Talk:Cleopatra and Caesar (painting)/Archive 1

Issues and errata

• The usual discrepancies have arisen. This is an attempt to document it:
  • The title of the work has changed over the years, and there is also some confusion with the sketches and preparatory oil paintings that do not represent the main work.
  • The painting was started in 1865 and completed in 1866. Some sources report otherwise.
  • Jean-Léon Gérôme visited Egypt. Dates vary, but 1857 was confirmed by Whiting in a footnoted source. It is very likely that Gérôme visited Egypt several different times, hence the varied dates.
  • At least one source claims that the painting influenced Cecil B. DeMille's Cleopatra (1934), but I only add material I can verify myself rather than relying on unproven claims that might as well be false. As of yet, I have been unable to verify this claim, but there are several sources that may provide additional insight.
    • In response, I've added Amy Crawford's article from Smithsonian which addresses this point quite well, noting that the carpet scene has appeared in almost every film production about Cleopatra. Viriditas (talk) 01:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Temporarily removed for the moment. Viriditas (talk) 00:33, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
    • The 2010 Getty lecture series also covered this topic, but whether they were transcribed, digitized and uploaded is a question I'm looking into. Viriditas (talk) 20:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Partly confirmed in Imagining Ancient Cities in Film (2015) although the footnotes are not as good as they should be. He refers to Richards' Hollywood's Ancient Worlds which in turn cites Ackerman. Viriditas (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• • I believe that professor Scott Trafton is the author of the introductory material that prefaces the Earl Shinn review, but unless I can actually prove it, I am referring to him as the "American Egyptomania project at George Mason University".
  • Christopher Pelling provides the history of the Plutarch translation issue.
  • The review of the exhibition at the 1871 Royal Academy reads quite scathing to my modern eye, but other sources suggest the painting was well received. It is difficult to fully agree with this statement. In fact, considering the criticism and denigration of Orientalist painting that occurred after this date, one wonders if this work was ever fully accepted as an "acclaimed" painting. The argument that it was well known holds true, but for reasons that my not be complementary. At least one source tentatively suggests some kind of close relationship between the culture of the Reconstruction Era (1865-1877) Southern United States and the positive reception. This deserves further research.
  • It is generally assumed that the Royal Academy Dictionary cites the Cleopatra and Caesar work, but for some reason, at least one source seems unclear on this matter. I'm curious if there has been some debate about whether the primary work or the secondary variations were instead shown. This is unclear.
  • Whiting's argument about the possible influence of Gérôme's painting on Shaw's play is highly speculative.
  • Who was Lucy H. Hooper? Was she just a journalist as Wikipedia seems to suggest or was she an art critic?
  • Ackerman provides a most comprehensive (and definitive) summary of major exhibitions and related information, but I only have partial access to the source. I may have to request it or keep searching for a copy.
  • Larger social issues inherent to this painting (mistreatment of women, slaves) is partially covered in several sources, but quite poorly. I have temporarily left this social commentary out of this article until I can find better material to directly address it. Because these issues tend to overlap with the usual criticism of Orientalism in general, it may be easier to stick with the latter rather than the former due to the higher quality of criticism.
  • Questions about provenance continue to arise, and without full access to Ackerman, the provenance is unclear and several sources contradict themselves. I'm working on fixing this asap, particularly 1) the role of Mills (if any, as according to several sources, he was the original buyer, whereas other sources disagree), and 2) who owns the work at present. According to the Sotheby's website, the painting appears to have recently been sold to a private buyer. I don't know if this is accurate or not.

More later. Viriditas (talk) 07:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

"One of two notable depictions"

What is the wording of the source for The painting was one of two notable depictions of Cleopatra from the nineteenth century along with Cleopatra and the Peasant (1838) by Eugène Delacroix? Cleopatra was a favourite topic of 19th-century history painters, since (along with Venus, Musidora and Godiva) she was one of the four topics in which scantily-clad women were considered historically justifiable; having just written The Triumph of Cleopatra, and being aware of Cleopatra Testing Poisons on Condemned Prisoners, The Death of Cleopatra, Alma-Tadema's Cleopatra and Meeting of Antony and Cleopatra, Waterhouse's Cleopatra, Moreau's Cleopatra, Coomans's Cleopatra and Bridgman's Cleopatra on the Terraces of Philae—as well as assorted paintings of Shakespeare performances—this claim is, to say the least, surprising. ‑ iridescent 10:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

It just says "Notable 19th-century examples include Delacroix's Cleopatra and the Peasant (1838) and Gérôme's Cleopatra and Caesar (1866)", so it has been over-de-close-paraphrased. Belle (talk) 11:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm open to suggestions, but my understanding is that, at least in the case of this painting, it became far more "notable" in the public imagination due to Gérôme's relationship with Goupil and the mass reproduction of this work, making it widely available and noticed. Can the same be said for any of the above? Viriditas (talk) 20:44, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

“See The Spectacular Art …”

This footnote, at the moment #2 under References, isn’t very helpful without publication details or a URL. Was it intended to cite the Musée d’Orsay exhibit?—Odysseus1479 05:24, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Yes, and as I said in the edit summary, I was on mobile at the time and couldn't format it. I'll have it fixed later tonight. Viriditas (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Odysseus1479: I've fixed and improved the source.[1]. Viriditas (talk) 02:56, 24 October 2015 (UTC)