238:, a descriptive term that most artists listed within reject. This happens. As for Bourriaud being the sole theorist, even if this were true, I'm not convinced that this would disqualify the term on its own. Having said that, if the consensus is that the term is premature for the template, I wouldn't argue the point further. A quick google search seems to show that term is fairly wide-spread as an international descriptive term, if not outright movement. But the article doesn't reflect that at the moment. Am I putting the cart before the horse? Possibly. I still think it should stay, as it seems odd that there are no 21st century art movements. As an educational tool, wikipedia should include some newer terms (as long as they are legit, referenced and so on). As for videogame art, I feel that there is enough evidence that that is now firmly established critically and theoretically.
22:
581:
template: the three periods have little in common with each other, and I doubt someone reading about one period will wish to immediately jump to reading about another. It's also inherently exclusionary (the "racism" angle is just the tip of this), and produces too long of a template to be useful. A separate template for each would be best, since it limits the scope to the reader's likely topic of interest and is in line with templates for global artistic production (eg.
71:
53:
81:
234:
been hoping to work on. As for the inclusion of the term in this template, I feel that it is applicable. As for whether the artists describe themselves as part of this movement, that may not be a necessary qualification as it is not unusual for artists to deny a descriptive or categorical framework (i.e. pigeon-holing them as one thing). I've been working on an article for the
441:
movements are considered non-Western, Hispanic
American art movements are considered non Western, Asian American art movements are non-Western... Oh, and all American countries aside from the US are considered non-Western, regardless of their actual history, demographics, or culture. Whatever definition of "Western" this template uses is incoherent. I'm changing it.
529:
template, its blatantly
Eurocentric (and essentially colonializing) historical timeline. After that, we only have to deal with two smaller things: the definition of "Western" to use in the premodern template, and how to deal with 19th-century "movements" (stemming from Neoclassicism, Romanticism, Realism) that are before modern art but behave more or less like it.
580:
Ha, ha, I was so gung-ho with my edits this morning because I was afraid of being accused of racism! It is absolutely an issue with the template as it stands, but not the only one. Moral allegations aside, I think it's utter nonsense to list modern, contemporary and premodern
Western art in a single
506:
I agree about the shortening, but turning this into a global template would greatly extend it. Other global regions have their own templates, which it would just duplicate. The whole concept of an "art movement" is rather dubious, and normally not a helpful way to think of art before about 1800. 272
491:
Something I think would be appropriate would be to first list all major pre-Modern/traditional art movements of the world, organized by region and time period, and then list Modern Art movements organized by region and time period, without overtly organizing movements as "Western" and "Non-Western."
458:
I've made a few provisional changes. If I had more time I would have better developed the presentation of traditional art traditions and maybe distinguished regions better. I made an
African & Diasporan art section for the early modern category but I'm not sure if that's actually the best way of
647:
I have attempted to rectify this (and other related problems) by replacing the "non-Western" section with two new ones, one for colonial art and one for art borrowing
Western elements. I hope that these new categories sidestep the Western/non-Western dialectic that made this template such a mess in
524:
I sign off on this, the definition of "Western" used in this template is incoherent and skews racist. I was the one who expanded the template so much, and I admit that I had a great amount of trouble trying to discern what and what not to include. Like you said
Johnbod, the issue is in the premise:
440:
This template needs to be changed. The whole structure in which it categorizes art movements as either "Western" or "non-Western" is incredibly racist. According to the current scheme, "Western Art" applies only artists from the United States or Europe, so long as they're white. Black
American art
233:
may apply here, but I think that the term may now be bigger than just
Bourriaud's ideas. There's been some acknowledgment by others that the term is applicable to a number of artists. Granted, the actual article on relational art is meager and needs much improvement, but this is something I have
631:
At this time 18th and 19th
Century art movements in the Spanish Empire, depicting Roman Catholic imagery and primarily following European artistic norms, are listed as "non-Western" art movements, while the "Hudson River School" movement, an American movement depicting landscapes from the Hudson
528:
I propose that we split this off into two (or perhaps three) templates: one covering the things that happened before modern art (which we could call "Western art periods"), and one (or two) dedicated to modern and contemporary art. That alone will get rid of the most problematic thing about this
487:
I didn't add them, I moved them from a former section of the template listing "non-Western" art movements to a section listing art movements by century. Without the dichotomy of "Western" vs "Non-Western" Art movements their inclusion is a bit random though, I agree. This whole template probably
588:
The template does need paring down in some areas (mainly the modern and contemporary sections, which have a lot of small, unimportant movements), but reverting back to March 2021 would be too much, I think. That revision retains all the problems of the current one, with the addition of being
213:
Relational art is a movement only theorized by
Nicolas Bourriaud, it does not seem to be widely accepted. Most of the movements under its banner are already on the template. I'd like more evidence that the artists themselves claim to be relational artists before it can be on the template.
525:
identifying an "art movement" is problematic before about 1800, and identifying "Western art" is problematic after about 1500. There is no period or situation where "Western art movement" is a remotely usable concept, let alone one suitable for an encyclopedia.
566:. Strongly implying that all editors who worked on the navbox since its 2005 inception are racists seems, at a minimum, a bit point-of-view, and at a maximum, ban worthy. Please change the insulting title of this section to something discussable.
420:
Does Superflat, a Japanese movement, really belong on a template about Western art? Is there some kind of broader Western participation (besides the SoFlo strain of the movement, which has its own article) that I’m unaware
372:
184:
These movements should be in succession according to the years they occurred. I moved Pop Art after Abstract expressionism for example. Someone should correctly reorder the movements according to their times.
610:
I have removed everything I could find in this template that I thought was suggestive of racism. I hope it should be passable now, unless we feel a strong need to split it in three or something similar.
395:
507:
articles use this, btw - who is going to remove the inappropriate ones. It wouldn't break my heart to delete it, or restrict it to after some date. Few people look at these btw.
409:
662:
I would also classify Latin American art, especially from the period mentioned along as part of Western Art. Specifically movements heavily influenced by European culture etc...
368:
592:
Once again, I feel that splitting into three separate templates — one each for Western, modern, and contemporary — will best serve the interests of Knowledge's readership.
492:"Western" is too complex a topic to use to categorize subjects in a template like this (Previously, the Harlem Renaissance was categorized as a Non-Western art movement!!).
536:). It might be best to remove all mention of more recent art from this template, and move the text about it to these preexistent templates. That would save some time.
626:
632:
valley in the US, is depicted as a "Western" art movement. So, what's the difference between these two movements that makes one Western and the other Non-Western?
376:
641:
289:
259:
268:
and feel there is ample evidence that other critics are using the term. The article still needs works, but I hope to continue early next week on it.
563:
155:
337:
142:
686:
331:
223:
430:
671:
303:
691:
203:
575:
468:
657:
620:
601:
450:
516:
501:
482:
545:
353:
103:
141:
I'd hesitate to call outsider art a "movement" or distinctly western phenomenon. Does it really belong on the template? —
174:
145:
391:
94:
58:
189:
208:
415:
167:
302:
I thought I'd just check in... I didn't see Feminist art movement in the template. Currently there's only the
387:
297:
194:
33:
435:
667:
582:
358:
325:
102:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
336:
276:
246:
39:
532:
I believe modern and contemporary art already have some templates of their own (for example
637:
571:
533:
497:
464:
446:
8:
663:
653:
616:
597:
541:
426:
405:
219:
400:
Just added it as a subcategory of Art Nouveau, as part of a larger edit adding detail.--
86:
512:
478:
349:
313:
269:
239:
230:
364:
235:
136:
633:
567:
493:
460:
442:
161:
309:
Is it because there's not a broader, more universal article about Feminist art?
649:
612:
593:
537:
521:
Thank you theBOBbobato for opening this thread, because this needed to be said.
422:
401:
265:
215:
680:
179:
171:
152:
508:
474:
473:
And you've added Mughal and Japanese 17th-century "movements" because....?
345:
383:
200:
99:
564:
March, 2021, when entries and the scope were easier to find and navigate
166:
Made a separate template for Russian art, since its not really western:
186:
70:
52:
80:
344:...is still missing. Who would like to help creating it?--
589:
unnecessarily selective of what movements are included.
98:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
76:
678:
488:needs to be revised, and shortened quite a bit.
562:Maybe the template should be reverted back to
199:Why break out only the 20th century topics
627:What makes Latin American art "Non-Western"
304:Feminist art movement in the United States
32:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
151:I suppose you're right, Ive removed it.
369:2001:8003:4085:8100:54EF:1164:446F:F09F
679:
92:This template is within the scope of
21:
19:
15:
687:Template-Class visual arts articles
306:, which I'm working on right now.
38:It is of interest to the following
13:
14:
703:
112:Knowledge:WikiProject Visual arts
692:WikiProject Visual arts articles
115:Template:WikiProject Visual arts
79:
69:
51:
20:
264:I've been working on expanding
168:Template:Russian art movements
1:
672:12:37, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
175:04:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
156:04:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
146:23:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
106:and see a list of open tasks.
332:03:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
7:
10:
708:
621:20:02, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
483:05:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
469:04:37, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
459:representing the subject.
451:02:46, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
377:06:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
260:00:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
224:16:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
190:07:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
658:16:32, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
642:13:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
602:18:24, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
576:14:55, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
546:13:46, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
517:15:09, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
502:13:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
431:20:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
410:20:48, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
396:15:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
64:
46:
583:Template:Ukiyo-e artists
388:Neoclassicism Enthusiast
354:11:39, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
290:16:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
204:16:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
436:This template is racist
209:Removing relational art
95:WikiProject Visual arts
416:Does Superflat belong?
382:Isn’t it included in
298:Feminist art movement
534:Template:Avant-garde
363:Can someone add the
195:19th Century Topics?
118:visual arts articles
87:Visual arts portal
34:content assessment
648:the first place.
229:On the one hand,
134:
133:
130:
129:
126:
125:
699:
365:Vienna Secession
359:Vienna Secession
328:
322:
321:
286:
283:
280:
273:
256:
253:
250:
243:
236:Vancouver school
120:
119:
116:
113:
110:
89:
84:
83:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
47:
25:
24:
23:
16:
707:
706:
702:
701:
700:
698:
697:
696:
677:
676:
629:
438:
418:
361:
342:
326:
315:
314:
300:
284:
281:
278:
271:
254:
251:
248:
241:
211:
197:
182:
164:
139:
117:
114:
111:
108:
107:
85:
78:
12:
11:
5:
705:
695:
694:
689:
675:
674:
664:Homerethegreat
660:
628:
625:
624:
623:
607:
606:
605:
604:
590:
586:
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
530:
526:
522:
489:
437:
434:
417:
414:
413:
412:
398:
360:
357:
341:
335:
299:
296:
295:
294:
293:
292:
266:Relational Art
210:
207:
196:
193:
181:
178:
163:
160:
159:
158:
138:
135:
132:
131:
128:
127:
124:
123:
121:
104:the discussion
91:
90:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
704:
693:
690:
688:
685:
684:
682:
673:
669:
665:
661:
659:
655:
651:
646:
645:
644:
643:
639:
635:
622:
618:
614:
609:
608:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
584:
579:
578:
577:
573:
569:
565:
561:
560:
547:
543:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
520:
519:
518:
514:
510:
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
490:
486:
485:
484:
480:
476:
472:
471:
470:
466:
462:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
452:
448:
444:
433:
432:
428:
424:
411:
407:
403:
399:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
380:
379:
378:
374:
370:
366:
356:
355:
351:
347:
339:
334:
333:
329:
323:
320:
319:
310:
307:
305:
291:
288:
287:
275:
274:
267:
263:
262:
261:
258:
257:
245:
244:
237:
232:
228:
227:
226:
225:
221:
217:
206:
205:
202:
192:
191:
188:
177:
176:
173:
169:
157:
154:
150:
149:
148:
147:
144:
122:
105:
101:
97:
96:
88:
82:
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
49:
45:
41:
35:
31:
27:
18:
17:
634:theBOBbobato
630:
494:theBOBbobato
461:theBOBbobato
443:theBOBbobato
439:
419:
362:
343:
318:CaroleHenson
317:
316:
311:
308:
301:
277:
272:freshacconci
270:
247:
242:freshacconci
240:
212:
198:
183:
165:
140:
93:
40:WikiProjects
29:
384:Art Nouveau
338:Lombard Art
109:Visual arts
100:visual arts
59:Visual arts
681:Categories
568:Randy Kryn
231:WP:CRYSTAL
650:Marisauna
613:Marisauna
594:Marisauna
538:Marisauna
423:Marisauna
402:Marisauna
312:Thanks!--
216:Jedravent
172:Cfitzart
153:Cfitzart
137:Outsider
30:template
509:Johnbod
475:Johnbod
346:Liuthar
162:Russian
143:thames
36:scale.
421:of?--
279:speak
249:speak
187:Ethii
180:Order
28:This
668:talk
654:talk
638:talk
617:talk
598:talk
572:talk
542:talk
513:talk
498:talk
479:talk
465:talk
447:talk
427:talk
406:talk
392:talk
373:talk
367:? --
350:talk
327:talk
220:talk
170:---
386:?--
340:...
683::
670:)
656:)
640:)
619:)
600:)
585:).
574:)
544:)
515:)
500:)
481:)
467:)
449:)
429:)
408:)
394:)
375:)
352:)
330:)
285:me
282:to
255:me
252:to
222:)
214:--
201:dm
185:--
666:(
652:(
636:(
615:(
596:(
570:(
540:(
511:(
496:(
477:(
463:(
445:(
425:(
404:(
390:(
371:(
348:(
324:(
218:(
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
