User talk:Cellorando

Sources for Bruno Bjelinski

Hello, good work on Bruno Bjelinski, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. From what websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Bruno Bjelinski? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? You can simply add links, or see WP:CITET if you wish to review some of the different citation methods. Thanks! BRIAN0918 00:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sheer Genius

Those were my words, alright. I think I have a fuller discussion at artistic inspiration, but what I was doing was trying to discuss criticism rather than artists themselves (although I think they follow and lead the critics). In essence, I was trying to survey critical thought on genius, and, since 1945, the discussion of genius has quieted considerably. There is far less discussion of or attribution of "genius" and much more value given to technique and ability. I didn't want to break away from a discussion of criticism to a discussion of movements in the modern era, but, had I wanted to, I think the thesis would have been the same.

Modernism had a quite Romantic insistence on genius. (Brache, Duchamps, Picasso, Dali, and Man Ray all saw themselves as separate from the rest of humanity in genius. The bicycle seat with handlebars is a bull because it was done by an artist. The urinal on the wall is art if done by an artist, because what artists do is art.) Abstract Expressionism is a genius-centered movement too. The agony of the individual emotion, the freeze-frame of a single gesture of feeling, is captured in a purely affective display.
Poetry has a good analog with this. The "High Modernists" (Poud, Eliot, Yeats) were seers, geniuses, prophets. Those who followed them, the Confessionals and the Beat Poets, were just as addicted to the language of genius, although they sneered at it. Sylvia Plath's "Daddy" requires you to know her biography, just as a Pollack painting makes you know his soul at that moment. Ginsberg's "Howl" may heap manure on seriousness, but he's a genius doing it.
Since these two movements, post-modernism has emphasized skill, collage, awareness of the medium and the technique itself. Pastiche and concrete music, found music, found art, all ask people to note the skill, the impersonal expression of the personal. The creator is clever, not stricken by Dionysius. The L=A=N=G=U=A=G=E poets turn from communication of philosophy to communication of the means of communication and questioning it.

So the answer is, yes, I've observed it. Absolutely: I think we're in a technical age and not a genius age. In the article, though, I was trying to stick to "what the critics say" and so I chickened out and said, basically, "fewer critics talk about genius and imagination being superior to skill these days." I didn't want to say there was a movement in that direction as much as a running out of steam of the Romantic genius theory. Geogre 22:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isidre Nonell

I was appalled to find no article on Nonell in the English Wikipedia. He was one of the greats of that period. It is very probable that Picasso, whom he lived with in Paris, got his Rose Period and Blue Period from Nonell. The various images available on the Internet do no justice at all to the expressiveness of his colors. He said profound things, even with light blues and pinks. In fact, it comes out rather dark.

I hope articles will be written in other languages; French and Dutch would be a good start.

Cellorando (talk) 20:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Casadesus/J.C. Bach

Hi, Cellorando: I don't have a score of that Casadesus "J.C. Bach" concerto, but I do see that someone has uploaded parts of it to IMSLP. Although these are not public domain in the U.S. or E.U. and are not the complete score, there is publisher and date information that should help you get a copy from a public library or music dealer. Good luck! -- MollyTheCat (talk) 09:04, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Cellorando. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by NtheP (talk) 21:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey

Teahouse logo

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:11, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Vatroslav Lisinski.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Vatroslav Lisinski.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:57, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]