User talk:Evanmayer1
== Welcome! ==
Hello, Evanmayer1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
- Introduction and Getting started
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Blythwood (talk) 01:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Hey cap'n, good luck on your project! Philibenl (talk) 19:31, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Notes on Edits to Nuclear Energy (sculpture)[edit]
Moved notes here to make my version of the page in my sandbox easier to read.
Notes[edit]
Small changes[edit]
The first thing that jumps out is the "divergent measurements exist; see text" under the dimensions property. It would be fairly easy for me to confirm the dimensions, but it's more likely that the differences arise from considering the black granite base or not in the measurement.
The main photo could use an update; I'll have to look into photographing public works of art for free use. Freedom of panorama? There are also good photos of the process leading up to installation in the University's Photographic Archives.
Other pages on sculptures are broken up into something like
Summary Design/Attributes/Construction/MaintenanceHistory <-- already some great info here Reception/Themes <-- this is my focus See also This page just has one big History section. I'd like to break it up so it's easier to read.
The Significance of the Monument[edit]
It's interesting that there is a Moore quotation on the page, but it doesn't add much of significance to the article. Some of the sources could be updated, and more of Moore's motivation or involvement could be added. This is an important marker of scientific progress, and it has special iconic value. Nearly every tour of campus passes this sculpture, and most tour guides make a vague reference to its resemblance to a skull and/or mushroom cloud, and it seems fitting. However, this suggestive anecdote has never been convincing, and I believe having proof of the artist's intent or thoughts would add more context to an already context-rich (in fact, loaded) work.
With a such a work, care must be taken to avoid value judgments about the results of the science which ushered in the nuclear age. It would be good to summarize the feelings it was met with at the time, and compare them with the artist's intent.
Connection to History of Science[edit]
This installation (and the collection of historic markers accompanying it) help us grapple with the fruits of scientific discovery. Is the work a trophy? Is it a warning? It is a tangible reminder of the science that happened at this location. It is a source; the slab in front of the sculpture has various plaques with information commemorating the event.
Secondary sources on the sculpture help us figure out how people view(ed) it in the context of the science. The sculpture has a give-and-take relationship with the event; they inform one another across time for the viewer. The location where the science was done gives context to the sculpture. A viewer of the sculpture may be influenced by it to see the science in a different way based on their interpretation of the form. It is Moore's lens on the scientific event, but the reception of the event is still left to the viewer.
Secondary Sources[edit]
The UChicago Arts Department has a great page that is a jumping off point for research. This has great body of knowledge on the sculpture's path to existence, and a distillation of this page would make a great addition to the page. I'll also be checking out some of the secondary sources from which this Arts page draws.
Tate description of sculpture, an early model ~1m high. Contains evidence that Moore disliked making sculptures for a specific locale, instead preferring that the interested parties choose from models-in-progress of what he had available. Thus, he reserved the right to continue making changes, and prevented the interested parties from influencing the content of the commission.
This has great information about the process of construction, procurement, artist intent, and the thoughts on the minds of University officials during procurement.
It appears that even Moore himself was unsure of how he would like the sculpture to be viewed, and later interviews and photo sessions alternately played up or undermined the connection to the destructive or beneficial tendencies of nuclear power.
Primary Sources For primary sources, I traced a PDF of an information sheet on the sculpture back to this Arts webpage . I believe the PDF comes from the William H. McNeill papers in Special Collections, and I'd like to see the rest of the folder.