Jump to content

Talk:Conversion on the Way to Damascus

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 75.84.184.44 (talk) at 05:08, 7 May 2010 (→Sheesh). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVisual arts Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Just made a few changes - most important is the date, which I changed from 1600 to 1601: Cerasi died on 3 May 1601, and the erjection of the first version seems to have been made by his heirs, rather than by him, which places this painting post-May 1601. The 1601 date is in John Gash's Caravaggio, 2003 (revised) edition, which is a catalogue of all known Caravaggios. Helen Langdon (Caravaggio, 1998) has a little on the confusion over the reasons for the rejection.

Otherwise I haven't changed anything important. I've Wikified the words Cerasi Chapel, but there isn't an article yet - it would be good if someone could write one, particluarly if there are photos of the chapel.PiCo 23:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Prostrate and supine" to "supine".

Just a small edit.

I changed "prostrate and supine" to simply "supine".

"Prostrate" means "lying stretched out on the ground with one's FACE DOWNWARD" and therefore "prostrate AND supine" is a contradiction in terms (besides which Saul is lying supine—that is, "lying face upward"). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.62.212.69 (talk) 13:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Sheesh

"This is not a pallid faith, Caravaggio has exterminated all the cherubim that infest the Virgin like flies in Carracci's adjacent Assumption." Pompuos and verbose to the extreme. It's supposed to be an encyclopedia entry, not a scene from 'Frasier'. Get over yourselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.69.81.2 (talk) 15:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree, this is not encyclopedic tone.75.84.184.44 (talk) 05:08, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I Liked the article

Hmmm, well speaking as an art lover and a Christian (I'm not afraid to use the "C" word), I enjoyed the author's description of the painting, and if he/she/they would like to point me towards other things they have written, i would appreciate it. It's always easier to be cool if you don't stand for anything or show passion, so I think the editor(s) showed guts and integrity. Sonofskagit (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who is responsible for the bulk of the article, but you can get some idea of the more active editors from the history page. It seems to have been started in 2005, and has expanded a lot since then. It also seems to me to be quoting some art book - prose like this is pretty typical of art writers, tho not normally of encyclopedias. PiCo (talk) 03:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conversion_on_the_Way_to_Damascus&oldid=360662702"