Jump to content

Talk:Art of the American Southwest

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

European

[edit]

it seems to me that the subject heading following Mexican should be "American" rather than "European". What would European be rather then Spanish-Mexican or American. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well hello, we've not chatted in awhile. Great catch! How is Anglo-American for you? If you think that shorter American is better, that's fine.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:25, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see you again. Anglo-A is fine. So is this article just for Native art? If so, it should be reflected in the title. Otherwise the Taos School aka Taos Society of Artists and all those Anglos will end up here.

Yep, the content is under discussion - one proposal is to just have indigenous people.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

also

[edit]

I'm wondering about copyright issues. I think anything done after 1923, except if there is some WPA art, is possibly under copyright. Or do we just forge ahead and let the river flow whre it may? Carptrash (talk) 01:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course we don't want to ignore copyright law. I have assumed that images that are in wikipedia articles, from commons are good to go. Probably not a good assumption. Is there something in particular that you're aware of was never put into public domain?
I can do an audit of all the images, but it would be good to know if you have particular knowledge of a copyright issue. Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For the items that are unclear if they were made before 1923, I am checking whether there is a copyright release or the articles are in the public domain and adding a comment (<!---- comment..... --->) after the image. So far, I've not found anything that is a copyright issue, but if I do, I'll remove the image. If you do know already, though, of something that is a copyright issue.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:26, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done If you go into "edit" mode, you'll see a comment for each image and it's copyright release / public domain status based upon the information for that file.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wooah. You move fast. I was thinking about Pablita Velarde. I have pictures (somewhere) of some murals she did in Albuquerque, and was wondering about the one in this article. It seems to have been done while she was employed by the Federal Govt., in which case it is in the public domain. I doubt that this is true about Maria Martinez's pot. As I understanding it, images of works located in museums are owned by the artist or their heirs. So that pot was done in 1929 so could conceivable still be under copyright. Or might not be. Even images of statues in public places are covered by copyright. The USA is sort of an anomaly in this respect, in Europe, for example, if a work is in a public place it is fair game. I have been collecting images of works by Bob Houzous, Allan Houser's son, which are all over Santa Fe (an hour away), but am going to have to find and contact him in order to use them here. Both father and son would be nice additions to the article because they bring the article right up to now. Carptrash (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the best way to address this at the commons site, so that image is removed and stopped from being used in all places? I'm not sure how to do that in the commons, but I assume that there are similar types of tags for copyright issues as there are for wikipedia.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also also

[edit]

I grabbed one of the images on your page (1874, so no copyright issues) and stuck it here [1]. Let's see how long that lasts. Oddly, the last image on that page is mine. I noticed the kokopelli shot here - that acknowledgment is fun for now, it doesn't have to go along with the article when it is posted. Carptrash (talk) 17:29, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice! (ledger art for Sand Creek massacre article)--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Items removed

[edit]

There were some items removed because the artwork was said to be external to the Southwest.

1. Ute Indians were said to be of the Great Basin and not the Southwest, yet in prehistory the Utes ranged over Colorado and are the only Native American tribe to have reservations in Colorado: The Southern Ute Indian Reservation and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe reservation. 2. Ledger Art was removed because it was considered primarily Plains Indian work of art, but the example shown was of the Sand Creek Massacre, which was in southeastern Colorado. I have read that Ledger Art sprang up in the plains, but was it unique to the plains?

Does anyone have an opinion about whether or not Ute Indian artwork or Ledger Art should be included here?

By the way, I've been using roughly the Four Corners definition of Southwest from the Southwestern United States article.--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regions are defined by geography, environment, and culture. The southwest region is bounded in the north by the Great Basin and in the east/north by the Great Plains.
Prior to its revival in the 1960s/1970s, ledger art (which has its own well-cited Wiki article) was exclusively a Plains Indian artform as listed in three common surveys of North American Native American art: David W. Penney's North American Indian Art (2004), Janet C. Berlo and Ruth B. Phillip's Native North American Art, and Christian Feest's Native Arts of North America (1992). (Penney 114-117; Berlo and Phillips 122, 125–6, 213; Feest 52–3, 98, 156). Cheyenne people, the victims of the Sand Creek Massacre, came from the Great Lakes region prior to European contact, but after the arrival of the horse, they have been Plains Indians (Penney 116–7; Berlo and Phillips 110; Feest 102).
The Smithsonian's Handbook of North American Indians is probably the most authoritative scholarly work covering cultural regions north of Mexico. Utes and Paiutes are covered in Volume 11: Great Basin (1986), in such essays as Callaway, Jentski and Stewart's "Ute" (336–367), Kelly and Fowler's "Southern Paiute" (368-397), Liljeblad and Fowler's "Owns Valley Paiute" (412–434), and Fowler and Liljeblad's "Northern Paiute" (435–465). This volume is cited in Indigenous peoples of the Great Basin and Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas#Canada, Greenland, United States, and northern Mexico#Great Basin, both of which include Utes and Paiutes. A good reference book for general readership is Pritzker, Barry M. A Native American Encyclopedia: History, Culture, and Peoples. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Pritzker lists Utes are belonging to the Great Basin on pages 242–246 and Paiutes as being Great Basin peoples on pages 223–233).
Possibly the quickest, easiest reference for Native peoples and their cultural regions is the Smithsonian NMAI's Cultural Thesaurus, which helpfully lists the large number of Southwestern tribes, many of which have not been written about yet here. Folks might also check out Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas#Canada, Greenland, United States, and northern Mexico#Southwest; however, that section includes Mexico, while this article is focused in the US. -Uyvsdi (talk) 02:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]
BTW whenever the contemporary section gets developed, Michael Horse could be added, since he's probably the only notable ledger artist from SW tribes. -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]
Thanks so much for weighing in! And providing such great reference information! I don't know why, I couldn't get the Smithsonian link to work - which I think would have been very helpful!
The only thing I strongly question is the Utes. I have written about the Utes and am aware that they came from the Great Basin before they came to the Southwest - but the Ute people are now largely located in southern Colorado and eastern Utah, which is the Southwest, right? It could be that I am missing something, because it seems you are more knowledgeable about these things than I am.--CaroleHenson (talk) 04:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Peoples definition of "the southwest" is going to differ, but Wikipedia goes exclusively by what is published in reliable, secondary sources. Regions are cultural as well as environmental and geographical. The literature on Utes predominantly identifies them as being Great Basin peoples, as opposed to Southwest peoples. A parallel example would be the fact that Allan Houser is considered Southwest, even though he was born in Oklahoma on the Southern Plains. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]
Ok.--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources that include Utes in Southwestern art collections include:

Does that help, or do we need some more citations? Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:15, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The bottom one is the only one that says they are SW, but that's good enough. BTW I changed some of the headings - they still could use more fine-tuning (for instance, dolls etc could be considered sculpture), so feel free.-Uyvsdi (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]
Ok, cool. Thanks.CaroleHenson (talk) 19:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ledger art

[edit]

Regarding "BTW whenever the contemporary section gets developed, Michael Horse could be added, since he's probably the only notable ledger artist from SW tribes. -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi:

Please feel free to make the additions that you'd like for Michael Horse; it sounds like you have an idea of how to expand the article further.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are hundreds more notable SW artists; I just mentioned Michael Horse if someone *really* wants to include ledger art. -18:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Ah. no that's ok.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where might I find a list of notable Southwestern artists?
I think that there's a list of Native American artists and their state, so I'll look for that.--CaroleHenson (talk) 19:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citation style

[edit]

I see that we've introduced short citations (Help:Shortened footnotes). I have no preference how we notate citations / references / bibliography, but it would be great to get agreement so that there is consistency throughout the article.

When a new section is started (References) to capture many uses of the same source, there are different schools of opinion about:

  1. Whether all "notes" should be in short citation format?
  2. Just those that are books?
  3. Just those that are books used many times.
  4. Just those that are sources (book, website, etc.) used many times.

Any votes for how we should handle this article? Thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:35, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shortened footnotes for books not website - especially when a book is cited multiple times. It makes it easier to quickly glean info. -Uyvsdi (talk) 00:20, 18 April 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Art of the American Southwest. 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) 17:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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) 07:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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) 04:14, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Art_of_the_American_Southwest&oldid=1163541832"