Jump to content

Talk:Sam Gilliam/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

New Picture

I added this better picture of Gilliam from the Smithsonian archives. It is not as "free" as the previous one, but I think it does the job better. Do we have a consensus? The older picture is at: Image:Picture 1114.jpg --Knulclunk 16:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

As the {{Smithsonian{{WikiProject Smithsonian Institution|class=|importance=|listas=|SIART=yes|SIART-importance=}} }} tag has been depreciated by WP, I replaced the older image until we can get a better picture or repro rights to the previous one. --Knulclunk 01:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Personal remarks by IP User:71.67.146.163

note: this section needs to reflect WP:NPOV and be rewritten in a more objective tone. - Modernist 11:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Sam Gilliam’s approach to making a piece of artwork inspires me as an artist. Visually, the painting occupies ¾ of a whole gallery wall, and seems to be made of tarp or canvas stuck directly on the wall, not framed. There appears to be a fragment of an American flag on the bottom right corner which has been somewhat painted over. There is a big triangle shape cut out of the tarp in the bottom center of the work, and a half of a brick sticking directly out of the canvas. There is a 3D cubed pole resting diagonally from the painting to the floor. This and other elements to the piece give the work more of a sculptural form than do other paintings.

Gilliam’s work reminds me of Jackson Pollock’s work. Pollock and Gilliam have very chaotic, random splatter marks. Both artists’ work is haphazard looking, but unified in an almost serene way. The hectic-ness does not take precedence over other more important formal elements in the work. The texture is ever-present and almost overpowering. Like Pollock’s work, there are violent splatter marks. It looks like the slashing marks are that of a lion clawing into the surface wet paint. It appears that there is painted cotton, or some similar material, painted over on the top of the canvas to give a thicker, more textural look to the paint as well.

The colors of the work are somewhat muddy, yet neutral, but still seem vibrant in the infrequent spots of pure color. The majority of the color in the work is a sky blue, pale yellow, cadmium yellow, a faded red, brown umber, black, and a pale pea green. On a closer look, there is a silver almost glittery paint brushed over areas of the canvas’ surface. On second glance of the piece, it appears that there are many different fabrics that are sewn together to make up the surface. The canvas appears to be a tarp. It has the eye-lit holes on the edges like a tarp does. The hem from the background fabric pieces sewn together actually serves as a function to lead the viewer’s eye around also. The tarp does not lie flat on the wall; it has some texture and ridges. Each time it is hung, it cannot be hung exactly like the last. It takes on a slightly different shape and feel depending upon the environment that encompasses it. The tarp displays a slight shadow on the wall next to and under the piece. Also, the shape of the canvas is not rectangular. I reference Frank Stella’s invention of the unshaped canvas. Gilliam’s canvas is not a perfect rectangle, and he does not strive for straight angular sides. Also, the canvas has a few small rips in it throughout the surface giving surface texture and sense of form to the whole piece.

What interests me most about Madison Blues is that everything in the piece serves the purpose to keep the viewer interested in the piece. Everything from the direction of the brush strokes, to the striped teal and faded red vertical and horizontal patterned fabric under the paint leads the viewer’s eye continually around the work and back into it. The triangle cutout in the bottom middle lets the viewer’s eye rest for a moment, then focus on the pole just to the right of the cutout to lead the eye back into the piece, then on to the remnants of the flag’s horizontal stripes, which lead your eye back left and not off the page. I love his approach to making a piece of art, and I admire how every part of the work keeps the viewer’s eye interested and intrigued in the piece. Modernist 10:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Ugh. what is with the in line (perry) references? Don't we prefer footnotes? --Knulclunk 14:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, thats part of the problem those (perry) references. I'm going to remove them. It would be helpful if someone could footnote or reference the article and add more text. The section above was written by IP User:71.67.146.163 and it is unusable in its present form. Modernist 01:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Melicolin23, Regisimms.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Personal remarks

Working on this page for Art+Feminism and having a difficult time citing this portion: "In the 1960s, as the political and social front of America began to explode in all directions, the black artist began to take bold declarative initiatives, making definitive imagery, inspired by the specific conditions of the African American experience. Abstraction remained a critical issue for artists like Sam Gilliam. Gilliam's sense of color is modulated by his study of light, color, and its transformative and changing dynamics." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonioberto (talk • contribs) 20:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sam Gilliam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:03, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Death of Sam Gilliam - edits to this page

Unfortunately Sam Gilliam recently passed away. It looks like there have been a flurry of IP address edits to this page, including someone removing the photograph without an explanation. Any admins want to take a look at this page and sort out what edits were appropriate? --19h00s (talk) 12:58, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

I see no reason for administrator intervention. If, for example, you think the image should be restored, then do so.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Binstock and working w/ a dominant secondary source

Given Binstock's preeminence as a source here, and as curator and biographer, he deserves more of an introduction (at least in a footnote). I removed repeated phrases describing him as an art historian and curator to dedupe it, but he could use more context when first mentioned, or better yet his own article now that he's directing the Phillips.[1]

In sections where this is the single source for the time being (currently the 60s-80s), you might add section-level {{one source}} to flag it for readers. A supplementary source for key paragraphs can make a difference. – SJ + 20:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

Definitely, already have a Binstock draft on deck. And I've been trying to read through his interviews in the transcribed AAA oral histories to get more sourcing on his early years to help with that, but will definitely add in the one-source template if there's not much else to be found. 19h00s (talk) 05:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sam_Gilliam/Archive_1&oldid=1223495159"