User talk:80.56.98.107

February 2023

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Marcel Duchamp—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Stay with the facts please. Your sandbox is passive aggressive and not ok. https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/06/14/de-leugen-van-marcel-duchamp-a1606507, read this. If you include the right information I'm fine. It's important that the maker of the fountain is prominent in this article because people assume it's made by Duchamp. 80.56.98.107 (talk) 10:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

1917: Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven was living in New York City at the time of the Society of Independent Artists exhibition, where the Fountain was submitted. Marcel Duchamp, on the other hand, was not living in the city at the time, and it is uncertain whether he even saw the urinal in person.

1917: Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven was known for creating artwork out of found objects, just like her famous assemblage sculpture God (1917). She likely saw the urinal as a ready-made object that could be transformed into art, and she created the Fountain in her unique style of found-object art.

1917: "R. Mutt" was a pun on the German word Armut meaning poverty, this was part of her artist statement.

The handwriting on the Fountain is strikingly similar to Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven's handwriting in other works of art and in personal letters. It is well known that she was the one who signed the urinal with the pseudonym "R. Mutt.

”The joke of "mutt" has also been interpreted as a reference to Elsa's nickname "M'Lady," which suggests that she may have signed the urinal with the pseudonym

1935: The first time the Fountain was attributed to someone, it was attributed to Marcel Duchamp. However, Duchamp's claim that he purchased the urinal from a plumbing store named J.L. Mott has been disputed. There was no shop at the location where he would have bought the object, only a showroom, and it was later discovered that the urinal had been shipped from Philadelphia. Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven was known to have been in Philadelphia at that time, while Duchamp was not. Also to refer to a showroom is not an artistic statement, while referring to poverty is.

1935: Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven had already passed away by the time the Fountain was first attributed to Marcel Duchamp. It is possible that she did not assert herself as the creator of the urinal because she did not have the opportunity to do so.

Theo Paijmans, a Dutch author and art historian, has argued that Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven was the true creator of the Fountain. He has cited the similarity between the Fountain and Elsa's other works of art, as well as the similarity between the handwriting on the urinal and Elsa's handwriting, as evidence of her authorship.

Irene Gammel, a Canadian literary historian who has written extensively about Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven, has also claimed that the artist was a significant influence on Duchamp and that her work deserves greater recognition. Gammel has pointed out that Elsa's other works from the same period as the Fountain, such as her assemblage sculpture Cathedral (1918), are closely related to the urinal and suggest that she was the one who created it.

In conclusion, the evidence strongly suggests that Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven was the creator of the Fountain, not Marcel Duchamp. Her unique style of found-object art, the similarity between the handwriting on the urinal and her handwriting, the artist statement and the proximity of her location to the urinal's shipment all point to her as the true author of this artwork. 80.56.98.107 (talk) 15:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Marcel Duchamp. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Nick Levine (talk) 09:04, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

This is an unnecessary aggressive reply Nick Levine. If you have something to say to me change your way of speaking.

It's imported that people know that Marcel Duchamp is not the maker of that piece of art. People also should now who did. In this page, it's hard to tell. 80.56.98.107 (talk) 09:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

If I look at your profile Materialscientist it is clear you don't know about this matter. The article in the guardian is not right. 80.56.98.107 (talk) 15:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Marcel Duchamp and Fountain (Duchamp)) for a period of 1 week for edit warring.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

---