheruses4}} - see Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Top links. I note that there are a significant number of links to this page, and they are not seemingly intended for another article say on hairdos or even painters. To me that is a criterion in determining whether or not disambiguation is necessary.--A Y Arktos\talk 09:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've made a few changes to the page. Sorry carptrash your pics had to be made a little smaller to fit the page. Could you write a little more, then they could be bigger to fit the section. I don't want to tread on your toes by venturing across the Atlantic! I've been thinking about the page move. I have to disagree with A Y Arktos - I think Italianate is too vague and ambiguous a name on its own. Practically anything could be Italianate from a pair of jeans to that odd hairdo. I can't see the harm in moving to Italianate architecture especially as it's already a re-direct. Giano | talk 13:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay Gman, the pix are not mine. I'll write more etc. but today my whatever is so slow [we have gerbels in cages running around wheels that make the internet work out here] that it's a hassle. Today they, the rodents, seemed to have some sort of a general strike going so it's taking a minute or two between links - - too long. Carptrash 14:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

same hear. Giano | talk 14:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no objection to a rename, for example Italianate architecture. I do have an objection to disambiguation given the number of links, all of which seem to refer to the architectural style and not jeans, hairdos, ... I fully appreciate that there is an adjective out there used indiscriminately and without much apparent meaning, when it becomes a wikipedia aticle (I am tempting fate here), then disambiguation would be fine. For the moment then page move yes, dab to red links - why?--A Y Arktos\talk 19:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Architectural opinion sought on 2nd Hotel Vancouver (d.1948)

I never got to see this building, which was torn down before I was born (1955) but was much-remembered by my parents and anybody else who had spent time in it. I added a bit on it to the Hotel Vancouver page, which is mostly about the current, third hotel, now a Fairmont and in the tradition of the Gothic railway hotels (the Frontenac, Laurier, Banff Springs, Lake Louise, Fort Garry, Empress, Royal York etc); the condition of its completion was that the second hotel be torn down (the new one didn't want the competition, which as you can see was formidable; especially the interior of the newer one is very drab by comparison). I've included pix of the interior to see if there's harmonization between exterior and interior, and would like the opinion of someone/people here as to if this is Italianate or not; I'd called it Italian Renaissance, which is the usual term for the style (at least it was in my cultural geography courses, anyway). The second hotel was by Francis Rattenbury (if that's a redlink, it's open turf to anyone interested in architectural history; yeah, there's an article, but now I'm not sure if the 2nd Hotel Van was his or not; have to check I guess; Rattenbury same designer as BC's Parliament Buildings and 1912 courthouse (now the Vancouver Art Gallery though I think in the UK he's a bit more famous for a society scandal/murder than anything else).

Italianate? Or am I wrong and it's Beaux-Arts or ??? I'd always called it Edwardian Pacific; the dining rooms/ballrooms were in different themes from around the Empire, there were echoes of Hong Kong and Bombay and Africa in the place, and gold-plated faucets and marble fittings in all the bathrooms....Italianate was fairly popular here, relatively speaking to Arts and Crafts and a tamer Queen Anne that's seen in the states; a famous example of an Italianate Renaissance house in Victoria is Emily Carr's old dig: http://www.emilycarr.com/main.html; despite those Gothic-flavoured finials or follies or whatever they are. Skookum1 03:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hello —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.154.114.27 (talk) 23:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page would be improved with an visual example of the so-called Italianate Victorian style famous in New England (and elsewhere) as a fairly common form architecture. With a prominent "widow's walk" above it's roof, many captain's homes were built thus. The article touches well upon this style. You say Italianate Victorian to any Yankee who knows a bit about architecture and this is what they'll think of. Some were very fancy, some more plain. If anyone has an image of this classic style of house, it would make a good addition.

That said, I agree that this page seems like a research paper put on on the Wikipedia. It presses its point too hard because quite simply "Italianate architecture" is too broad a subject heading to really organize around. The article on Neo-Renaissance architecture is much more germane, even if it does involve French Renaissance too. The Palazzo Vecchio certainly influenced a great deal of 19th C. American architecture, and in it's WP article it's called Tuscan Gothic. Sir Banister Fletcher makes the same distinction. Indeed, many of the buildings shown in this article reflect more of the Gothic influence of the Palazzo Vecchio and Giotto's campanile than Renaissance. Indeed, all of English Renaissance architecture would be Italianate. If the author means that the Italianate style is a distinct style because it has the Victorian concern with the symbolic weight of any feature (as perhaps referenced by the "picturesque" influence) as opposed to a truly Classical sense of balance and proportion, then this article would fit into Victorian architecture. Best, Francis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Francis Smith (talkcontribs) 03:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A question

Is this church Italianate? Its description on the Wilton, Wiltshire page says it's Romanesque with Bzyantine influences. What's the difference between Romanesque and Italianate?81.159.89.226 (talk) 15:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]