Talk:Georges Seurat

I can see why this was marked for cleanup way back when - there is a massive treatise on the scientific technology of the day, much bigger than the story of Seurat's own life. That section was originally only two paragraphs, but I've added another. It seems as though the article was written more with displaying the scientific influences on Seurat rather than the more well-known artistic influences, which are barely (if at all) mentioned. I'm not really sure what to do about that, so more insight into this would be very helpful. -Aeinome 06:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The explanation of the scientific influences might fit better into the Pointillism article. I started to extract it, but it is written with a Seurat focus and I didn't get very far. >>sparkit|TALK<< 03:34, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi GUYS

Scientism in Seurat's Work

You pointed a general problem about the interpretation of Seurat's work: in the literature before the 1990's, Seurat's art is often mentioned as being exclusively science oriented. It is only recently (and especially in Herbert, 2004: Seurat and the making of La Grande Jatte) that the work of Seurat as been formally situated amongst artists of his time.

This article mentions that shortly after Seurat's death in 1891 that a second son was born (name unknown) - this is a major surpirse to me! I have read nowhere that Seurat had a second son. I doubt if this statement is correct. What is the evidence? 203.12.30.146 01:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC) Nick

Evidence that Seurat had two sons?

This article mentions that shortly after Seurat's death in 1891 that a second son was born (name unknown) - this is a major surpirse to me! I have read nowhere that Seurat had a second son. I doubt if this statement is correct. What is the evidence? 203.12.30.146 01:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC) Nick