Talk:Baroque architecture

Ŝ

---

Examples of baroque architecture Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

Since Ghirlandajo repeatedly removes examples from Lithuania and asked for explanation, here you go.

While both St. Peter and St. Paul church in Vilnius and Pažaislis monastery in Kaunas are indeed outstanding for their architecture, the primary point for having them mentioned in the article is that they exemplify geographic diversity of baroque in the Commonwealth. Nevertheless, both are important and deserve separate articles on their own. The Pažaislis complex is one of the most magnificent examples of Italian baroque in Eastern Europe both for its outside and interior. Unfortunately some of the stukko inside were damaged when Russians closed the monastery in 1832 and converted it later into an Orthodox church. Nevertheless the church was renovated in 1970s and remains famous for its exterior architecture and the fresco in its dome. Vilnius has abundance of baroque churches, St. Peter and St. Paul basilique is mentioned as an example only. It is outstanding primarily for its extremely rich stucco decorations. --Lysy ^(talk) 09:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, now is see that these churches deserve a mention. If you think they deserve separate articles, you are welcome to start them. --Ghirlandajo 09:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)fak you fak you fak you

Deletion

Spanish baroque is not only Churrigueresque, and Churrigueresque is not only superficial decoration. Correcting this aspects is possitive for an overview of the Style. Ghirlandajo, please, ask before deleting. See User_talk:Ghirlandajo. --Garcilaso 17:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Garcilaso, you need to spend some more time around to understand that I mean to harm. I have to ambition to deprecate your additions in any way. They are good, but this article cannot include all details about every baroque palace in Europe. As it is, the coverage of Iberian Peninsula is way too long and out of proportion to the rest of the article, though I will try to make amends when (and if) I expand it further.

That's why I split Spanish Baroque into a separate article. You may expand it as long as you wish. As a sidenote, I mention only the most comprehensive examples of any particular brand of baroque architecture. If you read carefully, you will see that both Aranjuez and Palacio Real are mentioned in the text *twice*. This is a singular honour bestowed on no other building, though many are suprerior to these in originality, fame, and/or influence on future architects. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 18:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, again, I am glad to see that at last you decided to stay. Of course, my edition was not related to "all details of about every Baroque palace". I understand what a brief overview means, and you are right in saying that Aranjuez and La Granja are already mentioned, which surprised me for the "importance" given to them as you say, but surprised me more for they were mentioned in other countries sections and not in Spanish one ¿?. Well that can be superficial, not transcendent, and I don´t pretend an edition war (in fact, my second edition, was different, attending to you, abridged, and incorpored grammar corrections to the text, and have been just deleted by you. Please, cool off, and tell me if I am wrong adding references to a complete vision of Churrigueresque. The text, as it is by now, says that Churrigueresque is a mere facade decoration with no valuable space resorts, and this, no matter how prolific is one at Wikipedia, is just false, or what is the same, an mistaking incomplete personal view, not a precise, enciclopedic overview. I would like to spend my time in editing and filling voids, and, perhaps, one day be as wise and respected in this Enciclopedia as you, but I cannot if everything I write in "your" articles is blindly deleted and I must spend all my time in writing to you. Thank you for understanding--Garcilaso 18:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Resuming, in possitive: I think most of my edition (references to Granada Charterhouse and Transparente, reference to Madrid brick Baroque, grammar corrections of all the section and a short (if you want, much shorter) reference to the Bourbonic construction, must stay. Lagranja and Aranjuez as quotated in other countries(¿?) could be out, and references to Royal Palace of Madrid could be deleted form Scandinavia(¿¿¿¿????) and quotated in Spain. What do you think about this solution? See you!--Garcilaso 19:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Let me disagree that mentions of your pet palaces should be omitted from other sections, just because you want to expand the coverage of Spain at the expense of other sections. When I write articles, I take care to provide a logical flow. Let's say all we have to say about what you term International Baroque in one place, not take up the subject again and again in every new section. Furthermore, this article was plagued by selective approach, as every new editor attempted to add more data about the country he lives in, without any regard for the structure of the article in general and the logical flow of the text. Please pity our readers. I don't want to see the article plunged into this sad state again. That's the reason why I set up Spanish Baroque, French Baroque, English Baroque as separate articles: everyone wishing to expand the coverage of these regional variations, should add new details to those articles and not here. If the editros like you will come here and add new details ad infinitum, I shall be forced to follow WP:SIZE and obliterate the coverage of all regional varieties from this article at all. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

This is to notify that having tried to communicate with Ghirlandajo in all the ways in my hand (writting here, in his talk page and in his talk page in Russian Wikipedia), and havig received no answer to my arguments, I proceed to resore my last edition and remember Ghirlandajo the oficial policy Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. I will not accept latter accusations of "revert warring" if not answered.--Garcilaso 14:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Garcilaso, I don't contribute in this project as actively as I used to be, but if you continue revert warring, I will be forced to leave this particular page in disgust, although my expansion of the page is far from being over and I entertained plans of rewriting sections about Baroque architecture in Central Europe, Ukraine, and Russia. For the umpteenth time, once I start to expand an article that had been neglected and required cleanup for months, there appear editors who start to push their own POV by hook or by crook. I see that you still fail to understand that it's normal practice to branch off important subjects into separate articles. I don't know why you persist in your efforts to put some dubious assertions into this generalized account of vernacular Baroque styles, rather than to enlarge upon the subject in Spanish Baroque or Spanish architecture. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 15:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Madrid Baroque

Let's review Garcilaso's additions:

In Madrid, a vernacular Baroque with its roots in Herrera and in traditional brick construction was developed in the Plaza Mayor and in the Royal Palace of El Buen Retiro. This sober brick Baroque of the 17th century is still well represented in the streets of the capital in palaces and squares.

Please don't try to bring the article to the level of a Madrid guidebook with this touristy stuff. You live in Madrid, don't you? I wouldn't say that Madrid is the most Baroque of the European cities and that its importance for the development of the style should be highlighted in a separate passage. We should rather add separate passages about Prague or Munich, whose Baroque heritage is even more impressive, and then the article will be endless. I illustrated Madrid's baroque architecture with its most ingenious structure, Hospicio de San Fernando. The capital may have many other fine Baroque structures but so do other Spanish cities. I don't think that Madrid is exceptional among them and that El Buen Retiro stands out as beyond comparison from the European perspective. It's hardly instructive to mechanically list Baroque structures of Madrid, especially if you may see the likes of them in other parts of Europe. One striking - from the architectural/artistic not town-planning/touristy point of view - example is enough. All the rest should go to Spanish Baroque or to Madrid. That's where your passage should be moved. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

However, Churrigueresque baroque offered some of the most impressive combinations of space and light with buildings like Granada`s Charterhouse, considered to be the apotheosis of Churrigueresque styles applied to interior spaces, or the Transparente of the Cathedral of Toledo, by Narciso Tomé, where sculpture and architecture are integrated to achieve notable light dramatic effects.

I keep this passage, although its proper place is Churrigueresque and the Transparente should be discussed in the article about Baroque sculpture rather than architecture. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The Royal Palace of Madrid and the interventions of Paseo del Prado (Salón del Prado and Alcalá Doorgate) in the same city, deserve special mention. They were constructed in a sober Baroque international style, often mistaken for neoclassical, by the Bourbon kings Philip V and Charles III. The Royal Palaces of La Granja de San Ildefonso, in Segovia, and Aranjuez, in Madrid, are good examples of baroque integration of architecture and gardening, with noticeable French influence (La Granja is known as the Spanish Versailles), but with local spatial conceptions which in some ways display the heritage of the Moorish occupation.

The Royal Palace, a derivative structure of little originality, is mentioned for the fourth time in the article! That's what I call maltreating the readers. La Granja is indeed too French to be mentioned in the brief outline of Spanish Baroque and its indebtedness to "the heritage of the Moorish occupation" is not apparent to me. As for the "Spanish Versailles", every European state of the time, from vast Poland and Russia to the political dwarfs like Anhalt and Mecklenburg, boasted its own "Versailles". If you think it's amusing to turn the article into an endless list of Baroque residences, adding that Nordkirchen is known as Versailles of Westphalia and Mannheim was the Versailles of the Palatinate, that Herrenhausen was the Versailles of Hanover and Schleissheim Palace was the Versailles of Bavaria, etc, etc, I think this idea is exceedingly boring and refer you to "The Would-Be Versailles" section of Versailles Palace. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 16:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Answer to Ghirlandajo

Hallelujah! At last Your Higness descend to my level and argue with his wide knowledge, and not only with force arguments! This really a good step, and I encourage you to continue in this way, but better next time before some weeks of authoritary unexplained reversions. Now, let's see how solid are your arguments. I will start with content and then I will answer on form:

1-Madrid. Again you establish yourself as the Only Truth Owner. Madrid may not be the most Baroque City in the World, but its inclussion in this article has nothing to do with "touristic stuff", but with impression that in a general overview, the characteristical local branches should be quotated. If other cities deserve more attention, please, don`t neglect "your" article and do it. Mentioning Hospicio de San Fernando portal (and assertinig that all Churriguerseque is as plain as this and other portals) is not enough to have a general view of Madrid. This is as inconsistent as saying that mentioning the building at Rue Franklin of Perret is enough representation of Paris, and that Art Nouveau from Guimard has no place in an article about Architecture at the turn of the century, because all are in the same city.

I wouldn't say that Madrid is the most Baroque of the European cities and that its importance for the development of the style should be highlighted in a separate passage.Ghirlandajo

I don´t know how much you know about the stuff, but have a look on what Fernando Chueca Goitia,, the undiscussed most prestigious Historian of Spanish Architecture says about the subject: "(...)También Salamanca modula de manera personal su barroco de piedra dorada, heredero, del plateresco...y así una serie de grupos y subgrupos y variedades infinitas, sin olvidar el papel muy importante que adquiere el barroco madrileño como síntesis nacional, sin dejar de perder acento local. Por primera vez el arte madrileño, el arte de la capital, empieza a jugar un incuestionable papel rector." (Fernando Chueca Goitia, Historia de la arquitectura española, tomo II, Fundación Cultural Santa Teresa de Ávila, ISBN 84-923918-7-1 2001. pg. 251) Says that among all the regional varieties of Barroque, Madrid established as both the undiscussed leader and the synthesis of Spanish Baroque, with its local accent. I don´t say that it should have a separate passage in the article, only that the particular brick Baroque has nothing to do with Churrigueresque and nothing to do with European influences, and it should be quotated just to have a more real view of Baroque in Spain. I know that it is very common to ignore other aspects but the more spectacular, but the only porpose of quotating Madrid is having constance of a spreaded particular branch of Baroque. Personally, I don´t like it much but it exists.

2-About Granada Charterhouse and Transparente, congratulations for having learned about their existence and importance at last, but with your expression I keep this passage, although its proper place is Churrigueresque and the Transparente should be discussed in the article about Baroque sculpture rather than architecture., you again make clear your lack of knowledge about the subject. The Transparente IS architecture as well as sculpture, the webpage you used to inform yourself of its existence shows a partial view. Have a look at these:[1] [2],[3] [4] and note that Sir Nikolaus Pevsner, in its "An Outline of European Architecture" (Penguin, Middlesex, 1943), as an outline, not talking of all regional forms, but only of outstanding buildings, he starts the Baroque talking about Maderna, Borromini, Bernini, Vignola, Cortona, then the Scala Regia, and then, hocus pocus!...Toledo Transparente, and Granada Charterhouse. Then he continues with Guarino Guarini, and so on. Have a look at what some of what he says: The most outstanding example on Spanish soil is Narciso Tomé`s Transparente in Toledo Cathedral(...)Catholic orthodoxy objected to people walking along the ambulatory behind the Blessed Sacrament. So an ingenious plan was worked out by which the Sacrament could be seen(...) from the ambulatory as well. (...) Attention was focused on to the Sacrament by richly decorated columns. They are linked up with larger outer columns by cornices curved upwards. These curves and the relief scenes in perspective on the panel below give the illusion -in the same way as Bernini´s colonnade in the Scala Regia- that the distance from front to back of the altar is far deeper than it really is.(He continues talking, about wonders, miraclous effects... and then:) What the ingenious architect has done is to to take out the masonry between the ribs of half a gothic vault(...)And when to discover this source of magic light, we turn round, away from the altar, we see in the dazzling light beyond the angels Christ himself...(and so on). He talks about Spatial extremism, pulling a whole room into a vast stupefying ornament... I advise to you to read in in its whole, to see the admiration and respact of Pevsner for the architect who did it, as well as again the Fernando Chueca Historia de la Arquitectura Española to get more details of both architecture pieces and to understand their importance. So let me see, you have being blindly reverting the addition of two of the most widely internationally recognised spatial achievements of Spanish Baroque, because you didn´t even know of their existence. It is not the first time it happens with edition of new-for-you styles edited by me, but I hope it is the last.

3 La Granja, Aranjuez, Royal Palace... The problem is different here. We both agree in the inclusion of those buildings, but here it is only a problem of form, and of WP:OWN. Your redaction of the article, is nice, congratulations. But if you want it to be untouched, don´t submit it. With all your prestige you won´t find problems in editing a book, or writing articles in magazines, but if you have, you can also write your own webpage, called, "Ghirlandajo´s Corner", or something similar, to express all your literary achievements. But Wikipedia is different. You are not the owner of the article. If I think that Spanish significative monuments should be quotated in the Spanish section better than in Scandinavia's, my point of view is as legitimate as yours, and expressions like "a derivative structure of little originality, " are purely subjective personal assertions. I could submit you to the same proceeding you are doing to me and delete all the buildings and expressions I dont agree or just don´t know, or request your sources for each expression you make. The fact is that, as it was, your Perfect-untouchable article, was incomplet, and gave a false view of Baroque. Granada Charterhouse and Transparente are in the article for their own right and merits, not because you save my live. I will follow George Mikes` advises and won´t say "Don´t bully me", but will use instead "I repudiate your petulant expostulations". Yours sincerely, --Garcilaso 11:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Note: I have already enlarged Spanish Baroque. As for Spanish Architecture, this is such a huge subject I am afraid all my efforts would not be enough. Spanish architecture comes from Megalitic monuments to Contemporary architects. I prefer to write some minor articles about partial aspects of Spanish architecture before I try with that inmense project by myself.

revised malta text

I removed tour-guide language, if that is OKBrosi 19:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Valletta was described as "a city of palaces built by gentlemen for gentlemen" by Benjamin Disraeli, who also remarked that "Valletta, equals in its noble architecture, if it does not excel, any capital in Europe" and in subsequent letters to friends, that it is "comparable to Venice and Cadiz...not a single tree, but full of palaces worthy of Palladio." Valletta, inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1980, is rich in architectural, historical and cultural heritage - a unique, baroque, fortified city.

Yeah, much better. Marcus1234 09:43, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

"democratic values"

According to the text "There is little Baroque about Dutch architecture of the 17th century. The architecture of the first republic in Northern Europe was meant to reflect democratic values by quoting extensively from classical antiquity." The first sentence is more or less accurate, but I am more concerned with "democratic values" This is a modern phraseology.Brosi 13:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Sections

I think it might make more sense to divide the article into areas of Europe rather than empires/kingdoms etc. unless a particular country or state was known to have a particular style? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 13:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC)