Talk:Romanticism/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Phillis Wheately

One of the professors at Illinois State University in the US has advanced the idea that Phillis Wheately should be credited as being one of the founders of the Romantic movement in poetry. I don't know how widespread this view is; I mention it in case it should deserve inclusion. -- April (17:22, 17 February 2002)

I'm not quite sure on what this might be based. Wheately was writing about 50- 75 years before the American Romantics and her poetry reflects themes such as religion in a decidedly un-romantic way. I would contrast her famous "On Being Brought from Africa to America" which views slavery as a salvation from her "pagan land" to something like Blake's "Garden of Love" which views religion itself as an enslaving force.--68.38.223.84 02:39, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

American romantics?

Isn't there a set of American poets and novelists considered to be romantic, too? --firepink (15:43, 25 February 2002)

Sure, lots of them. The Transcendentalists were considered early romantics. Poe is generally considered a Romantic. Some scholars group people like Poe and Hawthorne who focus on the dark side inherent in human nature into a sub-category of Romanticism known as "Anti-Transcendentalism."

German musical tradition

The German musical tradition of the 19th Century is typically labeled 'Romantic', including the work of Franz Schubert, Johannes Brahms, Richard Wagner and Gustav Mahler.

Should we be worried about the fact that Schubert and Mahler were both Austrian? I mean, they were German speaking (though Mahler was originally from Bohemia), is that good enough? Anyway, I've replaced Schubert with a real German, Schumann, and removed Mahler (who did most of his work in the 20th century anyway). --Camembert (14:35, 27 October 2002)

Until the Seven Weeks' War of 1866, the distinction between German and Austrian was largely meaningless. Norvo 23:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Romantic music

I've added more specifics in the Romantic music para.: dates, individual "Romantic" works. User:Wetman (20:46, 18 September 2003)

Let's not get too carried away on music here - we probably want to avoid too much duplication with Romantic music. --Camembert (23:52, 18 September 2003)

Romantic ballet

I have just made a page for Romantic ballet, but I don't know where would be a good place to link to it on the Romanticism page. What do people think? mary 23:20, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Copyvio in Characteristics

Anonymous user 67.101.159.101 has removed two paragraphs from the '(Characteristics)' section for being copyright violations of http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article?tocId=9377134&;query=Romanticism

This certainly seems to be true of the second para. Not so sure about the first.

Either way, it was a small portion of the article, so I have removed the copyvio notice and replaced it with this discussion. -- Solipsist 14:34, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Good. The plagiarized paragraphs were serving an important function in this article, though: it needs some kind of introductory cartoon sketch of what "Romanticism" should mean for a general reader, even if too reductive to bear further scrutiny. Let's try to write such a section that isn't stolen. -- Rbellin 18:08, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

editing for readability

An anonymous user has been making significant edits to the page. To take one example:

Generally, Romanticism is the group of related philosophical and artistic, social and political trends arising from the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth centuries in Europe; Romanticism's precise characterization and specific description were subjects of intellectual history and literary history for all the twentieth century, to date, studied without definitive consensus.

I applaud the desire to improve readability, but not at the cost of accuracy. For example, "Generally" describes the frequency of use, not the broadest meaning of the term. Early the same editor changed "the position of the aristocracy" to the "aristocracy's position", which begs the question "on what"? Before making such a thorough going set of changes, it is probably better to enter in some discussion, as at least one frequent editor of this page strongly disagrees with both the style and content of the changes that were made. Stirling Newberry 03:30, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree with your revert; the rewording in edits such as this one reduced readability and distorted the meaning of some of the article (and even rendered some of it incomprehensible). There's no reason to keep such changes. (I agree with some of the small stylistic changes like spelling out "nineteenth-century", but not with most of them.) For what it's worth, I'm not an expert on the Schlegels (though I've read some of both) and I am not convinced by the additional material alleging their Romanticism was primarily Christian. I'd like to see a citation for that before introducing it into the article again. -- Rbellin|Talk 04:54, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I think we can put in a more nuanced reading, Schlegel's departure from neo-classicism and towards christianity passed through many stages, finally coming to rest in Catholicism. His embrace of the infinite found root in Schiller's conception of the divine. Stirling Newberry 05:27, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

A useful disambiguating notice?

the disambiguaring notice {{For|other uses|Romance}} at the head of the page was removed, with the comment "this is not what disambiguation lines are for". What does the Wikipedia reader need? Was this notice actually helpful to the user? --Wetman 15:47, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

New nav template

I updated the Romanticism nav template. It's at: Template:Romanticism. Appears as:

. I tried to match the Template:Modernism as closely as possible, but there's very few stand-alone articles on Romanticism poetry/music/art. As opposed to the Modernism section, most articles on Romanticism are simply about individuals themselves. Nonetheless, I think it works pretty well.

Also, I wasn't quite sure whether to put that Victorianism or Modernism followed Romanticism. The Modernism template says it is preceded by Romanticism, so I just put both.

Thoughts? :) --Wolf530 23:59, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

deletions

Going through the edit history for this article, I notice a series of anonymous deletions which appears to be unjustified and undiscussed. Some of this material seems useful. Does anyone want to restore it? -- Rbellin|Talk 16:11, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Good call! I've restored the Romanticism in music text that was deleted wholesale by Anon. User:205.188.116.195. This need to be more carefully concentrated, as a distillation of the main article, Romantic music, rather than entirely deleted. Are there other unrestored Anon. deletions? --Wetman 18:07, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

- The order is Romanticism, Victorianism, and Modernism.

"American" ou "US" ?

In the lists of romantic persons, "American romanticism" title is used and may reflects once more and inadequate use of the word : Is that South American ? Native American ? North American ? It seems to be simply the common while deplorable semantic mistake between US and America... There must be a policy guide somewhere on that topic, but... I'm no pit worker... gbog 08:46, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

From Use of the word American:

In adjectival use, it is generally understood to mean "of or relating to the United States of America"; for example, "Elvis Presley was an American singer" or "the American president gave a speech today;" in noun form, it generally means U.S. citizen or national.

U.S. national in other languages: English, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Chinese, Hebrew, popular Portuguese and Russian speakers may use American (Japanese: アメリカ人 roma-ji: amerika-jin), (Russian: американец, американка,) (Mandarin Chinese: pinyin- měiguórén, traditional- 美國人, simplified- 美国人) to refer to U.S. citizens. These languages generally have other terms for U.S. nationals; for example, there is U.S. Amerikaner in German, étatsunien in French, or statunitense in Italian.

As I understand it, there's a lot of debate going on that page over the use of the word, but that's how it stands now. Irish♣Pearl 18:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Nietzsche the Romantic?

You will find sources that argue that Nietzsche had a period of Romantic influence, but those aren't credited in the current Nietzsche article. It would seem reasonable to discuss the issue in the context of that entry and make edits here only after the point has been agreed and substantiated there. Buffyg 15:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

I suppose, but it seems fairly straightforward: The Birth of Tragedy, his first book, was clearly Romantic in its influences; later work less so. Chick Bowen 21:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Aristocracy

"It followed the Enlightenment period and was in part inspired by a revolt against aristocratic social and political norms from the previous period, as well as seeing itself as the fulfillment of the promise of that age."

I'm sure many, including plenty of history professors, would disagree with this statement, considering how many expressions of this genre have glorifed existing social orders. I think this should be revised.

As for the question about are Austrians "German", we must think of how these people reasoned in the 18th century. "Germany" was not a nation state. A German nation state did not exist until 1918, after the Prussian dominated German Empire was defeated. People living in Austria, Bohemia, Bavaria, Prussian, etc all thought of themselves as German. --Semyonkotko 09:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The general point is fine, but there has been a German nation-state since 1871. It took perhaps twenty years to achieve internal cohesion, but to date it as late as 1918 doesn't make sense. Does anyone seriously think that a ramshackle state could have fought so effectively in World War I? Moreover, Prussia remained the dominant German state long after 1918. -- Norvo 23:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Why not investigate the Romantic concept of the "natural aristocrat" instead? --Wetman 20:51, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

merge with Romance (genre)?

Someone added merge tags to this page and Romance (genre), the article on the medieval genre of romance (ancestor of the novel). There's been no explanation of this request, and it makes little sense to me, since the topics (a kind of medieval adventure story and a late-18th-century intellectual and artistic movement) seem quite distinct. Therefore, I'm removing the merge tags for now. Discussion is welcome. -- Rbellin|Talk 15:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

• I looked at it and it seemed to me that the genre could move into the literature section here. However, I have no strong feelings on it, and little knowledge of the subject. Pretty much I just do vandalism protection of the article. Wikibofh 15:44, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

No, no. The two are distinct and should have different articles. Romance the genre significantly predates what people typically mean by "Romanticism"--and the two differ in thematic content as well.

"In Germany and France, Herder praised the Aurora borealis."

Up until 2005-12-24, the article contained the amusingly absurd sentence above. I've restored the article to the original text ("[...] Herder praised the theater of Shakespeare [...]"), but for posterity, here (as far as i can tell) is the unlikely chain of events that resulted in it:

[1] deleted random chunks of text from the article, leaving the text "Herder praised the://aurora." (with "://aurora" being a remnant of the hostname of a URL further down the article). The vandalism went uncorrected. Some time later, [2] helpfully removed the errant punctuation before "aurora", and then (while reverting unrelated vandalism) [3] expanded "aurora" into the proper, linked term.--Piet Delport 21:52, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Definition of romaticism?

Because of the controversy over the definition of 'romanticism' and such, shouldn't we have an intro that lists aspects often associated with it, along with the era?D prime 04:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Picture caption

The picture of Waterhouse's Lady of Shalott is of course Romantic in theme and subject, but it Waterhouse is generally considered to be a Pre-Raphaelite artist. Should this be noted in the caption? 24.4.112.227 20:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Waterhouse reveals himself in the actual painting to be a Romantic Realist in this particular instance. The image illustrates several aspects of Romanticism. Perhaps "pre-Raphaelite" doesn't fully describe Waterhouse.--Wetman 20:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Potential vandalism of this article?

"In art and literature, 'Romanticism' typically refers to the way cheeseburgers are made in Switzerland, jerk."

Just flagging this one for the author to correct or remove?

Of course vandalism. I have reverted it. You can do so yourself by looking at previous revisions from the "history" tag and then editing an earlier revision and saving it again. See Help:Reverting. Kusma (討論) 16:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Other meanings for romance

I was looking for "romanticism"/"romance" in terms of having romantic ideals and attitudes (not necessarily Romantic love, though), but all I get are stuff about art styles and movements. Anybody want to create something about romance as a state of mind or something? Comrade-HW 04:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Nothing for you at Romance (genre), Courtly love, Idealism, Ivory Tower, Tovarich? --Wetman 06:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

You might try searching for "utopia" and "utopianism", too.

-- Norvo 20:53, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Word Origin

Did it originate from the word Rome? 205.174.22.28 00:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

OED cites one of "romance"'s earliest uses as "The vernacular language of France" (1300s). We still call the languages derived from Latin (French, Spanish, Italian, etc) "romance languages"--which I think you're right, was a way of saying "Romanesque."

This in turn, led to a genre of medieval literature being called "romance" [4], because it was written in such vernacular languages. Then, presumably due to a certain affinity between these works and the 18th century movement, we get "Romanticism" in the sense that this article discusses it.

Romance derives from romanice -- an adverb meaning to speak in the Roman language, that is, the vernacular (as opposed to Classical Latin, which only the educated elite could read and write). It came to designate both the vernacular languages derived from Latin, such as French and Italian, and the lengthy Medieval poetic stories about love and adventure (for example, about the Knights of the Round Table) composed in those languages. These old stories, which could be understood by everyone, not just the highly educated (who imitated Latin and Greek literary models), became increasingly popular due to the democratizing tendencies of the 18th and 19th centuries. HaroldKirkpatrick (talk) 06:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Improving this article?

This looks like a very nice article, and I'd like to nominate it for Version 0.5, but unfortunately the lack of references would prevent it going through. Could the folks who contributed a lot to this article put in their sources? Maybe they could then nominate it for Version 0.5 and also at WP:GAN? Thanks, Walkerma 04:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Evolution influenced Romanticism??

"It [Romanticism] was influenced by ideas of the Enlightenment, particularly evolution and uniformitarianism, which argued that..."

How can this be? Evolution was put forth by Charles Darwin mid-19th century, how could evolution have influenced Romanticism, which developed in the mid-18th century?

Thanks.(anonymous)

You are incorrect - the concept of evolution predates Darwin by quite a bit, and Romantics such as Goethe believed in it. What Darwin did was provide a comprehensive theory for how evolution occured - by natural and sexual selection - and that all biological change could be attributed to this one process. Stirling Newberry 01:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

A better characterisation of Counter-Enlightenment than this?

"Some modernist writers argue that Romanticism represents an aspect of the Counter-Enlightenment, a negatively charged phrase used to label movements or ideas seen by them as counter to the rationality and objectivity of the Enlightenment, instead promoting emotionalism, superstition and instability."

This is trashy writing, in that it brings up this suggestive connection only in order to crudely caricature the idea of Counter-Enlightenment and knock it down as a straw man. Can anyone provide a paragraph on the relationship of Romanticism and the Counter-Enlightenment that is less cheap? --Wetman 01:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you about the poor quality of this passage. I'll take a crack at a slight improvement, but a more fleshed-out version will have to wait for a more informed editor. -- Rbellin|Talk 04:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

If it's any help, I suggest that Romanticism came into being in opposition not to the Enlightenment but to Classicisim. The educated elites in charge of education and censorship (such as the French Academy) looked to Greece and Rome as their models of good and acceptable taste. To read or write poetry one was supposed to 1) learn Greek and Latin (an option only available to men) and 2) strictly follow Greek and Roman stylistic models (which used a complicated periodic sentence structure with many subordinate clauses that were often hard for the average reader to understand in any language). In an attempt to reform the "Gothic barbarousness" and "bad taste" inherited, so they thought, from the Middle Ages, Seventeenth century Academicians prescribed genres and imposed many "Aristotelean" rules, such as that a tragic play had to take place in the space of one day, with all violence offstage, for example.

In the Seventeenth Century, controversy over this had played out as the "Quarrel Between the Ancients and the Moderns" over which literature was better, Ancient (Classical) or Modern [meaning Medieval literature composed in the vernacular languages (often by women) -- folk and fairy tales, novellas, romances -- stories about King Arthur -- (Perrault, the fairy-tale author was a "modern")]. The Classicists won, and "Good" Classical taste ruled in the 18th century. Though "Modern" genres understandably continued to be quite popular and increasingly so as the century wore on.

Also characteristic of Romanticism was Historicism, a completely new and acute consciousness of the differences between the past and the present. A gap now loomed between past and present. The past was seen as exotic and "other," and there now arose an interest accurately portraying these differences and to avoid anachronism. (The gap also provoked an aching sense of loss and longing -- the word 'nostalgia' came into vogue for the first time.) Therefore, Neo-classicism, which copied ancient models more accurately than hitherto, characterizes Romanticism as does the phenomenon of the historical novel pioneered by Walter Scott, which portrayed the Middle Ages for the first time in a relatively favorable light. HaroldKirkpatrick (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Quote

I need to find a poem that begins with the lines "my true love hath my heart and I have his by just exchange one for another given. thanks jmarr

It's a "romantic" thought, perhaps, but it's the opening of a sonnet by Shakespeare's older contemporary Sir Philip Sydney, built on an elaborate conceit constructed from the idea of eye-beams: see complete text. (Wetman 05:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC))

Art in the era of Romanticism

Right from the beginning I would like to credit my source Dr. George Rodetis, professor of Art History at Sonoma State University, whose lectures on Romanticism I attended and whose ph.d discertation on the french 19th c. romantic painter Eugene Delacroix I had the pleasure of reading, for the following information: of the romantic movement in Western art, literature, and music, and I purposefully included all three- art, music, and literature together because perhaps more than any other era, writers, musician and artists were cross-pollinating ideas and inspiring one another, for example Delacroix painting scenes from Faust, by the greatest of the romantic writers Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe. When young Goethe explored the great Cathedral at Cologne and proposed in an essay that the greatest of the gothic architecture was every way equal and perhaps surpassed the beauty of the classically designed architecture of antiquity and the Renaissance, this sprang the Gothic novels later, such as Northanger Abbey, etc. Delacroix, too loved Shakespeare, and painted scenes from Shakespears plays, for Shakespeare was in this era a revelation to all, and all like Voltaire compared Shakespeare, whose works being newly translated into french, with Racine, and found Shakespeare more violent, emotional, and yet greater than the classically inspired Racine. In many, many ways Shakespeare in every sinew and fiber of his plays anticipated what in Western history we call the Romantic movement. Mark Faraday 04:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

image problem

is the first painting a reflected image? i'm actually looking at a copy of 'Traveler over a Sea of Fog' in a history textbook (A History of Western Society---McKay, Hill, Buckler), and the man is turned towards the right, not left.

No, this is correct; I verified the image in ARTstor. The textbook image must be wrong. 129.74.151.177 19:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

You might add John Martin to your list of Romantic painters, as well as Caspar David Friedrich.

Antonio Giusti 04:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)Antonio Giusti

music

The last paragraph in th "romanticism in music" section seems to be original research or at least does not cite anything. I have put the SectOR template on it. 128.174.253.233 00:44, 17 February 2007 (UTC) No, there's nothing original here--it's all fairly standard stuff, albeit garbled.

Definition of "romantic"

"The name "romantic" itself comes from the term "romance" which is a prose or poetic heroic narrative originating in medieval literature and romantic literature."

This doesn't make much sense. You can't define a word with the word itself. So what characterizes "romantic literature"? Sladek 22:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

presumably he/she was trying to give something of an etymology, rather than a definition... It is probably important that this term "romantic" comes from a specific genre of text from an early era. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.58.237.227 (talk) 15:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Shortcomings

I think this article needs to include - or give more attention to - criticisms of the ideas of this period & an examination of some of its excesses. Nazism is suggested, but not directly confronted. There also is no mention of Hegel, nor Nietzsche --JimWae 23:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Nazism? What you talking 'bout? Nazism cropped up during the modern period, and is often understood as a dark embodiment of modernist impulses--which are very much in opposition to Romantic ones. Do you have a specific idea of the connection between Romanticism and Nazism? As for Nietzsche, he gets lumped in with basically all the movements--Romanticism, Modernism, Postmodernism--depending on which of his ideas you're talking about. I think the same is true of Hegel, although I don't really know much about 'im. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.58.237.227 (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree with the Nazism suggestion. Nazism has romanticist roots. I am sure this is covered in the article on Nazism if I remember correctly. Misodoctakleidist 12:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

In fact there is a whole section on it in the article: [[5]]. It is not particularly well written though. Misodoctakleidist 12:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Romantic Epistemology

The article currently states that Romantics argued "for an epistemology based on usage and custom."

Unfortunately, this seems patently wrong to me. Romantic epistemology (which is, loosely speaking, an account of where knowledge comes from) emphasizes intuition, feeling, and a deep spiritual connection with inner essences, which contrasts sharply with Enlightenment epistemology based on reasoning. Very importantly, the romantics thought all these sources of knowledge were deeply natural. The idea of usage and custom doesn't really get emphasized until postmodernism, and is really quite opposed to Romantic ideals (although distantly related in that it's anti-Enlightenment).

Usage and custom were seen as outgrowths of the conditioning of a people by the nature of their place. See Goethe on the failures of Josephine Austria for an example. But it could use a rewrite, as it overemphasizes one facet of a larger concept. Stirling Newberry 01:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

"Romanticism" is, of course, so broad and vague a term that there's no way to really pin down this issue (especially if we're going to start interpreting specific romantic works). However, I still think the literature on Romanticism decidedly does not emphasize usage and custom as key aspects of the movement. In the received view, we typically think of the Romantic hero as someone who's broken away from the constraints of society to follow his/her own creative spontenaeity and inner nature. The Romantic man is one who is guided by his (innate) intuition and imagination, not the customs of his society. Similarly, Romantic artists and writers are generally thought of as stylistically breaking away from the rigidly defined customs of art/literature/poetry, to explore their own inner-directed and original approaches to creativity.

Mozart

Although I'm not sure, being German, whether Mozart is considered Romantic in English-speaking countries, I'd like to mention that both Mozart and Haydn, and even like the "biggest part" of Beethoven, are considered the composers of Vienna Classicism, not Romanticism. No matter what E.T.A. Hoffmann says, who was Romantic and might have had the idea of calling the composers he liked Romantic too. That's why I think, Hoffmann's position should be mentioned in the text, but a picture of Mozart at the head of a text about Romantic music is completely misleading. --84.154.100.159 20:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC) (PS: Sorry for whatever isn't understandable concerning my English, if there is anything.)

Section order

Is there any particular reason why the music section is before the art and literature one? Classical music tends to take its cues from art and literature, and not the other way around, and IMO the literature article would generally be better as the first section after the introduction, as it would be describing the works which influenced most romantic music, and without the written works, there would be no romantic movement. Lethe 03:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Citations

This article badly needs a full complement of in-line citations, though I see no point in applyinmg a tasteless and lazy banner to that effect. (There is none as I post this.)--Wetman (talk) 20:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

my deleted sentence

Hello, I deleted the sentence fragment " the concept of the Romantic musician begins to reveal itself— the man who ]" from the section on Romanticism and music, because it appeared to be something that was overlooked when rewording the content on Beethoven as the archetypical romantic composer. --Kyoko 15:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I have to say that this article beats around the bush too much, so to speak. It gives a lot of general information, wraps around it with useless information, and gives little to no specifics in many areas. Though it is decent for a quick review of Romanticism, this gives so little information it wouldn't be enough for even a 3rd grade essay, were one assigned. For example, the "Characteristics" portion gives no Characteristics of Romanticism, gives no characteristics of Romantic writings, it's just a bunch of (random) general definitions dumped into one spot.

75.95.15.128 (talk) 22:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The hyperbolic characterization as not being 'enough for even a 3rd grade essay', besides being untrue, is not much help. If you can provide some constructive copy editing, or have something of depth to contribute, with sources of valid scholarship, then jump in. JNW (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Visual art and literature

Who would be in favor of seeing this section split into two separate sections? Certainly there is enough material for separate discussions of Romanticism in literature and visual arts, yes? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 01:42, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Etymology of the words romance, romantic, Romantic etc.

I added a few lines on this section with some info from the OED. I hope it clarifies some of the usage subtleties of the language. MrMelonhead (talk) 23:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I think this would be better in a separate section, and not as part of the lede. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 17:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Watertight pigeonholes: Romantic and "Victorian" mutually exclusive, etc?

The following text was twice deleted by User:Ottava Rima as "wrong meaning of romantic" and " Improper termonology, as they are related, but not the same movement":

"The historian Thomas Carlyle and the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood represent the last phase of transformation into Victorian culture. William Butler Yeats, born in 1865, referred to his generation as "the last romantics."

The ensuring discussion is copied from User talk:Wetman:

WB Yeats was using romantic in a different sense. One refers to an artistic movement. Yeats was refering to a style that dates back to the Middle Ages. There is a difference between Romantic and romantic. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Then your report of a published explanation of the distinction will make a desirable addition to the article Romanticism. Deletion of a self-description by Yeats would only be helpful if Yeats made no such remark. --Wetman (talk) 20:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Except that a disambiguation page would show that there are multiple definitions. There already is one here. I suggest that Romanticism have note of such disambiguation added to it, since the disambig page already links to romanticism. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, there needs to be a link to Romantic poetry, seeing as how the page starts off with "Romanticism", and that is one of the terms of Romanticism. There is also German Romanticism, which has an equal problem with the above. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

These confusions need to be addressed in the article Romanticism. --Wetman (talk) 21:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

To note - Victorian applies mostly to those under the British influence after 1835. Romanticism in the UK deals with the time of the Romantic Poets (Wordsworth - Keats) and their influences/those influenced by them. This is paralleled by British Romantic novels that span from Scott to Austen. German and American Romanticism is far more spread out. The US caught up with Victorianism post-Poe.

Also note - The term "romantic" can apply various ways: considering the "romantic" poets, which was a term they did not use; considering those who wrote in the romance style; considering those who followed the ideas of Romen; or considering those who wrote in the "roman" novelestic style.

I hope this clarifies my point on the matter. Btw, Yeats's quote deals with a more open sense of the term, and is comparable to someone saying "I am a romantic", i.e. an idealist. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

P.S. the historic quote above makes it clear that by "transformation into Victorian" that the Pre-Raphaelites were Victorian. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Baudelaire's definition

Romanticism is precisely situated neither in choice of subject nor exact truth, but in a way of feeling.

Okay... here is the french sentence:

 Le romantisme n’est précisément ni dans le choix des sujets ni dans la vérité exacte, mais dans la manière de sentir

Not "dans UNE manière de sentir", which translation would be "in A way of feeling", but "dans LA manière de sentir"

Therefore, the exact definition from Baudelaire is:

Romanticism is precisely situated neither in choice of subject nor exact truth, but in the way of feeling.

(Oh, and, by the way, here is the source: http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Salon_de_1846_%28Curiosit%C3%A9s_esth%C3%A9tiques%29 )

I know, I could have corrected it myself, but I want to make sure everyone agrees with me. (And I'm terribly sorry for my bad english, I'm French, and I'm 15 ^^)

Excellent! Now work it into the article and don't worry about your English. The point is, get the information into the article, with its source in a <ref></ref> footnote. Others will tweak it for idiom or style, you may be sure. --Wetman (talk) 00:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

pre-romantics?

Has anyone heard of this? It's being taught as a substitute for the post-restoration course at my school... curious about who is considered a pre-romantic.

---cowper and grey are two great examples. And even though Blake is lumped in with the Romantic poets, he didn't really write much theory, and can so be considered as a sort of pre-Romantic figure this brings up the point that there should be some reference to the pre-Romantics in the article 96.229.63.68 (talk) 18:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Romanticisms

Arthur Lovejoy wrote a great article i just read “On the Discrimination of Romanticisms.” In English Romantic Poets: Modern Essays in Criticism. Ed. M.H. Abrams. London: Oxford University Press, 1975. Essentially, it's a look at all the different Romanticisms. Here's a good quote that pertains to this Wiki page: “There is no hope of clear thinking on the part of the student of modern literature, if—as, alas! has been repeatedly done by eminent writers—he vaguely hypostatizes the term, and starts with the presumption ‘Romanticism’ is the heaven-appointed designation of some single real entity, or type of entities, to be found in nature. He must set out from the simple and obvious fact that there are various historic episodes or movements to which different historians of our own or other periods have, for one reason or another, given the name." The point is, "Romanticism" does NOT apply exclusively to the British Romantic poets--it was in fact a term for a completely different movement. This page should not be so anglo-centric that it assumes that "Romantic" = British movement. 96.229.63.68 (talk) 18:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Errors

the article says, "The ideologies and events of the French Revolution, rooted in Romanticism" and needs a source. I would go further, and say that the French Revolution was an extremely enlghtenment influenced event. The revolutionaries would go on and on about the glories of reason. Furthermore, it is cronologically well before romanticism took ahold. In fact, much of the romantic movement is a reaction against the revolution.

Gramatically, it says, '"romantic" meaning "someone involved in romance,"' but 'romantic' is an adjective, not a noun, so it cannot be "someone" or mean "someone". This is poor writing.

I agree that more needs to be discussed regarding Hegel, who was influenced by both romanticism and the enlightenment. (The same is true for Marx.)

For Romanticism and the Nazis, I suggest the book "Reactionary Modernism" which showed the Nazis to be a blend of romanticism and the enlightenment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.89.159 (talk) 00:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Obectivism vs. Romanticism?????

I do not understand why Objectivism is listed as an "Opposing Term" when Ayn Rand, the very person who founded the Objectivist philosophy was an advocate of Romanticism in the arts. I have added a disclaimer noting that while Objectivism is not in keeping with the philosophic ideas behind the Romantic Movement, it is not an "opposing term". (I honestly would be fine with having it removed from the list entirely rather than have it moved to the "similair terms" or whatever it is) - 70.138.210.90 (talk) 01:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Removed sentence from section on Romanticism in the U.S.

I removed the following sentence because it is overly general and simply untrue (not to mention unsubstantiated): "The poetry which Americans wrote and read was all romantic until the 1920s: Poe and Hawthorne, as well as Henry Wadsworth Longfellow." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.81.185.124 (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Italian Romantic Opera Music

Isn't there a set of Italian musicists and operists considered to be romantic, too? Personalities such as Donizetti, Bellini, Verdi aren't even named! And for the late romanticism I would propose Puccini... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.25.5.144 (talk) 19:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Bourgeois liberalism?

"Berlioz still struggling with the bourgeois liberalism which all but smothered radical artistic endeavour in Europe" -- what is that supposed to mean? Reeks of POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.198.135 (talk) 02:16, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Different National Romantic Movements?

I see that there is a separate article for German Romanticism, Polish Romanticism, Spanish Romanticism (literature), but none for American, English, French, Italian (and others?) Should some of the content on this page be moved into more detailed articles for each nationality? And Romanticism can be subdivided by field: Romantic music, Romanticism in science.

Should there be articles for each country's Romantic Movement? For each field? Or even each country's field, e.g. English Romantic Poetry? Clemwang (talk) 09:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

We don't cannibalize Wikipedia articles to make little articles. But concise gists of each of the national sub-articles mentioned by Clemwang should appear at the appropriate places here, in order to keep this article encyclopedic.--Wetman (talk) 23:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)