Jump to content

Talk:Leda and the Swan

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

Seduction

[edit]

Is seduction the best term in the first sentence? In a lot of renditions I've heard. it tends more towards rape, or at least something Zeus did to Leda, rather than a way he made her feel that "seduce" implies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thirdandlake (talk • contribs) 01:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've gone ahead and made the major edit anyway, though you waited 10 days without answer, so maybe fair enough. Personally I think the introduction should say "either seduces or rapes (depending on the story)" because there has been disagreement in the various stories and interpretations for over 2,000 years, as this article notes [1]. Of course, when you're a god capable of magic seduction, the line between the two blurs anyway; and in any case, famous feminist Andrea Dworkin said of seduction and romance that they are "rape embellished with meaningful looks". Perhaps this is the whole point of the story? In any case, I think it makes sense to note the ambiguity up front - the point of the article is to inform, not pass moral judgement from the modern era. Fig (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
there is no disagreement there is no mention of rape in the myth before William Butler Yates that detail is entirely an invention of his 2601:405:4A80:B950:4CB2:FED:33F2:1CCF (talk) 21:28, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please wait for this discussion to reach a consensus before making changes to the main article, not doing so could be seen as engagement in an edit war and result in your changes being temporarily reversed. Thanks! Jthekid15 (talk) 08:54, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You realize this discussion has been going for on 2 years? I've put "seduces or rapes". In different versions it could be either, and in most art there's no real way of telling. Johnbod (talk) 18:25, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Johnbod, There has been a spate of edits around the particular wording over the last day or so and I only saw the date in the comment on the 9th. I was not involved in the changing of the wording to "rape", but the edits changing it back and forth are alerting in recent contributions, hence the slight edit war this article finds itself in. I have no strong feelings about the wording either way so defer to you on the matter. Apologies once again, Jthekid15 (talk) 18:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
why was there no consensus needed to change the original wording from seduction which it hade been for years before it was changed to the factually incorrect term rape that is not supported by any ancient literary sources your use of double standards just shows your bad faith the sources side with me why shouldn’t I be bold this discussion has stayed open for two years since it was opened by my fellow ip editor and in that time no one has given a counter argument and now i second them if that is not a consensus I dont know what is 2601:405:4A80:B950:5C67:376:C3F3:521C (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Was the picture here vandalized or what :( - Jashiin I tried reverting it to the original version, but it didn't work out!

Indeed, this looks more like a turkey than a swan! No, what do I say: this looks more like two turkeys than a swan!

Play

[edit]

The article on Justinian mentions a play Leda and the Swan - is anything known about that ? -- Beardo 00:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

When I editing, this triggered the spam filter, so I couldn't save the page. Don't know what it is. www.davincisketchesDOT.com Sketches of a Renaissance Man. So i've cut it & put it here Johnbod 15:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the page "studies for major works" has the full Windsor sheet (illus in the article) plus 2 drawings for his first composition (Chatsworth & Rotterdam), so although the site carries some ads, it is a valid link in my view, not spam. Johnbod 17:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link expired *[http://www.cinoa.org/art-and-antiques/detail/719 English snuff box c.1720] and hence removed. Pbhj (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image File:BjorkVespertine.jpeg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Einaudi's painting

[edit]

I really like this painting: http://bp2.blogger.com/_mk-LiBhV7-M/R-18cNXDk3I/AAAAAAAAACE/snPaKwm5kH0/s1600-h/leda+and+the+swan.jpg (artist's main site: http://fredeinaudi.com/) -- but I don't know if it's noteworthy enough to go under the modern art section, so I'll let someone else make that call. 96.50.106.54 (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo's version of 'Leda'

[edit]

This article states that da Vinci's painting has been lost, probably destroyed. David Irving's book on Hermann Goering states (page 294) that in July 1940, it was in Goering's possession. Any comments? 122.57.190.89 (talk) 05:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the Irving, Google picks up "One of those he returned was the Spiridon Leda (1505-1515) from the Leonardo da Vinci school, acquired by Goering before the war." from WP's Kunstschutz. See here for more on the Spiridon version (Goering discreetly omitted), now in the Uffizi in Florence. I've added this to the article. With the Wilton House version it is one of the best copies, probably by an associate of Leonardo's. Johnbod (talk) 14:17, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Readd link?

[edit]

I'm seeking consensus from this community to re-include a link to this page: http://beckydaroff.com/stories/details.php?recordID=219. This is an entry in 'Stories in Art,' my searchable database of paintings that tell stories: this entry is one of Rubens' depictions of Leda and the Swan. The user can visually compare this with other paintings that depict the theme of Leda and the Swan, and other related themes such as Danae and the Shower of Gold (both stories about Zeus' lovers). 'Stories in Art' is a not-for-profit project. I do not benefit in any way from additional visits to my site, other than the gratification that a stranger might appreciate how different artists handle the same theme because of my project. Please ask any questions you may have, and thank you for your consideration. Bdaroff (talk) 01:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That it's your site does raise concerns about a potential conflict of interest. However, the site really doesn't include much information beyond the painting, its name, author, date, and location. And beyond that, there is WP:ELNO #11, which disqualifies "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)" Unfortunately, you do not appear to be a recognized authority. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ian, Many thanks for your response. I would argue that my pages are not blogs or personal web pages. While you are correct, I am not a recognized authority, I noticed point #3 under WP:ELYES which allows for links to "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia." I believe my content is neutral, accurate and cannot be integrated into Wikipedia because my pages are image-based rather than text-based and involve flash/java mouse-over interactions. My project 'Stories in Art' (http://beckydaroff.com/stories/) contributes to an encyclopedic understanding of common themes in art such as Leda and the Swan or Danae and the Shower of Gold because it allows the user to visually compare how different artists handle these themes.Bdaroff (talk) 18:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Leda and the Swan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Leda and the Swan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:15, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leda and the Swan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:23, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sidney Nolan's series

[edit]

The leading Australian painter Sidney Nolan made quite a few works on this theme.

I suppose there could be copyright issues for images, though a Google image search for: sidney nolan leda turns up quite a few images.

Information on one work: "Leda and swan" https://www.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/collection/works/OA35.1960/

Two books (which I haven't seen):

"Sidney Nolan: Leda and the swan and other recent work", Matthiesen Gallery, London, 1960.

"Leda and the Swan", Gould Galleries, South Yarra (Victoria, Australia), 2000. (Exhibition of Nolan's work.)

Someone who knows more about Nolan than I might like to contribute?

GammaTwo (talk) 01:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Context limited to Italian Renaissance

[edit]

For some reason (presumably due to previous author's interest) the entire page currently reads as "The importance of Leda and the Swan during the Italian Renaissance", with the implication to the casual reader (apart from a brief introduction) is that the topic is culturally confined to this period. I came here to learn about the interpretation and usage of Leda and the Swan during antiquity but found zip useful info - apart from the oddly noninformational tidbit that one didn't make big Leda statues in antiquity. Perhaps someone more proficient in the article subject could be kind and broaden the timespan and focus a bit beyond the Italian 16th century artistic merits. --Dórmouse (talk) 14:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, anyone is welcome to try, but the "some reason" is that the Italian Renaissance (and a bit later) was the period when a reasonably coherent "interpretation and usage" is found, and there are several key works. I don't think this is true for earlier or later periods, but maybe I didn't look hard enough. Johnbod (talk) 14:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Depictions

[edit]

"This article is about the story and its depictions." Well, no it isn't. It tells very little of the story and is almost entirely about various depictions. Manannan67 (talk) 06:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the part about the swan using his beak...

[edit]

"Ronsard wrote a poem on La Défloration de Lède, perhaps inspired by the Michelangelo, which he may well have known. Like many artists, he imagines the beak penetrating Leda's vagina."

I'm sorry if this sounds like an awkward detail to focus on, but there are two things that stand out to me about this excerpt from the article. First of all, despite looking across the Internet for hours to find Rosnard's full peom, Leda Deflowered, my results came up empty (and the citation given in the article goes nowhere), so I have no way of knowing if the detail about the swan using his beak to penetrate Leda's vagina is actually real or if it's just an editor sneaking it into the article for a little extra eroticism. Secondly, where's the precedent for there being "many artists" imagining the same thing? I couldn't find any examples of that sort of thing anywhere (written or in painting). The only work of art that comes close to what's described is this painting by François Boucher, which depicts Leda presenting herself to the swan as his beak gets close to her vagina, but even then, the penetration is left to the viewer's imagination rather than shown (and that's despite it being arguably the most explicit portrayal out there, as others tend to avoid showing or describing genitalia altogether). Am I missing something? I hope this doesn't seem too weird to bring up. 66.27.89.159 (talk) 06:08, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here (it's Ronsard not Rosnard). But he only seems to say:
Et son bec luy mit adonc
Dedans sa vermeille bouche.
And then placed his beak
Within her crimson mouth.

Johnbod (talk) 05:31, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changeed back to mouth. This is what Bull actually says, and was the original here (c 2009). Several years ago someone changed it to "vagina". Well spotted. Johnbod (talk) 16:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, here, by a now-blocked ip in 2009. Johnbod (talk) 17:39, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leda_and_the_Swan&oldid=1203531944"