Talk:Isabella (Millais painting)

Don't mention the shadow of the arm.[edit]

In November 2012 the Liverpool museums page said (but doesn't say ist anymore): "[...] On the table there is spilled salt, symbolic of the blood which will later be spilled. The shadow of the arm of the foremost brother is cast across this salt, thus linking him directly with the future bloodshed. [...]". The URL was http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/online/pre-raphaelites/lorenzo/symbolism.aspx

In June 2013 I noticed that in the new page the "shadow of the arm" is gone: "[...] salt, symbol of life, is spilt on the table; [...]"

--DL5MDA (talk) 07:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Humm, that's just about when Carol Jacobi expounded her theory that the shadow is an erect penis. Paul B (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In 2016, the phallus finally made it into the WP article, but I don't think that Jacobi "discovered" the phallus. She just addressed what has been entertaining visitors to the Walker Art Gallery for a long time already: “The gallery staff at the Walker Art Gallery have been mischievously pointing it out to (adult) visitors for years : )” (2012-09-10, https://twitter.com/stella_louise/status/245277137966350336) --DL5MDA (talk) 11:43, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable[edit]

The "Subject" section says

"Millais and his colleague William Holman Hunt had both produced drawings illustrating episodes from the poem, but only Millais worked his up into a full painting"

The article on Isabella and the Pot of Basil looks like a pretty finished work to me. Any reason why I should not remove this claim?

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 21:33, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, perhaps because it's true. Hunt's painting, created two decades later, is completely unrelated to his drawing. Look it up. Paul B (talk) 22:13, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So Hunt didn't do any preliminary drawings for Isabella and the Pot of Basil? Just started painting from scratch?

Sorry, I'm only a fan of the PRB, not an expert, so I apologize if I seem ignorant here.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 15:46, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hunt did not generally make extensive preliminary drawings, no, especially in his later works. See Judith Bronkhurst's Catalogue raisonné. However, whether he did or not is completely irrelevant to this issue. The drawing referred to in the article is one of an intended series that Hunt and Millais produced with the vague plan of publishing an illustrated edition of the poem. Hunt drew a scene of Lorenzo at work in the office of Isabella's brothers. He's portrayed as a dreamy clerk sitting at his desk, catching a glimpse of Isabella. In the background the brothers are ruthlessly pursuing their business interests. It has no connection to the later painting, the composition of which in fact seems to derive from a sculpture by Thomas Woolner. Paul B (talk) 16:03, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article only says "Millais and his colleague William Holman Hunt had both produced drawings illustrating episodes from the poem, but only Millais worked his up into a full painting." I'm sure you can understand my confusion, given that this certainly seems to contradict the existence of Isabella & the Pot of Basil. Could you perhaps add some of the details you mention here, or rework the sentence to eliminate the appearance of error? I'm not qualified.

Thanks,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 00:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added "...(Hunt's 1868 Isabella and the Pot of Basil used a completely different composition)." but fiddle if you like. Johnbod (talk) 11:18, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Not gonna touch it. Maybe if I go off and study the PRB for a couple of years after I'm retired...

Thanks,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 16:53, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've scanned and uploaded the drawing (at the top of this section). As you can see, Hunt's 1849 drawing has no resemblance to his 1868 painting. It is, though, directly related to Millais' picture - with the same pastiche-medievalising compositional devices, such as the single figure squeezed at one side; the angular flat forms defined by sharp outlines, and the Hogarth-like busy-ness and satirical edge. Even the two spiky greyhounds are in both pictures. Very different in style to the lush, erotic "aestheticism" of 1868. Paul B (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

The Dinner Party, Sam Walsh, 1980.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Splendour Oracle Isabella[edit]

Splendour Oracle Isabella 2.97.157.27 (talk) 12:56, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Splendour Oracle Isabella[edit]

Splendour Oracle Isabella 2.97.157.27 (talk) 12:56, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]