Talk:Opening of the Fifth Seal

A fact from Opening of the Fifth Seal appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 31 October 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the seemingly irrational composition of El Greco's painting Opening of the Fifth Seal (pictured) is a result of it being trimmed by about two meters in 1880?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/October.

Wikipedia

Metropolitan Museum of Art

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of Art. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Metropolitan Museum of ArtWikipedia:GLAM/Metropolitan Museum of ArtTemplate:WikiProject Metropolitan Museum of ArtMetropolitan Museum of Art articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Greece Mid‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts

This 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

Comments

I'm afraid the last passage of this article gives undue weight to certain fringe theories, essentializing El Greco's connection at the expense of Picasso's genius. Please consider rephrasing. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 10:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ghirla, let's clarify something here. My references do not question Picasso's genius. Influences from one artist to the other is a common phainomenon. The fact that Picasso may be inspired by El Greco is not, in a any case, a questioning of his genius. The artistic connections of one genius with another is not questioning none of these geniuses!

I'd also like to point out that I'm not citating "fringe theories". Richardson is probably the best biographer of Picasso! He is not a fringe theoritician! Lambraki-Plaka is the director of the Greek National Gallery etc.

In any case, If you want to propose any rephrasing, I'm open to discuss it. I'm also open to other opinions which contradict my sources, If you can mentio any. A thorough coverage of all opinions is my goal.--Yannismarou 10:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For Richardson check also John Richardson (art historian). If you want I can also give you other external links, which prove that he is nothing but a fringe theoritician!--Yannismarou 10:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Johnson is also another highly esteemed art historian.--Yannismarou 10:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is also an undisputable fact verified by a series of sources I've citated and I can citate moe if you whish that "When Picasso was working on Les Demoiselles d'Avignon, he visited his friend Ignacio Zuloaga in his studio in Paris and studied El Greco's Opening of the Fifth Seal".--Yannismarou 11:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! And something else: My edits on this particular topic do not only emphasize on Greco's possible influence on Picasso, but also on the theory that scholars like Lambraki-Plaka, Richardson, Foundoulaki, Johnson and Laesse have tried to establish of a triangular artistic connection between Cezanne-Greco-Picasso. So, it is a matter of broader interest and it has nothing to do with promoting one artist against the other. The goal of these theoritical approaches is to establish the diachronical artistic influences that may exist between important and highly esteemed artists like Greco, Picasso, Cezanne etc.

Is there any evidence that Picasso saw this work? In which collection? When? The list of its past owners may be accessed here. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I've clarified the things a bit.--Yannismarou 11:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanations. I still think that the connections between artists are neither demonstratable nor verifiable. Where one person may decry some sort of influence, most would see none. It's all very subjective, you know. Is the painting only notable for its purported influence on the genesis of Cubism? Perhaps we should say something about its own merits (if such exist)? Unsettling, unearthly colors, rife with emotion? Extreme mannerism of figures? Expressionistic composition and brushwork? Is it expression of the artist's emotional instability? I believe there is much more to say. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and I'll try to do it. But unfortunately, my time during this period is limited. My intention was to create this article and connect it with El Greco's main article. I recognize it is imperfect and it needs work. Expansion is also welcomed! So, I'm open to any suggestions and contributions, but for the following 10 days forgive me for any delayed responses. My program is more than full! At this time, I souldn't be here! I should be reading some boring, tedious stuff for my exams!--Yannismarou 11:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck then. We may return to it later. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The dude on the left looks like Napolean Dynamite.

The dude on the left is St John. Napoleon Dynamite couldn't stand in a blue robe like that without tripping into it.--SidiLemine 12:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An art historian named Manuel Bartolomé Cossío apparently retitled this painting in 1908, but the painting itself was certainly done before El Greco's death in 1614.

Size

DYN says it was trimmed of around two meters, but this doesn't appear in the article. Is the original size of the painting known?--SidiLemine 12:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that "the upper portion of the canvas appears to have been considerably cut down (it was destroyed in 1880)". Now, if the 2 metres is exact I do not know. This was written by me. I also d not know the exact size of the original painting. I must search it.--Yannismarou 15:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It does appear in the article: "The restorators actually trimmed it by at least 175 centimetres (68.9 in)". Do you really think "at least 175 centimetres" and "around two metres" make so much difference? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK! My mistake! I did not notice it. Sorry!--Yannismarou 15:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, the shame is all mine, really. 12,5% is not that bad. Didn't see it.--SidiLemine 16:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]