Talk:Académie de la Grande Chaumière

Foundation and early professors

The Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana says Escola privada de belles arts, fundada a Montparnasse (París), al carrer del mateix nom, pel pintor català Claudi Castelucho el 1904. (Private school of fine arts, founded in 1904 in the street of the same name in Montparnasse (Paris) by the Catalan painter Claudi Castelucho.) But the Claudio Castelucho article says "[...] in 1905, became one of the first group of Professors at the Académie de la Grande Chaumière, founded by Alice Dannenberg and Martha Stettler", citing a book by González and Martí.

The Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana and the book by González and Martí conflict about when Castelucho started teaching at the Académie, and by implication whether he founded it. When there is a conflict between sources we should make a judgement on their relative reliability. Unfortunately, the González and Martí book is not available online, but it its publisher does not appear to be prominent ([1]), its authors do not have articles on English or Spanish Wikipedia, and a Google search on their names does not suggest that they are prominent in this field. I have looked for more sources on the Académie in Oxford Art Online and Encyclopedia Britannica without success. I think we should favour the Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana, and credit Castelucho as the founder.

Regarding Alice Dannenberg and Martha Stettler, I have not seen a source that confirms that they taught at the Académie. This is not mentioned in their Benezit articles. We do not have a source for the 1909 date. However, the Claudio Castelucho article cites a source for them having taught in the early years of the Académie. We cannot cite that source here (don't cite a source you haven't inspected, WP:SWYGT), so I suggest we give their names with {{Citation needed}}. I propose the following:

The school was founded in 1904 by the Catalan painter Claudio Castelucho on rue de la Grande Chaumière in Paris, near to the Académie Colarossi. The painters Martha Stettler and Alice Dannenberg became professors soon after the school was founded.

In cases like this there should not be a problem with leaving a {{Citation needed}} tag in the article indefinitely; it identifies something for which there is reasonable evidence but for which the editors have not found a citable source. I have omitted the citation of La Revue Septentrionale because it does not appear to add anything that is not already sourced. Or have I missed something? I have not described Claudio Castelucho as a "painter and sculptor" because his Benezit article does mention his sculpture and I can find no sculptures by him using Google.

Verbcatcher (talk) 20:49, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

See [2], only in German it seems--DDupard (talk) 20:59, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes that confirms that Dannenberg and Stettler taught at the Académie from 1909. I don't understand German, but this does not appear to say that they founded the Académie (I was using Google Translate). If I understand it, it says that Dannenberg, Stettler and Lucien Simon jointly directed the Académie from 1909.

González and Martí are more prominent as Carlos González López and Montserrat Martí Aixelá [3], and their book is here. However, in view of the Sikart source I think we should say that Castelucho was the founder. I suggest:

The school was founded in 1904 by the Catalan painter Claudio Castelucho on rue de la Grande Chaumière in Paris, near to the Académie Colarossi. From 1909 the Académie was jointly directed by the painters Martha Stettler, Alice Dannenberg and Lucien Simon.

Verbcatcher (talk) 21:24, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

References

Académie Charpentier

What is the relationship between the Académie de la Grande Chaumière and the fr:Académie Charpentier?

This source indicates that the Académie Charpentier originated from the acquisition of the Académie de la Grande Chaumière by the Charpentier family in 1957. The Académie Charpentier homepage has a link to the Grande Chaumière website. The contact page of the Grande Chaumière website says Les ateliers de la Grande Chaumière sont proposés par l'Académie Charpentier (The workshops of the Grande Chaumière are offered by the Académie Charpentier). I interpret this as indicating that the Académie de la Grande Chaumière is now a subsidiary school (perhaps a brand) of the Académie Charpentier. The Académie Charpentier provides formal tuition leading to qualifications, and the Académie de la Grande Chaumière provides free workshops and evening classes.

The Académie Charpentier it merits its own article, because it is an active university-level institution. If my analysis is correct the material on the Académie de la Grande Chaumière should form a section of this new article. At that time we should consider whether to move the lists of students and teachers into a separate list article. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Académie de la Grande Chaumière has a name and a place in art history. Charpentier acquired the school (and the name). From a business stand point, the owners are riding on the Grande Chaumière name and perceived reputation for communication sake.

Wikipedia has 19 interwiki-versions of page Académie de la Grande Chaumière, including Chinese and Russian, the global architecture of interlanguage links of pages per same subject should be respected for consistency and coherence reasons among others.--DDupard (talk) 08:54, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Académie de la Grande Chaumière does have a place in art history, but the lack of coverage elsewhere suggests that it was not of the highest significance. Whatever the Charpentier family’s motivations were in 1957, I see no evidence that that they are now "riding on the Grande Chaumière name and perceived reputation". This heritage is not stressed on the Académie Charpentier website or on the Académie de la Grande Chaumière website.

The existence of corresponding articles in other Wikipedia languages should not restrain us from renaming or reorganising articles in English Wikipedia, that would be a recipe for stagnation. A redirect from "Académie de la Grande Chaumière" would take its place among the articles in other languages. In this case, none of the articles on these academies in any language is of significant size, and it is more than possible that no other Wikipedia editor has investigated the relationship between these academies.

We should first try to establish the basic facts, then write an article on the Académie Charpentier, and then, if appropriate, merge the articles. The Académie Charpentier does not emphasise its heritage, but I found this on one of their documents:

Fondée en 1945, l’Académie Charpentier, dont les espaces sont situés dans le quartier légendaire de Montparnasse, fête ses 71 ans cette année. Sa filiation remonte à l’ancienne Académie Suisse du quai des Orfèvres, fréquentée par Delacroix, Manet, Pissaro, Cézanne, au dix-neuvième siècle, puis transformée en Académie Colarossi, en 1870. C’est à cette date que ses locaux sont installés rue de la Grande Chaumière. Reprise en 1957 par la famille Charpentier, elle devient aussi héritière de l’Atelier de la Grande Chaumière, qui lui est adjoint en 1958 par Pierre-Louis Charpentier. Forte de cette tradition étroitement liée aux arts plastiques, l’âme de l’école et son atmosphère si particulière ont traversé les décennies.

— Académie Charpentier, Livret de l'étudiant 2016/2017

Please check my inexpert translation:

Founded in 1945, the Académie Charpentier is located in the legendary district of Montparnasse and celebrates its 71th anniversary this year. Its origins go back to the Académie Suisse on the Quai des Orfèvres, which in the nineteenth century was frequented by Delacroix, Manet, Pissaro and Cézanne, and which in 1870 became the Académie Colarossi in the Rue de la Grande Chaumière. Reopened in 1957 by the Charpentier family, it [the Académie Charpentier] inherited the workshops of the Grande Chaumière, which were incorporated in 1958 by Pierre-Louis Charpentier. With a strong tradition in the visual arts, the soul and atmosphere of the school have crossed the decades.

I think this indicates that the Académie Suisse became the Académie Colarossi, and that its workshops in Rue de la Grande Chaumière were incorporated into the Académie Charpentier in 1958. This conflicts with what we say here, that the Académie Colarossi and the Académie de la Grande Chaumière were seperate institiutions, both located in the Rue de la Grande Chaumière. Our version is only supported by a very poor-quality source, an article on caberet in a weekly "What's on" tourist guide from 1930 which says that they were then located near to each other. Can we find a better source to establish that the Académie de la Grande Chaumière was seperate from Académie Colarossi, and not simply its successor?

The best description I found is again from GEC: [4] , that is to say from 1870 to 1904 = Colarossi, from 1904 to circa 1957= Grande Chaumière, from 1957 to 2016 = Charpentier. Each (academie) giving a specific and particular style and coloration to their approach.

Unless Benezit, Oxford Index, Britannica are all wrong, the editors of those encyclopædias make a clear difference between them, by naming either Colarossi or Grande Chaumière.

The role of Wikipedia is to report, repeat or "regurgitate", it is not to publish new extrapolation(s), nor jugements about "very poor-quality source", "suspicions", etc, etc, --DDupard (talk) 06:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for finding that source. I disagree with your interpretation of it. It says: Académie Colarossi, 2nd half of 19th century until at least 1914; Académie de la Grande Chaumière, founded 1904. Where did your other dates come from? This source indicates that the Académie Colarossi and the Académie de la Grande Chaumière operated as separate institutions from 1904 until at least 1914. This does not necessarily contradict the Académie Charpentier's Livret de l'étudiant, because the Académie Colarossi and the Académie de la Grande Chaumière might have merged sometime between 1914 and 1957.

Benezit, Oxford Index, Britannica mention these institutions by name, but possibly for different years. If an Académie changed its name or was absorbed into another then these sources would probably just give the institution's name at the relevant date.

I agree that we should not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. However, it is acceptable to discuss such inferences on talk pages, see here. I my experience it can be a useful technique: postulating what seems likely to be true sometimes uncovers a good source that confirms or contradicts it. However, I strongly disagree with one of your points: an important role of Wikipedia editors is to make judgements about the quality and reliability of sources. For this topic we should not rely on "Caberets et dancings, la plaisante vie de Montparnasse", this citation should either be removed or tagged. Verbcatcher (talk) 19:22, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

? What are you talking about?

We could also remove every thing #history or even delete the page entirely.--DDupard (talk) 22:10, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

By "combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources" I am referring to drawing conclusions such as "the Académie Colarossi and the Académie de la Grande Chaumière merged sometime between 1914 and 1957". This could be inferred by combining material from the Livret de l'étudiant source and the Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana source, but we should not put this in the article because it is not stated in either source. However, it is worth raising as a possibility on the talk page because somebody may find a source to confirm it or rule it out.

By "an important role of Wikipedia editors is to make judgements about the quality and reliability of sources" I am referring to Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. If a cited source is insufficiently reliable to establish the relevant facts then the source and/or the main text should be tagged, to alert readers that the information does not meet the level of dependability to which Wikipedia aspires, and to ask other editors to make improvements. If a source is totally unsuitable then it can be removed. The text that purports to be supported by the questionable source should not be deleted just because it is inadequately sourced (except for contentious material about living people). I see no problem with some tags remaining in article indefinitely, they are not a demand for immediate action and they should not be interpreted as a criticism of the editor who introduced the source.

Or are you asking about something else? Verbcatcher (talk) 23:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I dont see the point: 1) you are citing a primary source (i.e. Grande chaumière website) 2) you want to tag the ref. publisher "Office du Tourisme et des Congrès" City of Paris - 1930 i.e. Visitor information.... And yet you have not fixed the lead sentence in the article about the "artist from Wales. !!!??? --DDupard (talk) 23:19, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

The website of an institution discussing its history is not a primary source. WP:PRIMARY says "Primary sources are original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved." I assessed the article from the tourist leaflet as an poor-quality source largely based on WP:CONTEXTMATTERS: the article is about cabarets and dancing, it only mentions our topic in passing. Also, tourist leaflets are typically less well fact-checked than encyclopedias or "serious" newspapers. We cite this source to establish that two Académies were located near to each other. I have a better source for this which I will add later.

Since you persist in referring to an unrelated page, describing Iwan Bala as an artist is accurate. One of the meanings of "Artist" in the Oxford English Dictionary is A person skilled in a visual art, as painting, drawing, sculpture, etc. Wictionary defines "Artist" as A person who creates art, and "Art" as The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colours, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the senses and emotions, usually specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium. In idiomatic English "Artist" usually means a painter, a graphic artist or a sculptor (except in a musical context, where it means a performer.) With many contemporary artists the traditional divisions between painting, drawing and sculpture are blurred. Iwan Bala is known for painting, drawing and 3D assemblages. The lead paragraph should be a summary of the article, and "artist" encompasses these artforms.

I have found some new sources.

The Académie de la Grande Chaumière was founded in 1902 by Martha Stettler and operated drawing classes at 14 rue de la Grande Chaumière until its sale to the Charpentier family in 1957; the school is now called the Académie de la Charpentier. The Académie Colarossi was founded by the sculptor Filippo Colarossi, who purchased a school established in 1815 on the Île de la Cité and relocated the academy to 10 rue de la Grande Chaumière in the 1870s; the school closed in the 1930s, and Madame Colarossi destroyed the school's archives.

— Hans Hofmann: The Artist's Materials by Dawn V. Rogala

Although it was located in rue de la Grande-Chaumière, it should not be confused with the Académie de la Grande Chaumière in the same street, a few doors away, but an entirely separate establishment.

— Artist Biographies: Académie Colarossi

The Artist Biographies website appears to be acceptable for citation: it is prepared "by a team of historical and biographical researchers" and appears to have some level of editorial oversight. Their article on Académie de la Grande Chaumière says that it was founded in 1902 by Martha Stettler.

We now have conflicting sources for the foundation date (1902 and 1904) and founder (Martha Stettler or Claudio Castelucho). I think we should continue to follow the Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana with 1904 and Castelucho. Verbcatcher (talk) 01:42, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

References

Names removed from article

• André Dauchez, Bénézit article does not say that he was a student
• Jean-François Desrousseaux de Vandières, unlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online,
• Beba Zemborain, redlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online,
• Georges Artemoff, redlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online,
• Arnold Geissbuhler, redlinked, Bénézit stub article does not say that he was a student,
• Martha Haffter, redlinked, Bénézit stub article does not say that she was a student,
• Willy Jordan, redlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online,
• Gottlieb Kurfiss, redlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online,
• Max Uehlinger, redlinked, Bénézit stub article does not say that he was a student,
• Bertha Züricher, redlinked, Bénézit stub article does not say that she was a student,
• David Birmingham, redlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online
• Joseph Alexander Akerman, Jr, redlinked, no article in Oxford Art Online,
• Alirio Oramas, redlinked, Bénézit stub article does not say that he was a student,
  

• Amedeo Modigliani, not mentioned as student here in the linked article, or in his articles in Benezit and Grove Art Online
• Maurice Denis, not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked article, or in his articles in Benezit, Grove Art Online and Oxford Companion to Western Art
• Charles Guérin, not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked article, or in his article in Benezit
• Fernand Léger, not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked article, or in his articles in Benezit, Grove Art Online and Oxford Companion to Western Art
• Émile-René Ménard, not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked article, or in his article in Benezit.
• Bernard Naudin, not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked French article, or in his Benezit article.
• Jean Toth (1899-1972) (as a teacher), not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked French article. No article in Oxford Art Online.
• Olga Boznańska, Not mentioned as a teacher here in the linked article, or in her article in Grove Art Online.
• Lino Enea Spilimbergo, not mentioned as student here in the linked article, or in his article in Benezit
• Serge Gainsbourg, not mentioned as student here in the linked article, or in his article in Oxford Music Online
• Pascual Navarro, not mentioned as a student here in the linked Spanish article, or in his article in Benezit

List reintroduced without some comments by --DDupard (talk) 09:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)