Humanities desk
< July 14	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 16 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 15

Have you....

Heard of The Renee/Rene Society? One of my kin, who was a police officer told me about it. Supposedly, it is similar to NAMBLA, only that they target girls and boys. I've also seen reports of this on some old magazines as well. IF this is "for real", can this be sourced and used? Supposedly this org is into kiddie porn, worse. Thanks. 🤐😘🥰 Nuclear Sergeant (talk) 03:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe see René Guyon Society, and then take some Syrup of ipecac. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nuclear Sergeant, the juxtaposition of those emojis with your final sentence — wouldn't have been my first choice. Folly Mox (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to convey how sick the Rene Society founder was and how great the Wikipedians are on here. 🥰 Nuclear Sergeant (talk) 05:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven't. What is your question to the ref desk? Can this be sourced and used for what? Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that a cop told me about this org, and I've seen some old magazine articles on it as well. I was trying to find out if it was for real, still around. The mags were not pornos, just really old mags. I don't know if the magazine publishers are still around. You'd be amazed by what you may find at a garage sale, estate sale. Thanks guys. 😘🥰 Nuclear Sergeant (talk) 08:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unless those publishers went into retirement you should be able to find their active status quite easily if you only tried. --Askedonty (talk) 08:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All sources indicate it was one guy publishing an irregular newsletter with wildly inflated membership claims. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 03:13, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Madame Théodore Charpentier

I've run into a bit of a mystery with an 1869 painting by Renoir titled Madame Théodore Charpentier. Most wiki articles have her connected to the family of Georges Charpentier and Marguerite Charpentier, but I think this is an error of some kind. I don't see how Madame Théodore Charpentier could be connected to this family of the same name because 1) the couple weren't married until 1871, 2) Renoir didn't start painting for them until the mid-1870s (I suspect his first painting for the family was in 1876), and 3) the Le Cœurs were still patrons of Renoir at this time, perhaps all the way up until about 1874. On the other hand, I did find at least one obscure source written by someone I've never heard of before, a Lawrence Hanson, who I think was an art historian. He wrote a book that I've never seen cited anywhere else titled Renoir: the Man, the Painter, and His World (1968). In this book, he claims that in the summer of 1869, Renoir met Georges Charpentier at a party. Again, this is all very odd, as no other source mentions this. Being as curious as a cat, I looked at Hanson's source for this claim which didn't match anything in his bibliography, so there's no concordance; it's either a misprint of a listed source or, well, I don't know what. All in all, very, very weird. So, back to square one. Who is Madame Théodore Charpentier? Viriditas (talk) 09:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing very meaningful that I can find with Google, except that the Musée d'Orsay website says that until 1924, the painting was owned by the family of "Marie Charpentier (modèle)". [2] Alansplodge (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's helpful. The Charpentier family tree doesn't list Madame Théodore Charpentier, Théodore, or a model named Marie. I think it's a safe bet that someone made an error, and that Charpentier is a common name in France. I think it's highly likely that Madame Théodore Charpentier is somehow connected to the Le Cœur circle of acquaintances, and not to Georges Charpentier. I think it's best if I start by removing it from all the categories and articles connected to the Charpentier family, since she isn't a member of that family. Viriditas (talk) 10:14, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update: your linked provenance helped me solve the problem. Madame Théodore Charpentier is Marie Pauline Charpentier (1802–1875), wife of Théodore Charpentier. Her daughter is Marie Le Coeur. Thanks again. Viriditas (talk) 10:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You just beat me to it (edit conflict):

Douglas Cooper explained that this commission, however, was obtained through Renoir's friendship with Jules Le Couer, not Georges Charpentier. Jules' brother, Charles, married Marie Charpentier, whose father was the architect Theodore Charpentier. It is a portrait of Marie's mother.

Snay, Cheryl Kathleen (1991); Renoir and the Charpentiers: The symbiotic nature of the artist/patron relationship p. 19. This seems to be an MA thesis, the start of which is here.

The Douglas Cooper article is Renoir, Lise and the Le Cœur Family: A Study of Renoir's Early Development - II: The Le Cœurs which is sadly not readable on JSTOR as "this article is not available for free online reading".

Alansplodge (talk) 10:28, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, you're the best, Alan. Viriditas (talk) 10:29, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

C'est rien. Alansplodge (talk) 10:37, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Me again. I was able to access the JSTOR article through The Wikipedia Library:

In March 1866 he was engaged in a large portrait of Mme Joseph Le Cœur, mother of Jules, which he suddenly abandoned to go off with Le Cœur and Sisley on a painting trip. (p. 164)

Alansplodge (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Although that’s an entirely different person and painting, I appreciate your commitment and follow through. Viriditas (talk) 02:01, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! Alansplodge (talk) 08:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Old people and babies look alike. I always get them confused! Viriditas (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lost work of Maurice Ravel

Hello, The wikipedia page of Ravel's works lists the composition entitled "Saint François d'Assise" as lost. Please find the work. Just kidding. Though I would appreciate if anyone could rummage and discover any insight or contemporary commentary/descriptions of the peice.

Thank you 2600:1700:3D74:F010:EDF5:5857:F017:AB23 (talk) 11:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Les Fioretti de saint François d'Assise oratorio or cantata, 1909–10? anyone know what the 'M59' identifier refers to? fiveby(zero) 15:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

oh, M59 is Marnat, Marcel. Maurice Ravel : l'hommage de la Revue musicale, décembre 1938. OCLC 18361015. fiveby(zero) 15:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, these are evidently numbers allocated in: Maurice Marnat, Maurice Ravel (Paris: Fayard, 1986). Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could a reader of French take a quick look here p. 142, 195-6? Just Planned? Manuel de Falla a meme declare (Revue musicale, 1939) qu'une des parties avait ete ebauchee : le Sermon aux oiseaux fiveby(zero) 16:41, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That makes it sound like it may indeed not have been written or at least not completed. The first mention without year says that he talked about putting the Fioretti (Little Flowers of St. Francis) to music. The second with the year 1932 says that he had a lot of projects: Don Quichotte à Dulcinée (probably M84a the unfinished M84), Jeanne d'Arc (probably the unrealized M86), Morgiane (probably M85 sketches only), Le Grand Mealnes (I found nothing corresponding to this) and an oratorio after the Fioretti. And the statement by Manuel de Falla, that a part of the latter had been drafted: Sermon aux oiseaux (Sermon to the birds). -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 17:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Only see snippet views of Hélène Jourdan-Morhange Ravel et nous cf. for Sur l'amour de Ravel pour les oiseaux and Ravel au miroir de ses lettres. Thanks Random, it's unfortunate we can't get the text for Revue musicale 1939. this suggest Manuel de Falla might tell us something of the planned work might survive in "Les entretiens de la Belle et de la Bête" (second part of the Finale?) from Ma mère l'Oye. Someone might try Gallica again, or WP:RX if it could be article content. fiveby(zero) 15:38, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I found the text by Manuel de Falla on Gallica[3]. He says that Ravel talked about writing a piece about Francis of Assisi at the time he wrote Daphnis et Chloé (1909-1912) and that he thinks he remembers that Ravel had written a the sketch of the Sermon aux oiseaux. He further speculates that Ravel used that sketch in the second part and the final of Ma mère l'Oye (1910-1911) "of which the beginning has such a beautiful religious character" according to de Falla. He gives no indication that Ravel told him he used it like this. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 17:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More in Nichols, Roger (2011). Ravel. p. 114. which cites Manuel de Falla (1979). On Music and Musicians. p. 96. and a personal letter from it:Domenico De' Paoli which must be where there is mention Les entretiens? I'm lost as to which part of Ma mère l'Oye authors are referring to. fiveby(zero) 18:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

De Falla says second part and finale, Nichols names these as Petit Poucet and Le jardin féerique. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is The Queen's Gambit book set in the 60s?

Seeing that the book was first published in 1983 and that nowhere in the article about the book it is mentioned that it is set in the 1960s, I wanted to ask if the book is actually set in the 80s and the miniseries being set in the 60s was a creative choice of its creators.

Thanks in advance 109.242.60.18 (talk) 14:05, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can read the book at archive.org here (you need to open a free account). On a quick scan through it was difficult to pin down an exact chronology, except that when the heroine is 8 years-old, Major Hoople is mentioned, a comic-strip character from 1921 to 1984, and when 13 years-old, I Love Lucy is mentioned which ran from 1951 to 1957 (although I expect repeats were shown for much longer). Also as a young adult, she leaves for Russia from John F. Kennedy International Airport, which puts it after 1963. Alansplodge (talk) 16:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The U.S. Championship described in the novel was partly modeled after the 1975 Championship in Oberlin, Ohio, which Tevis attended. Soltis, Marcy (May 1983). "Chess: A Novel Idea" (PDF). Chess Life. pp. 288–9. Wonder if anyone has recognized the games which were constructed around the actual moves from nineteenth-century tournaments. fiveby(zero) 22:46, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet's Northern Boundary in 1820

Hello, I would like community input on two maps of Tibet in 1820. The northern boundary of Tibet in the two maps is wildly different. Which one is reliable, if either? And if neither or only one is reliable, what should be done? Or could both be right, despite the fact there are two different boundary lines? Thanks. Geographyinitiative (talk) 15:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought was that cartography wasn't an exact science back then, but a political one. Who drew each map would probably be a good place to start, and perhaps drop the assumption that one is "right." DOR (ex-HK) (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some maps here. The boundaries being largely mountainous, sparsely inhabited and lacking any sort of international recognition until the early 20th century, it seems likely to me that you might not find a definitive answer. Alansplodge (talk) 17:17, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into this and thinking about this. I totally agree with @DOR (HK):(ex-HK)'s comment that cartography was not an exact science until much later. I also agree with @Alansplodge: that there may not be a definitive answer. So the question is, if DOR and Alan are right: how should Wikipedia handle these two maps? Are they both "good enough" to show Wikipedia readers? Should they both include some kind of disclaimer, so that people don't think these are boundaries like a modern, clearly defined border? Wikipedia is a platform for fearlessly providing citation-based, reliable information. If that northern boundary was uncertain, why not add some kind of disclaimer on these maps directly, so people are not misled into thinking these lines are more than they are? Then a citation for that disclaimer could be added either on the image or on Wikimedia Commons. Thanks again! Geographyinitiative (talk) 17:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The traditional Wikimedia Commons policy is that if there's legitimate real-world dispute or uncertainty, then images reflecting both sides can be uploaded, and then it's up to each individual Wiki-project to decide which images to use. AnonMoos (talk) 18:32, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not only cartography. There are also different (yet related to its fuzziness or inexistence) rules in policy, such as, relationships are established between administrative centers without much worrying about the linear delimitation between their respective territories. See U-Tsang Military Commission. During a period indeed, part of taxation from Shaanxi went to Tibet, or was considered as coming from Tibet: Mt Wutai. --Askedonty (talk) 18:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should this question also apply to File:Qing_dynasty_and_Manchuria.jpg, File:Qing dynasty and Mongolia.jpg, File:Qing_dynasty_and_Qinghai.jpg, and File:Qing dynasty and Xinjiang.jpg? These are all used (as well as the "Empire of the Great Qing" map) in Qing dynasty in Inner Asia. Who are Kallgan and Cartakes (given as the authors of the images)? Oh, they're Wikimedia/Wikipedia usernames: here's commons:User:Kallgan. Card Zero (talk) 23:32, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nowadays, we are used to a world consisting almost entirely of nation states with fixed borders and mutually recognized frontiers. That is a relatively recent situation (even for Europe, let alone elsewhere). As recently as the 1960s, the borders between Saudi Arabia and the various sultanates and emirates to its east were unsurveyed. The farther back you go, the more of this you have to take with a grain of salt. - Jmabel | Talk 00:29, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]