User talk:AzitaS

Stained glass

With regards to Picasso and stained glass, I don't know of a single window designed by Picasso. He may have dabbled in this media at some time, but he certainly isn't famous for it. Marc Chagall is famous for his windows. Henri Matisse also designed several windows, and these were created by the Gemmaux technique. I think you may be muddled.

There is another problem with your edit. When you put it in, you inserted it between the details about Gemmaux glass, and the reference that supportd those details. This made it look as if your sentence about Picasso had a reliable reference (in this case, Britannica) but in fact that reference belonged to a different statement entirely. That statement was subsequently left without any reference at all, until someone who didn't realise what had happened, inserted a different one.

When you put in new info, have your reference ready. If you are not certain how to add it, leave a message on the article's talk page and someone else will fix it. Amandajm (talk) 07:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC) --AzitaS (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Picasso never realized any window in traditional stained glass as you rightly point out above. The Gemmaux technique being an innovative form of stained glass, we can certainly refer to Picasso as being one of the most prolific artist in this medium. Indeed he has produced about 50 Gemmaux between 1954 and 1956 in collaboration with Roger and Roland Malherbe-Navarre who perfected this technique by creating transparent enamel. Many other famous artists such as Matisse, Van Dongen and Braque created gemmaux and the first exhibition of their work took place in Paris in 1957. Thereafter an exhibition titled 'Les Gemmaux de France' was organized to show the gemmaux in the United States. The first exhibition took place in NY at the Corning Glass Museum and then at the Metropolitan Museum. The exhibit then toured the major American Museum between 1959 and 1961. A retrospective exhibition was held at the prestigious Galerie Charpentier in 1964 in Paris. I could provide a photo of one of Picasso’s gemmail, which would greatly enhance the description. What do you think?

Poster of the exhibition of the Gemmaux at the Galerie Charpentier in 1964

[1]

Article of the Time : A new Art

[2]

Signature of Picasso "a new art is born : Gemmaux"

[3]
[4]

Encyclopedia Britannica

[5]

Catalogue of the exhibition "Les gemmaux de France " at the Metropolitain Museum Library

[6]

Catalogue of the exhibition ‘Musée du Gemmail’, Raymond Nacenta, Galerie Charpentier, Paris, 1964 --AzitaS (talk) 22:46, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AzitaS (Marc? Antoine?)- Some of what you say above would be good material for the gemmail article, if we had good sources for it. You don't need to keep adding the same references to everyone's talk pages. A few of them are already in the article. But none of these sources shows that Picasso produced 50 works in gemmail. Eric ^talk 14:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Britannica reference says that works by Picasso were reproduced in this material. What I want to see is, not a reproduction of a painting, but an original work designed by Picasso specifically for gemmail. That poster that was used for the exhibition is a reproduction of a well-known painting of Picasso's youth. Amandajm (talk) 10:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This statement All the Gemmaux are original artworks designed and signed by Picasso, they are not reproduction. When Picasso discovered this new technique he decided to reinterpret his paintings in this medium, it was his choice. seems like nonsense to me.

The only Picasso gemmaux that I have been able to locate are reproductions in glass of other paintings that he had already done on canvas. These include the Harlequin, the Three Musicians and the portrait of Maya. None of these are "originall creations" in glass. All of them are based closely on the parent work, and in the case of the Maya, the glass even attempts to reproduce the appearance of brushstrokes in oil paint. I do not believe that Picasso, a supremely creative, prolific artist, wasted his time directing the meticulous "reinterpretation" (reproduction) of his works.

Picasso was so creative and his style evolved so rapidly that he is most unlikely to have revisited his older works and had them "reinterpreted" almost identically in another medium. What a wate of his creative time and effort! This wasn't the way that he functioned! If Picasso actually embraced the creative possibilities of gemmaux, then what we would be seeing is original designs that exist only as gemmaux and drafts/sketches. This would be a sign that Picasso really had designed for this medium. Maybe some original Picasso Gemmaux exist, but the portrait of Maya is not one of them. It exists as an oil painting. Amandajm (talk) 11:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by –MuZemike 20:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.