Talk:Art of Francisco Narváez in the University City of Caracas

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Art of Francisco Narváez in the University City of Caracas/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 15:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thanks so much for your work on this article. I will review it with comments by section, make minor changes (links, punctuation, etc. - with you may change if you disagree), and then assess the article by the GA criteria.

I have another GA review to complete today and will likely start this late today or tomorrow.–CaroleHenson (talk) 15:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Kingsif, I think I will let you finish replying to the comments and updates before continuing the review. It looks like I need to re-review the Background section - which is fine - and I love the addition of the image, by the way. But, the article has become a moving target and I will have a much easier time if I can complete the review when it's not changing.

Do you mind pinging me when you have finished with edits to the article and this review page? –CaroleHenson (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Introduction

• The introduction is quite short. It would be good to add some notable information about the works and the time frame (generally from 1950 to 1956 and another in 1987)–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The introduction is looking much better, in a number of ways. What do you think about adding a bit about the murals and the sculptures of Dr. José María Vargas and José Gregorio Hernández?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done [1].–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• In the first sentence - and relevant to the Background section, does contributed mean that Narváez donated the sculptures? Or, was he commissioned to create the works?–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:47, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• There's not actually solid details on this, for any of the artists. They were definitely asked for most of them, and presumably they were paid, but a lot of them seem to be Villanueva's friends. 'Contributed' is used here because Torso was not made for the university. Kingsif (talk) 19:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Moved from the bottom of this section (I put it in the wrong place):Here's one source that says he was commissioned to create art for the university in 1949.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I see your edit to this. Looks good and if you're happy, this is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• The intro says that there are eleven works. A note says that there are twelve. If La educación and La ciencia are two distinct works, which is the way it sounds in that section, aren't twelve works of art described in this article?–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• The source says eleven, there are obviously twelve. The difference seems to be because Torso has never been a public work of art (first it was in an exhibition at the university, it was later acquired and sits in a dean's office) - the campus is considered a living museum and this one, in effect, is not on display. Kingsif (talk) 19:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Based upon what you are saying, is it possible to talk about the eleven works + Torso and describe the difference in how it came to be made and exhibited? And, that it was contributed? Do you have sources for that?–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I've expanded the footnote a bit, I think the section on Torso is clear, but if not I can edit it. Kingsif (talk) 21:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I made this edit, which I am perfectly expecting to be tweaked, but it's a start for a bit more clarity about the 11 + 1 works. See what you think.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I see your edit. Looks great. This one is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I see that the intro now says that there is twelve works in the first sentence of the intro... which confuses the issue of being commissioned to do the work in 1949. I will take a stab at this and see what you think.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done. See bullet #2.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I see your edit to this. Looks good and if you're happy, this is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Here's one source that says he was commissioned to create art for the university.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Moved up to second bullet.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

This section is looking good. I made a minor edit here and consider this section  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Background

I made a minor edit here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Here are comments after this section was expanded:

• I don't understand the end of the first sentence because of his aversion to following trends. I think it reads fine without it, unless you would like to clarify this phrase.

• That's the reason he chose Julian (the other schools were more traditional), I can probably clarify it? Kingsif (talk) 19:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

That's great, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• I am confused by Narváez' style was largely connected to his national identity, but he did not follow the predominant Latin American schools of the time; he has also been compared to artists of similar styles, like Diego Rivera, who first explored other national movements before cementing their identity. Narváez did not do this, either, but "knew how to assimilate the contributions that artists such as Pablo Picasso or Constantin Brâncuși, for example, were achieving in the field of sculpture".[3] Unless I am reading the quotation wrong, it sounds like Narváez and Rivera did have a similar approach. — Or, if they did create their own style differently: Is the point that Rivera did a better job of creating his own identity, while Narváez leaned more on the contributions by Picasso and Brâncuși?

• The source says that Narváez was eminently Venezuelan but developed his own style, following neither Latin American traditions nor the art nouveau of France when he studied there, but was open to various styles for influence. It compares this to Rivera, who was eminently Mexican (and developed some of this tradition) but lived in France and actively did some art nouveau before that. This might be quite complex, I could cut the Rivera part. Kingsif (talk) 19:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

This looks really great, too! Thanks!!–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• I changed the citation [5]. There is no need to call out the page number (137) if all the citations for a source are for the same page number. So, I changed the citation and added the page number to the ref name (should someone want to use the same source, but a different page number).

As an aside, it is better to format page numbers with the {{rp}} so that this is consistency across articles - rather than using html codes that others may not understand. This is the first time I have seen this approach.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I switch between the two, often using superscript if there's multiple pages in one ref or something else to add, so I'm not sure why I did it here. Kingsif (talk) 19:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

This section looks great and is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Style

• Lovely section! No comments or suggestions.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• I've added a bit more, mentioning relation to campus design. Kingsif (talk) 22:38, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Looks great, this is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:07, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Cumarebo stone sculptures

La educación and La ciencia

• I made some minor edits here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
• Regarding In 1986, the university commission to preserve the campus artworks began a walk-out over being left out of conversations with the university. However, the original conservation group formed to preserve Narváez' works continued to run. I am not sure that the walkout is necessary detail. The point is that: A university conservation group to preserve Narváez' works first selected La ciencia in 1987 to be restored, as it was most in need. If you think the walkout should be discussed, perhaps it could be in a note.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• I think the point was that the university-wide preservation group stopped working, but the group focusing on Narvaez kept running so they got the money to fix up his works? Regarding this and the next point, I'll review the source. Kingsif (talk) 20:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Looks good! This is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• Regarding They published job advertisements for specialists, ... Is the point that they hired specialists? Or, that that they hired local specialists?–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Source quote

The source says, if I may quote at length: A pesar de la renuncia de la Comisión, la preservación de las obras de arte no se paraliza y la Unidad de Conservación de Obras de Arte, adscrita a la Dirección de Servicios Generales, conjuntamente con las Autoridades Universitarias, decidieron emprender la conservación de las esculturas en piedra de cumarebo, del artista Francisco Narváez, el cual se distingue en el articulo: “Cuidar y Querer” en la UCV Restauran la Ciencia de Narváez, detallando: “...ante la necesidad de restaurar las obras de piedra de cumarebo que forman parte de ese sueño que Carlos Raúl Villanueva hizo realidad (...) la Unidad de Conservación (...) busca el asesoramiento de especialistas (...) contacta al Instituto Central de Restauración de Roma. (...) como primera obra se escoge “La Ciencia” que es la más deteriorada. La especialista Giusseppina Fazio llega a principios de año a darle nueva vida a “La Ciencia”. La restauradora aplica los métodos ya investigados y logra limpiar las formaciones biológicas, algas y líquenes, que habían escogido a “La Ciencia” como hogar. Además de reintegrar los estucos usados por el escultor para unir las diferentes partes de la obra y de consolidar la piedra para evitar desmoronamientos”. Para esta época la Fundación Francisco Narváez participa de pleno con la Universidad Central de Venezuela para lograr los recursos económicos ante Petróleos de Venezuela cuyo fin era el de concretar la restauración de la obra titulada La Educación (1951), y, posteriormente, la Unidad de Conservación de Obras de Arte afronta la tarea de preservación de las obras de arte, La Ciencia (1951) y El Atleta (1951), previa la experiencia adquirida con el equipo de especialistas del Instituto Central de Restauración de Roma. En estos tiempos se publican varios artículos en la prensa nacional referidos al tema de la restauración, destacando el camino de la preservación de las obras de arte de la Ciudad Universitaria de Caracas, lo cual generó expectativas en la misma comunidad universitaria y en el país entero. Seguidamente se presenta un extracto de uno de esos artículos. Experta Italiana dirigió importante labor. La Educación de Narváez fue restaurada en la UCV - 1987, en donde se demuestra: “... Giusseppina Fazio, del Centro de Restauración de Roma, adelantó un importante trabajo de rescate de una obra del escultor venezolano Francisco Narváez, realizada en piedra de cumarebo y ubicada en el recinto de la Universidad Central de Venezuela (...) La Unidad de Conservación del Patrimonio Artístico de la UCV utilizará las enseñanzas de la profesora Fazio para la restauración de las obras de Narváez “La Ciencia” y “El Atleta”, realizadas en piedra de Cumarebo”. Which, for speed, google translate spits out as: Despite the resignation of the Commission, the preservation of works of art is not paralyzed and the Conservation Unit for Works of Art, attached to the Directorate of General Services, together with the University Authorities, decided to undertake the conservation of the sculptures in cumarebo stone, by the artist Francisco Narváez, which is distinguished in the article: “Caring and Wanting” at the UCV They restore the Science of Narváez, detailing: “... faced with the need to restore the cumarebo stone works that They are part of that dream that Carlos Raúl Villanueva made a reality (...) the Conservation Unit (...) seeks the advice of specialists (...) contact the Central Restoration Institute of Rome. (...) "Science" is chosen as the first work, which is the most deteriorated. The specialist Giusseppina Fazio arrives at the beginning of the year to give new life to "The Science". The restorer applies the methods already investigated and manages to clean the biological formations, algae and lichens, which had chosen “La Ciencia” as home. In addition to reintegrating the stuccoes used by the sculptor to unite the different parts of the work and to consolidate the stone to avoid collapse ”. At this time, the Francisco Narváez Foundation participates fully with the Central University of Venezuela to obtain the economic resources before Petróleos de Venezuela, whose purpose was to complete the restoration of the work entitled La Educación (1951), and, subsequently, the Unidad de Conservation of Works of Art faces the task of preserving works of art, La Ciencia (1951) and El Atleta (1951), after the experience gained with the team of specialists from the Central Restoration Institute of Rome. In these times, several articles are published in the national press on the subject of restoration, highlighting the path of preservation of works of art in the University City of Caracas, which generated expectations in the university community itself and in the entire country. . Following is an excerpt from one of those articles. Italian expert directed important work. Narváez's Education was restored at UCV - 1987, where it is shown: “... Giusseppina Fazio, from the Restoration Center of Rome, carried out an important rescue work on a work by the Venezuelan sculptor Francisco Narváez, made of cumarebo and located on the grounds of the Central University of Venezuela (...) The UCV Artistic Heritage Conservation Unit will use Professor Fazio's teachings to restore the works of Narváez "La Ciencia" and "El Atleta ", Made of Cumarebo stone"

Which explains it: the university-wide group resigned, but preservation continued with the Narváez group, so his works got fixed first. They hired specialists, specifically imported ones from Italy. Kingsif (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(Edits made for all the above) Kingsif (talk) 21:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Looks good! This is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

• I had added a {{fv}} tag for something that Narváez often portrays, through different media.[3] in edit. The source for that phrase is to a page about Le educacion - it mentions where it is on campus. But, it does not say anything about any other works... and definitely doesn't say anything about other nudes. I see that you removed the fv tag without fixing the issue.

Please either find a valid source or remove that phrase.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

...I removed the tag because I changed the source (to one that does support it). Kingsif (talk) 22:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

That source does mention nudes... so much closer... but in the context of paintings. I made a minor edit based upon the source.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Info from source

It is in the painting section, but connects it with his other material: Además de los desnudos, el ser humano es representado por medio de sus series de cabezas y en las escenas de trabajo y costumbres. Aparece en sus óleos, estucos e incluso, en los relieves de madera (esculturas bidimensionales). En su obra tridimensional, lo representa también por medio de las Cabezas en su período criollista, tema que replantea en los Ochavados de finales de los sesenta y principios de los setenta; y por supuesto, en los Torsos realizados entre los cincuenta y sesenta (Fig. 13) . La relación entre su pintura y la escultura es estrecha.* [...] NOTA PARA EL DISEÑO: las Fig. 12 y 13 deben estar juntas para que el lector visualmente pueda establecer la relación entre un torso en pintura y uno en escultura. Igual para Fig. 14 y 15. trans: In addition to the [painting] nudes, the human being is represented through his series of heads and in scenes of work and customs. It appears in his oils, stuccos and even in wooden reliefs (two-dimensional sculptures). In his three-dimensional work, he also represents it through the Heads in his Creole period, a theme that he restates in the Ochavados of the late sixties and early seventies; and of course, in the Torsos made between the fifties and sixties (Fig. 13). The relationship between his painting and sculpture is close.* [...] NOTE FOR DESIGN: Figures 12 and 13 must be together so that the reader can visually establish the relationship between a torso in painting and one in sculpture. Same for Fig. 14 and 15.

There's even a footnote to explain how the painting and sculpture are visually alike. I can keep looking if this doesn't seem clear enough, though? Kingsif (talk) 22:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I was looking for nudes, and not heads and torsos. But the point "The relationship between his painting and sculpture is close." helps bring it home for me.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I've removed this part, because I remembered a mention of male nudes in a book I have on Narváez (that's not used in the article at all, yet): I think I'll look over the sources and see if I can write something longer about it. Kingsif (talk) 23:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Excellent!–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

El Atleta

• For southwest of the Olympic Stadium, on the large ramped access way to the south end of the grandstand. how would it be to reword to "southwest of the Olympic Stadium, near the south end of the grandstand?
  • I don't mind rewording, but it would lose some of the specifics? Kingsif (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, yes, but that's the point. This isn't a travelogue. Starts getting into criteria #3b - too much detail. Is there some sort of map of the outdoor works of art that shows where they are on the campus? If so, that would be a great external link (below the body of the article)... Or, {{External media}} which is meant to be used in the body of the article. See: Mary Beth Edelson#Feminist art movement, for example.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

There's some maps linked on the campus talk page, would it be appropriate to link the last three (which are more concise, but there's three), or the complete 108-page book? Kingsif (talk) 22:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I think it would be good to link to the 2 pagers with the maps and last the 108 doc. Does the doc for the engineering map include works by Narváez?

• artwork map of cultural center
• artwork map of hospital complex
• complete WHS guide to CUC

–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

If the engineering map is the one with the sports complex on it (the east side of the campus), then El Atleta will be on it. I'll just look through them all. Kingsif (talk) 23:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Great!–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:43, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• Regarding Benko also suggests that the colossal scale and "totem" reverence of the statue were Ancient Egyptian influences.[5] what does "totem" reverence mean?
  • I'll look at the source, but I think it more or less said this as it's written: it looks like a totem pole to be revered. Kingsif (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Edits made to clarify. Kingsif (talk) 21:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Looks great, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:43, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• What do you think of adding "Since then," to the beginning of The condition of the statue is degrading;,...?–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done Kingsif (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

This section on the Cumarebo stone sculptures looks great and is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Medical complex murals

I will pick back up here in several hours.–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

I am picking back up here:

• For The mosaic murals at the entrances of the Institute of Experimental Medicine and the Institute of Anatomy were installed by María Luisa Tovar.[12], would it be helpful to add that they were designed or created by Narváez and installed by Tovar? I get that most people will come to that conclusion, but it might be good to be clear.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

•  Done Kingsif (talk) 22:38, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled mural at the Institute of Experimental Medicine

• Is there some significance in the way he used surgical and religious imagery for the Institute of Experimental Medicine mural? (i.e., anything to say about this mural?)–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled mural at the José Izquierdo Institute of Anatomy

• Ok.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled fresco mural

• Is there anything more to say about this mural?–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

As a general comment, if there is information about the symbolism of the murals (really throughout the article)... and how that ties back to the style and identity talked about in the Background and Style sections, that would be amazing. It's not necessary, but it's something to think about to make the article even better now or in the future.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Other murals

Untitled sea life mural

• I made a minor edit here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
• I would probably have had the renovation as a footnote, but I am seeing that the renovation aspects are important to you.
• Do you have anything to say about the mural as a work of art?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:57, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled wooden mural

• Oh, wow! What an incredible mural / relief. I am guessing that this has been commented on by critics and other artists. Can you find anything of interest - the wood used, what it may represent, etc.?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• @CaroleHenson: You would think, but not really. Especially this mural, oddly, for which coverage is not much more than 'it exists'. The commons photo isn't even the best image of it, because it really shines, and is probably one of the best preserved. I'm in a bit of an online library deep dive, and have added more to the article, but coverage on artistic qualities and symbolism is really uneven. Kingsif (talk) 01:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for checking, Kingsif. I was thinking that you were done, but have seen you were making edits. Do you mind pinging me when you are done and want me to look at the review update and the article?–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: I thought I was done, too - I'm done now, thanks. Kingsif (talk) 03:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

This section is  Done. Thanks for your work on it.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Other sculptures

Until now, the sections / subsections seemed to have been going in chronological order. Is there a particular order for the following subsections?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Kingsif (talk) 01:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

La cultura

• I took a stab at simplifying the first two sentences into one sentence here, but I know you'll likely polish it up even more.
• Please see WP:Paragraph regarding one sentence paragraphs.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Torso

• I made a minor edit here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Dr. José María Vargas

• Do you have any more information that would interest the readers?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• Added a bit about another older bust of him. Kingsif (talk) 01:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Untitled sculpture of José Gregorio Hernández

• Was José Gregorio Hernández a notable figure at the university? In Caracas?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oh yes, he was a medical student at the university in the 19th century and was apparently a favorite student, he then basically founded experimental medicine in Venezuela, and after his death in 1919 many people there wanted him venerated as a saint. I'll add something about that. Kingsif (talk) 01:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional information, it's very interesting.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

This Other sculptures section looks great, too - and is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): } b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

• The article is well-written and conforms to MOS guidelines. (1a, 1b)
• Content is cited to reliable sources and there is no evidence of original research. (2a, 2b, 2c)
• The only hit on the copyvio report was a quote (i.e., non-issue) (2d)
• The article could have more information about the works of art, as is noted in the sections above. (3a, 3b)
• The article is stable and neutral. (4, 5)
• Images have proper licensing, are relevant, and have proper captions.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Kingsif, I have finished the review and put latest comments in the initial sections in purple for easier identification. Thanks so much for your spirit of cooperation in coming to consensus in the early sections. I really like the additions that you made to the Introduction, Background and now Style sections. Please let me know if I can help or clarify any of my remarks.

What do you think about this image of his sculpture at the entrance to the building, this one, or perhaps an image of the university for the main image for this article?–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Added the la educación one, thanks. Kingsif (talk) 02:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

You did an incredible job on this article. I have a much better sense of who his was as an artist as the result of your additional work. Thanks much. The article passes.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:25, 15 May 2020 (UTC)