Jump to content

Talk:The Thinker

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

Untitled

[edit]

Looks like some of the content is plagiarized from this site, or vice-versa.

http://www.statue.com/the-thinker-statue.html

Other places

[edit]

Isn't there one in Waldemarsudde, in Sweden? Like, one of the originals? 58.248.226.156 (talk) 08:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just got back from the North Carolina Museum of Art in Raleigh, NC. There's one there! Along with many other Rodins. Nice museum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.111.224.89 (talk) 21:58, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalized Statues

[edit]

I know that the statue in Cleveland was partially destroyed by a bomb in the 1970s (or so I was told as a child), but I'm looking for an official source so that the information can be added to this page. The only information that I have to that effect is having actually seen the damage to the sculpture. SailorAlphaCentauri 15:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The outdoor version of The Thinker at the Cleveland Museum of Art (CMA) was damaged on March 24, 1970. CMA describes this at The Thinker Vandalized and Conservation Issues: The Thinker P. Kalina 216.193.51.1 (talk) 01:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Updated link: "Thinker re-thought". Cleveland Museum of Art. Retrieved 11 February 2015. JohnCD (talk) 12:22, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Size

[edit]

How big is it? Cutler 19:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Model?

[edit]

Is it known who the model was? --04:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

There probably wasn't one. 24.225.131.191 01:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pineal gland

[edit]

I've reverted an anonymous unsourced assertion. If Rodin was aware of the pineal gland in producing this sculpture it needs to be tied to his voluminous correspondence or other published material. --Wetman 08:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Real sculpture?

[edit]

There's a Rodin exhibition [1] near me (Belgium) from 31st March to 1st July 2007. Is it likely to be the real "The Thinker" sculpture or a copy? Pgr94 15:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Original casting

[edit]

How is this the original if there is the neolithic version? Or is it the way its worded. Sure its impressive though the original is far more intriguing. I believe the original statue is the one at the University of Louisville campus, not the one in the Rodin museum. http://louisville.edu/uoflmagazine/summer-2008/masterpiece-among-us.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.142.140.55 (talk) 21:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the casts of The Thinker produced under Rodin's supervision are originals. According to the Cleveland Museum of Art at The Thinker at the CMA, there are twenty-five large casts of The Thinker of which fewer than ten were produced during Rodin’s lifetime. P. Kalina 216.193.51.1 (talk) 01:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link now at [2] Johnbod (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two first casts?

[edit]

Which one is the first cast, the one at the Rodin Museum or the one at Louisville Uni? They can't be both, unless one is the first cast of one kind and the other is the first of a different kind. In any case, clarification is needed. --Quarconi (talk) 23:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

monumental?

[edit]

How big exactly is "monumental"? If the exact size is not mentioned, how are we supposed to believe if it even qualifies as such? 85.217.21.121 (talk) 18:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Thinker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Thinker and David

[edit]

Great article! There are some comparisons to be made with Michelangelo's David. Both nude of course. David is standing, The Thinker is sitting. David is physically fit and verile, but not nearly as masculine as Thinker. I would love to see more scholarly research added, comparing the male nude art form to other sculptures.Juneau Mike (talk) 17:36, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How many casts?

[edit]

The second lead paragraph says '28' full-size casts (I removed 'about', as this should be an exact number). Accurate or off-count? The page List of The Thinker sculptures has a different count. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re:"Some critics say..."

[edit]

Re:"Some critics say..." Download : https://www.nga.gov/content/dam/ngaweb/research/publications/pdfs/european-sculpture-19th-century.pdf (Warning:file size= 100 meg). More accurate info than cited in this wiki article. This article would benefit from being corrected. 19:35, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Internal Inconsistency

[edit]

Measurement of figure at Museé Rodin - inconsistencies in text. Opening section lists 72 inches as size. Origin section cites 72 centimetres (vastly different!) Also, the opening segment dates the sculpture as 1904, but in the Origin section declares the stature was enlarged to 181cm (which is close to 72 inches) in 1902.

I don’t know the correct information, but the inconsistencies are problematic. To whomever can amend the article, I offer my thanks. AllTheWordliness (talk) 09:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]