Jump to content

Talk:Cultural depictions of Medusa and Gorgons

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Canuckle (talk | contribs) at 00:35, 18 July 2007 (→‎Unsourced/insignificant info archive). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Creation of this article

I've created this article as a prose rewrite of other Medusa/gorgon popular culture lists that includes what I believe is notable information and excludes the excessive trivial references and minutae of other versions. Medusa and the gorgons are iconic figures, and some of their uses in fiction are notable, in particular because they are ancient figures that persist in our culture.

Do not add every minor reference to Medusa or gorgons here; the information in this article should provide notable and new information about the use and dramatization of these mythological figures. In particular, the use of the word "Medusa" in the title of a song or album, or the mere inclusion of the character in a video game, is not in itself notable and is therefore inappropriately listed here. References like these will be deleted to keep this article free of the excessive trivia and fancruft that has made previous versions eligible for deletion. TAnthony 02:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced/insignificant info archive

I've removed the following items from the article as they are unreferenced and at this point have little relevance (individually) to the cultural impact of Medusa or gorgons; I'm collecting them here because a future source may potentially make one or more of them relevant. Do not re-add any of this data without sources asserting notability. Anyone interested in finding every video game or whatever that features Medusa can look at the What links here page for Medusa.

Hang on/Deletion

This new article is a new presentation of information and should be considered as such. As noted above, it includes notable information and excludes the excessive junk that got previous articles deleted (like song titles containing the word "Medusa"). It is not simply a prose version of the previous list! Perhaps there is some information that is unnecessary, but it is not all worthy of deletion.

I actually agree that the prevalence of useless trivia is a problem on Wikipedia, but there is room for information that can realistically be useful to someone. When I am researching something as a reader, I want to know that Livia was dramatized in I, Claudius, what films were made about the RMS Titanic and yes, some places where Medusa has been portrayed and how the name has come to cannote certain things in our culture. TAnthony 04:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not address the concerns from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gorgons and Medusa in popular culture. Some information was removed and the formatting was changed, but if that were all that was needed then the page wouldn't have been deleted. Jay32183 19:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wish I had been able to contribute to that deletion discussion, but it seems to me that the bulk of deletion votes involved the excessive, non-notable references ("so-and-so wrote a song called 'Medusa'"), all of which are now gone. I would argue that in its current form the article does not blatantly fail WP:NOT#DIR. The current references are not as "loosely-associated" as you would suggest. We're not talking about "Rachel said 'Medusa' on Friends," we're talking about significant modern representations of this ancient figure, its prevalence in certain media and that fact that the name itself has become synonymous with certain ideas in our language and culture. That is notable. TAnthony 20:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are loosely associated because referencing something does not make two works connected. Clash of the Titans is not related to Monsters Inc. Claiming they are because of gorgons is original research. The article also still has no secondary sources. The reason the AFD resulted in delete was not that some of the material was inappropriate, but that all of the content was not suitable for an article. Jay32183 20:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We can go on like this forever, LOL. I honestly do see your point and I'm not suggesting that every reference in this article is necessarily important. But by your argument, if these films cannot be put side-by-side just because they feature gorgons, then the countries featured in List of oil-producing states cannot be associated just because they all have oil. To me, it's somewhat of a gray area. Making unsourced assertions and conclusions in an article is OR, providing information and allowing readers to make their own connections is not. TAnthony 20:51, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List of oil-producing states actually has a source that connects all of them, so it isn't original research. This page doesn't have any sources and you are unlikely to find any. This entire article is an unsourced assertion. Jay32183 20:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, if you think it's impossible to find sources mentioning Medusa in popular culture you really are hopeless and shouldn't be editing an encyclopedia. They're freaking everywhere. DreamGuy 21:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Implementing sources

I have found a great source and am in the process of rewriting and citing the article sentence by sentence. I'd appreciate a reasonable amount of time to get the article in shape before someone acts on its possible deletion. Once I've implemented this particular source I will also seek others to round out the article (by the way, this first source is "searchable within the book" on Amazon.com if anyone is interested in checking it out). TAnthony 02:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • KEEP pending edits: I have been on the fence about the gorgon and Medusa articles but am swayed by this new source. If the article can be adequately referenced and some more extraneous info removed, I definitely see its usefulness. TheRhani 02:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most recent AfD

This is a new presentation of the information, which includes sources. I am not finished, but I have sourced much of the article and removed much of the non-notable info. Previous deletions of similar articles should have no bearing on this one. TAnthony 03:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a vast improvement over previous lists of Medusa references that were not notable. This new version cannot be compared to other ones. TAnthony is obviously bringing this article up to speed, and I am happy with it so far. TheRhani 03:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

possible sources

Reviewed in Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2004.07.19 [2]
Reviewed in Women's Art Journal - The timeless fascination with Medusa, a “trait evidently shared by Ovid, Freud, and Gianni Versace,” makes The Medusa Reader (edited by Marjorie Garber and Nancy J. Vickers) “useful, entertaining, and eclectic,” writes reviewer Carolyn Springer. The collection includes references from literature, philosophy, psychology, advertising, and the arts (from Louis Marin on Caravaggio’s Self Portrait as Medusa to Jo Springer quoting the Betty Crocker Home Library’s The Pleasures of Crewel).

Canuckle 15:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • and the source from the Medusa article has some examples as well: [3] Canuckle 15:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Medusa

  • I think this topic should be merged with Medusa given how short that article is and how much it would benefit from an exploration of this and other topics (such as feminist theory). You may find a chronological treatment to be easier: in Myth, in Renaiisance, the next time period, Modern (with subsection for film/tv, videogames, etc.) Canuckle 15:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You make a good point; if this article continues to develop in the "cultural impact of Medusa" direction, it would be an appropriate part of the Medusa article, which itself needs development in the art and literary representation sections. This would also reinforce the film references as examples of the character's evolvement etc. rather than stand-alone culture references. TheRhani 16:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm adding the merge tags now. Further discussion to be on Talk:Medusa page. Canuckle 21:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article was created for a specific purpose, and that was that the cultural impact of the Medusa character has more detail than what can reasonably fit on the main article.

I've removed the tag as firmly against the consensus established in the deletion vote for this article. We've got people voting to KEEP and also people voting to DELETE who do not want this info on the main article. The merge idea goes against the views of one full side and much of another side. It is therefore completely inappropriate and demonstrably against consensus. DreamGuy 21:37, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • As described on Talk:Medusa: There hasn't been a consensus established yet in the ongoing AfD. There have been Delete and Keep but also Merge votes. Is it inappropriate to discuss a merger on a Talk page while an AfD occurs in parallel? Maybe, but I began this discussion in good faith. Canuckle 22:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The way this article is shaping up, I think it will end up fitting nicely into the main article; it is now more about Medusa's appearance in art and literature than anything else, and those sections are underdeveloped in the main article. The main article isn't that long, and much of the trivia objected-to by dissenters has been removed. But I agree that the merge should come after the AfD is settled, and perhaps only certain parts should be merged. TAnthony 23:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • How did Medusa (up to Ovid) and Medusa (after Ovid) get split up anyhow? Was it just an over-reaction to trivia bloat? Unlike Joan of Arc, Medusa was a mythical figure and so has always been a figure in art and culture. This article really does seem like Part II of the current Medusa article. Canuckle 16:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List format?

I'm not sure if a list is desirable, but I've wanted to try one out for a while. What do you think of this? Looks like the sort by date doesn't like pre-1000 dates. Canuckle 06:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Medusa in art and culture

Date Title Type Artist Notes
200 BC Alexander Mosaic Painting Medusa on the breastplate of Alexander the Great in Pompeii mural
1600s Medusa Painting Leonardo da Vinci Oil on canvas, possibly the work of an anonymous Flemish painter, active ca. 1600
1554 Perseus with the Head of Medusa Sculpture Benvenuto Cellini Bronze
1801 Perseus with the Head of Medusa Sculpture Antonio Canova
1976 Perseus Sculpture Salvador Dalí Bronze[9]
1878 Medusa Painting Arnold Böcklin Oil on canvas
1597 Medusa Painting Caravaggio Oil on canvas
1854 On the Medusa of Leonardo da Vinci in the Florentine Gallery Poem Percy Bysshe Shelley Published after his death
8 Metamorphoses Poem Ovid ca. 8 AD
1617/18 Head of Medusa Painting Peter Paul Reubens “perhaps the earliest original treatment for 16th-17th Century European art…the depiction of the severed head of Medusa, ‘entwined by snakes,’ was for artists of that period a very handy way to demonstrate their ability to instill fear in the spectator.”[10]
1904 L’esprit a combattu le mal Painting Paul Klee “portrays a complete reversal of roles -- Perseus is painted full face with a terrible countenance, while Medusa turns aside.”[11]
1922 Das Medusenhaupt (Medusa’s Head} Book Sigmund Freud Medusa is presented as “the supreme talisman who provides the image of castration -- associated in the child's mind with the discovery of maternal sexuality -- and its denial. The snakes are multiple phalluses and petrifaction represents the comforting erection.”[12]
  1. ^ Medusa the Gorgon - Atmosfear.com.au
  2. ^ Monsters, Inc. review - DecentFilms.com
  3. ^ WikiSource: Dickens, Charles. A Tale of Two Cities.
  4. ^ Garber, Marjorie. The Medusa Reader, 24 February 2003, Introduction, pg. 2, ISBN 0-415-90099-9.
  5. ^ Medusa: Solving the Mystery of the Gorgon, pg. 200.
  6. ^ Watch Over Me Episode guide - Yahoo TV
  7. ^ ABC.com - Lost Episode Guide: #314 "Exposé" pg. 4
  8. ^ ABC.com - Lost Episode Guide: #314 "Exposé" pg. 5
  9. ^ [1]
  10. ^ Rubens 'Head of Medusa' at The State Hermitage Museum, Art Knowledge News, retrieved on July 16, 2007
  11. ^ Medusa in Myth and Literary History
  12. ^ Medusa in Myth and Literary History
This list will be great as part of the Medusa master plan (lol); there are so many notable items and it's too cumbersome a list to explore in prose (and unnecessary). I envision beefing up the main article's art section to include an overview/chronology of Medusa in art and literature (from my research so far, the two seem to have mutually influenced each other) that includes what you've started implementing in this article. We cover the major points and works and then link to a complete list (or two separate lists, if necessary, as there is a lot of literature). And I think this will basically phase out the "in popular culture" concept, which seems to cause the most controversy.
By the way, thanks again for all your hard work here, it's very exciting to see the article take shape. I wish I had more time lately to devote to this. TAnthony 13:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prose by era is important to set the context and establish (and source) the notability of individual artworks, analyses and trends. If we use the above table, it may be wise to have it at the end of the article and have separate tables by type: Sculpture, Painting, Poetry. Canuckle 16:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The only problem with having these lists/tables incorporated into a larger article is that I don't think they really fit with the embedded list criteria (they're too extensive), which will limit the article's ability to rise in status and will certainly invite criticism. But no need worrying about that until the list gets longer and we've worked out the issues between this article and the main one. TAnthony 20:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cultural_depictions_of_Medusa_and_Gorgons&oldid=145337001"