Talk:Hercules's Dog Discovers Purple Dye
 | A fact from Hercules's Dog Discovers Purple Dye appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 June 2018 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
part of a cycle of paintings of Hercules[edit]
Lovely article. Rubens not much good on snail biology, excels at subtext.
Can we identify the other paintings which are "part of a cycle of paintings of Hercules" by PPR? --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:53, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- This was just a sketch. The Prado has the finished painting based on the sketch, by a different artist. Their catalogue (in Spanish) mentions some other similar Rubens sketches - they hold about a dozen - but most are not scenes of Heracles. 213.205.251.28 (talk) 10:50, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Ships in art[edit]
I was going to categorize it 'Water in art' when I spotted the ships in back. It's not a "maritime painting" (another category which lists paintings in which ships are prominent) because the ships aren't prominent, but they are shown in the cities' bay and can be easily seen on the full-size painting (even though it's a small painting) about eight of them (I said ten but counted again). Always have to consider what the painting looks like full size, as if standing in front of it. That's why the categorization. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:37, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- It is not a WP:DEFINING piece of the artwork, the way the dog, Hercules, and the shell are. You might just as well classify it as "starfish in art" or "arrow quivers in art" or "hills in art" or "clouds in art" or "flying birds in art" or or "stone arch gateways in art" or by any other of the incidental details of the painting. If we had a "beaches in art" classification, it could go there. See also WP:NONDEF "if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead portion of an article, it is probably not defining". Would you mention the ships in the lead? No? Then why use them for categorization? —David Eppstein (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Then it should go into "Water in art" but that would be incorrect, as there are ships in the painting. They are not prominent, or else they'd be classified in "Maritime paintings", but they do exist in the work. I'd personally mention the ships in the lead, yes, as they define that the city in the background has an active harbor with quite a lot of commerce. Rubens did not place Hercules and his dog on a random stretch of beach, but shows them, purposely, placed in front of a thriving city and harbor. The city and the ships define locale. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- It is specifically Tyre. That, not the fact that it has a harbor, is what is relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:40, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- There is no visual indication of the cities name unless someone is familiar with it. It's a city, and Rubens had to know that in the future people would not be able to automatically household-name pinpoint the city. So he used the harbor and the ships to define it as a hub of commerce. So yes, the city and the busy harbor should be in the lead, or at least the city named and the ships pointed out in a relevant category. Good to meet you by the way, we've probably crossed Wikipedia paths without saying hello. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- p.s. The Tyre page puts a large focus on the harbors. For example "The original island city had two harbours, one on the south side and the other on the north side of the island. It was the two harbours that enabled Tyre to gain the maritime prominence that it did; the harbour on the north side of the island was, in fact, one of the best harbours on the eastern end of the Mediterranean", so the harbor and its ships have historically played a key role, and Rubens was likely not just plunking Hercules and his dog down anywhere along a beach, but backdropped them with one of the historically important facts of ancient times. Thanks for mentioning the location and the link. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, yes, your name looks familiar but I'm not sure where from. Anyway, it's less relevant for this specific picture that it's a hub of commerce and more relevant that it's where Tyrian purple comes from. And why would Rubens think future viewers would forget a story that by his time was already a couple thousand years old? —David Eppstein (talk) 21:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- True, he may have thought, like New York in the states or Paris, that the image of Tyre and the story would be known and recognized by all literate people. I'm semi-literate and this is the first time I've consciously known of this mythical event. For that I thank you (and I checked and there is a "Seashells in art" category, if you know of any that are maybe missed...). Randy Kryn (talk) 22:00, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, yes, your name looks familiar but I'm not sure where from. Anyway, it's less relevant for this specific picture that it's a hub of commerce and more relevant that it's where Tyrian purple comes from. And why would Rubens think future viewers would forget a story that by his time was already a couple thousand years old? —David Eppstein (talk) 21:52, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- p.s. The Tyre page puts a large focus on the harbors. For example "The original island city had two harbours, one on the south side and the other on the north side of the island. It was the two harbours that enabled Tyre to gain the maritime prominence that it did; the harbour on the north side of the island was, in fact, one of the best harbours on the eastern end of the Mediterranean", so the harbor and its ships have historically played a key role, and Rubens was likely not just plunking Hercules and his dog down anywhere along a beach, but backdropped them with one of the historically important facts of ancient times. Thanks for mentioning the location and the link. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- There is no visual indication of the cities name unless someone is familiar with it. It's a city, and Rubens had to know that in the future people would not be able to automatically household-name pinpoint the city. So he used the harbor and the ships to define it as a hub of commerce. So yes, the city and the busy harbor should be in the lead, or at least the city named and the ships pointed out in a relevant category. Good to meet you by the way, we've probably crossed Wikipedia paths without saying hello. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- It is specifically Tyre. That, not the fact that it has a harbor, is what is relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:40, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
- Then it should go into "Water in art" but that would be incorrect, as there are ships in the painting. They are not prominent, or else they'd be classified in "Maritime paintings", but they do exist in the work. I'd personally mention the ships in the lead, yes, as they define that the city in the background has an active harbor with quite a lot of commerce. Rubens did not place Hercules and his dog on a random stretch of beach, but shows them, purposely, placed in front of a thriving city and harbor. The city and the ships define locale. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)