Talk:Juan de Pareja

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 April 2020 and 7 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Margaritamanrique7.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

Reverted vandalism to previous version. Applejuicefool (talk) 17:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

A couple of things seem weird here: the value judgment saying he was never as good a painter as his master (we're talking about DIEGO VELAZQUEZ; that doesn't even need to be said, I think) and "only" minor works, which I think comes across as unnecessarily demeaning--let's talk about what he DID accomplish only; and later, the article mentions that the Innocent X picture was difficult because Velazquez had to paint "from life"... unlike his other portraits, which were ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.231.108 (talk) 14:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

1. REDIRECT [[fsdrfsetfrftre4t<nowiki>Insert non-formatted text hereftesfte</nowiki>4rfwe4]]

You are correct, 67.169.231.108. If the authors ever said that he wasn't "as good" as Velázquez, beyond artists the caliber of Rembrandt and Vermeer, who was? As for "minor" paintings, The Calling of Saint Matthew (which includes a self-portrait of de Pareja) is held by the Museo de Prado, after all. That renowned museum saw value in Pareja's work. I saw, and was stunned/arrested/transfixed by, the painting Juan de Pareja at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, but it was when I took art history in college that I discovered the artist, Juan de Pareja, and learned about his body of work. That course and accompanying textbook didn't waste time on minor artists. The article, happily, no longer calls de Pareja "not as good" or a "minor" painter. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 04:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

the novel I, Juan de pareja

the novel I, Juan de pareja is a biography of Juan himself. Go check it out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JuliusIIguy (talk • contribs) 02:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Written at a middle school level. Keep in mind, though, that it IS a novel. 68.197.49.1 (talk) 04:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I just dropped by to point that out, too. It's interesting if you are are a Velázquez and de Pareja fan, but it is a novel, a fictionalized version of de Pareja's life. As you can see from it's WP article, the book won a "Newbery Medal for excellence in American children's literature". Unfortunately, it's not a scholarly work at all and should not be cited as a source for this article for these reasons. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 04:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Life of Juan de Pareja--sources?

I remember hearing some interesting stories about Juan de Pareja a while ago--unfortunately I cannot now find sources for them. Here's what I recall:

• It was forbidden for slaves to learn how to paint, but Juan de Pareja taught himself in secret to be a painter. de Pareja was a devout man, and was troubled not to be able to confess to his priest that he was secretly painting. Eventually, although afraid of the consequences, he told Velazquez, who freed him. (The "taught himself in secret" part is in the Maxwell reference, which has an interesting story about how he didn't reveal to Velazquez that he was a painter until he was 45 years old, when he left a painting where King Phillip would find it. But the story in Maxwell is otherwise different from the story I remember hearing...)
• Velazquez injured his right hand while traveling to Rome to paint the pope. de Pareja helped heal it, so that Velazquez was able to paint again. In gratitude for de Pareja's help, and to make sure that the hand had regained its skill, Velazquez painted de Pareja's portrait.

Has anyone else heard these stories, or know where they might come from? Many thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 04:00, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

the object of this article is...???

I'm confused by this article. Is it meant to be about the masterpiece PAINTING, Juan de Pareja or the wonderful ARTIST, Juan de Pareja? It blurs both topics together and really shortchanges the man, who went on to have a successful career. Although he didn't reach the pinnacle that Velásquez did, he was darned good; his work is still included in college-level art history courses.

The article needs to establish a focus. If the focus goes to the painting, then an article for the man should be created, too. 68.197.49.1 (talk) 04:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Different freedom date

According to the Metropolitan Museum of Art's "Online Collection" section of their website, de Pareja was freed in 1654. See the information that accompanies the Museum's Velázquez portrait of de Pareja: http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/437869

I went to JSTOR to see the article on his manumission papers, and was able to access a preview of "Velázquez Marginalia: His Slave Juan de Pareja and His Illegitimate Son Antonio" by Jennifer Montagu, The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 125, No. 968 (Nov., 1983), pp. 683-685. The documents are not mentioned on that first page. Is this the correct article? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 06:42, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

???

I am very confused by this... And also, where did Juan travel with Diego? I am doing a history paper and an answer ASAP!!! Jazzygirl4406 (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)--Jazzy--Jazzygirl4406 (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2018 (UTC)