Talk:The Beloved (Rossetti)

Wiki Education assignment: Nineteenth-Century Art

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chaetz8 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Sia.chandras (talk) 03:14, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery in England

Re the sentence "Rossetti's criticism of slavery in England during his time" as slavery was abolished in England long before his birth, and throughout the British Empire in his childhood, that sentence seems odd to me. At the time the painting was done slavery still existed - in the USA, Turkey and Brazil for example and Rosetti may have been in England and criticising slavery, but in his time slavery was no longer in England. I suspect that in the artistic conventions of the time the child's lack of clothing implies they are a slave rather than a servant or family member, so he is depicting slavery. But the painting is not set in contemporary England, and the presence of the child and what they are wearing may be a reference to that. Ϣere SpielChequers 06:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, can't see the source, but "Rossetti's criticism of slavery in England during This time" might be what is meant" (ie whatever dreamtime the pic is supposed to be set in). I've fudged. It's not a well-written article, drawing on some rather dodgy contemporary criticism, I suspect. Johnbod (talk) 15:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the "in England" bit is simply misleading. Rosetti was painting in England, but this as you note was clearly not intended as an English scene. It isn't obvious to me whether this criticises, acknowledges or celebrates slavery. At that time English opinion was sharply divided between those who boycotted Southern cotton and those who had sympathised with the South. If Rosetti was making a political statement, was he normalising slavery? Or condemning it by depicting a child with less clothing than would be acceptable in that era? I don't know, nor indeed do I know the symbolism of the flowers held by the other ladies. But it wouldn't surprise me if the choice of flowers was as important to Rosetti as the child's déshabillé. Ϣere SpielChequers 00:03, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I removed "in England" I think. The rather rich jewellery argues against the child being a slave at all, but 21st-century academia often can't see images of black people in any other light. The long-departed editor also is quite capable of inaccurate summary of whatever the paper says. Johnbod (talk) 05:26, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Or a bit of product placement. The way that jewelry is shown front on rather than as if it was lying flat on that child's chest looks like a deliberate error to clearly show off the jewelry. Ϣere SpielChequers 07:49, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I revised the section to better summarize the claim in the cited source. I should note that the editor is not "long-departed" as User:Johnbod says, but was working on this article within the last few days as part of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. I would ask you to be welcoming and respectful of student editors! Owunsch (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake! I thought this was by the original editor, ten years ago. In fact I see the recent student editors have removed some referenced stuff by him, which seems unwise - I would ask them to be respectful of him. In fact respect on wp has to be earned, and is never guaranteed. Johnbod (talk) 04:42, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the African child, one of the ladies at the back has a complexion that also adds to the diversity of the composition. Have the critics picked up on that? I suspect the flowers had a symbolism at the time that may also have been part of Rosetti's composition. The child is holding pink roses and one of the ladies red lilies. Not sure what the other red flowers are. Ϣere SpielChequers 20:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the last 20 years the critics have picked up on nothing else! See the article as it now is. And indeed the EB1911 critique. They're not bothering much about the flowers (lots of them in S of S). Johnbod (talk) 04:43, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that the third woman in the top group looks very north Indian to me, and is certainly the darkest of the adults. But I'm rather distrustful of critics assigning ethnicities based purely on visual appearance, so I probably shouldn't do it myself- especially when only 1/3 of the face is shown. I find it unlikely that the woman on the right was intended to be seen as a Romani, even if we know the model actually was one. Johnbod (talk) 05:30, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]