Talk:Currier and Ives/Archives/2012

Editing the text
I've reworked the article and removed some of the warnings on top of the page. If someone could copy edit this article, I'd appreciate it.Vsanborn (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty clean! Nothing jumped out at me as far as spelling or punctuation (and I tend to be a reasonably thorough copyeditor). I removed the final warning because on the whole the article seems to me to be in good shape. Style is much more sophisticated compared to a year ago, so good job!--Eve Teschlemacher (talk) 22:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I've started to fill in information and footnotes, but this will take a while. Thus far my additions are raw and largely direct quotes from other sources. Vsanborn (talk) 20:49, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Racism
Maybe someone who knows the history of Currier and Ives should write an account of the bizarre and often extreme racism in many of their reproductions?

For example:
 * All Broke Up
 * An Affair of Honour

If noone else volunteers, I'll have a go.

Sam Dutton (talk) 20:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I've written a couple of papers on the firm, one on the race issue. Their racism isn't really that bizarre or extreme in contemporary context. One interesting thing is that they got more racist as the post-bellum era progressed. As the Southern Redeemers and populists gained more power the Darktown prints emerged. Definitely needs to be dealt with here. I'd do it, but I'm a pretty busy guy. Writing another paper on them, actually. Good luck. Ghamming (talk) 18:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The link to Albion College that I provided under The Lithographs discusses the Darktown series at length. Vsanborn (talk) 12:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

a fairly large section
of this article, the trivia, or popular culture section has been removed. I am in favor of keeping it but until there is more involvement than just the editor who made a good faith edit and me involved (called a tie) I won't "undo." Feel free to vote below or do something else.


 * Keep Carptrash (talk) 13:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Please see alternative proposal in heading immediately below. Thank you. Wikiuser100 (talk) 22:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Trivial deletions
My suggestion would be to select the most relevant of the items deleted and work them into the text the way the single most one was. Perhaps with a lead in (but ideally not under a new heading) along the lines of "Currier and Ives prints' homespun character have tended to evoke feelings of nostalgia and often serve as a metaphor for the good old days..." (in concept), then integrate a couple of examples that demonstrate this. This avoids having Wikipedia discouraged Trivia or In Popular Culture heading catch-alls, which become fly paper for every sort of "I once saw/had/my Grandmother had..." a Currier and Ives print, along with every possible citation of Currier and Ives lithos in print, lyrics, or video games. Good luck in picking the best and dodging the pitfalls such content invites. Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, thanks, Wikiuser100. Actually, I'm glad you made the decision. When I rework a Wikipedia article, I try to preserve as much of the contributions that were posted before, so I kept the trivia category. One hopes that someone (not me) will have the energy to incorporate these unrelated facts in a cohesive way. Vsanborn (talk) 22:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)