Talk:Penelope Rosemont

Surrealism
I realize that I am significantly tardy to the party, but I do want to weigh in so that this type of controversy does not happen again with things being taken up and taken down constantly from her page. It is my understanding that if something is written in one's memoirs, it is generally taken on faith that the person has told the truth unless it is actively disproven. I know that is a taken-for-granted fact among American Surrealists that the Rosemonts did visit Paris and did receive the "transmission" from Breton. Penelope Rosemont mentions that in several of her books as does Franklin. Until someone can disprove that as a hoax, which no one has so far to my knowledge, she should be taken at her word. In order to get around these "controversies" I have quoted from her books rather than referring to disputed outside sources such as letters that I personally haven't seen but that were published in the Rosemonts' book The Forecast is HOT! sometimes showing the addressed postcaard with signatures. As far as her being a Surrealist, if she calls herself one, practices Surrealist artistic, writing, and political practices, then she is. She is well-accepted by any and all members of the American Surrealist movement. She has contributed and written far too much about Surrealism to be denied the right to call herself a Surrealist.

Also, she and Franklin published a good deal of material by the Paris Surrealists and others. You can't just publish anyone you want willy-nilly. You have to have the permission of the copyright holder. Therefore they must have had contact with major Surrealists and their estates in order to publish their works in Arsenal or their imprint Black Swan Press. Fluffysingler (talk) 00:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)FluffySingler 28 March 2017

Penelope Rosemont is part of the surrealist movement, this can not be denied, please stop reverting this. Google for +"Penelope Rosemont" +"Andre Breton" -Wikipedia -encyclopedia and there will be lots of articles backing this up. I personally think that enough external evidence suggests that she was in Paris around 1966-67 and was part of the surrealist movement there. If that is indeed the case, then she MUST have met Andre Breton at some point. In any case, the open letter to surrealists in the United States written BY Andre Breton is prefaced with "Dear Franklin and Penelope Rosemont" I don't know how much more clear this must be to prove the Mr. Breton had contact with the Rosemonts. I personally would not say "welcomed by" because that is rather unprovable, but there is linkage, and she is definitely a surrealist. Removing that is advocating an un-factual POV. -Vina 21:54, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Vina, all your above information is wrong. Penelope Rosemont is inspired by surrealism. She never met Andre Breton, no matter how many bogus, "articles" you claim to show proof, there is no proof of their meeting. The open letter you refer to above is false information.Classicjupiter2 00:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * What is your basis of this claim that it's "false information" other than your well-documented anti-surrealism and dislike of the Surrealist Movement in the United States in particular? Oh, I know, you will feign ignorance of what capital letters mean, and say that you can't tell the difference between the surrealist movement in the United States and The Surrealist Movement in the United States, but the question still stands.  --Daniel C. Boyer 19:13, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Its false information. There was a May 1967 open letter to the Rosemonts, but there is no handwritten letter by Breton (in Breton's handwriting) to the Rosemonts that exists. If it does, show me.Classicjupiter2 22:40, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In Franklin's book (An Open Entrance To The Shut Palace Of) Wrong Numbers he talks about having met Andre Breton. I know because I reviewed the book for Rain Taxi. Penelope Rosemont is DEFINITELY a Surrealist and I met her two months ago at the ChicagoDada exhibit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluffysingler (talk • contribs) 23:14, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest/photo problems
There's an apparent long running issue with the quality of the photo on this article between the subject and a contributor/photographer. While not a big issue, please be careful when editing this article, as the subject has broken several templates in repeated attempts to replace this image. This image has now been removed from the article per her request in an OTRS ticket. I have no interest in revisiting this.

If the subject would like to upload a different photo, she should do so on. Create an account and upload a new file, but please don't over-write the existing image file there. A new photo file name may then be linked here, but probably should be done by editors not involved in this kerfuffle.

To the subject of this article and anyone else involved with the subject who may wish to edit this article: please read Conflict of interest carefully before editing. Ideally this suggests you should disclose your potential conflicts of interest on your user page, and propose changes on this talk page for other uninvolved editors to then make on the article.

I'll now fix some formatting / tag errors broken in these edit conflicts, but will make no other changes to the article. Thanks T L Miles (talk) 15:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)