Talk:The Blackcurrant Pie

Banketje(stuk); breakfast piece
Hi, hi , The picture doesn't seem really typical of the banketje or the breakfast piece, and the Oxford Reference translation of the one as the other is surprising. Could we perhaps put a full stop (period) after "style" and delete the rest of that sentence? Best wishes, Frans Fowler (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi . Well, Sandrine Le Bideau-Vincent (ref. 1) calls the painting a banketjestuk, using explicitly the Dutch term. We can only add further references, but not change the content of those that we already use. Best wishes, --Edelseider (talk) 14:32, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I totally agree with Frans on this one. Such dubious Dutch terms should either have good Wikipedia articles to explain them or just not be used at all. The Still life page is interesting because the most screen real estate is given to Dutch paintings but this may be simply because of other issues with still-life painting definitions. I am not about to tackle any of these definitions but I would certainly not characterize this painting as either a "banquet piece" or even a "monochrome banquet" even though that is what the sources say. May I remind both of you that when the birth of art history took place in the late 19th-century most of these had never been cleaned? Everything looked pretty monochrome whether they had colors or not. Using this term is just ridiculous to me, whether or not there is a whole community of folks who consider this a proper term. Please can we just follow the AAT or leave out the Dutch terms entirely? Here's the AAT on "banketje" which they (correctly) pluralize with "banketjes" 300265043. Jane (talk) 15:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Jane, you can go ahead and edit this article as much as you like. Do you have access to the two books that are used as references? --Edelseider (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Having just reverted my edit you are surely saying this with a touch of irony? My current estimated time of completion on the Vroom catalog is at least another month, but that's if I can track down the pre-1945 catalogs quoted in there. Once that's done there will be more illustrations to back up this being the prime version for a series of replicas. It's OK to leave as a stub, notability is not the issue. Using a source to uphold a clear mistake is not a good idea however. Jane (talk) 15:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

No arguments against the proposal, so I'm doing it. -- Frans Fowler (talk) 00:03, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Heda cup
Just reiterating here that the most interesting item on display in this painting is the carefully crafted overturned nautilus cup. This is not even mentioned in the article! Also how people decided that this was a blackberry-based pie is beyond me, but titles have very interesting provenances and I am not going there today. If any info does turn up on the title it would definitely be worth mentioning. Jane (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * As yet, the article is a stub. Le Bideau-Vincent's article about the painting is long and useful, Jacquot's is shorter, but useful too. However, I am not and prone to write long, detailed, and excellently referenced articles. I leave that to the real specialists! :) --Edelseider (talk) 15:14, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * For the avoidance of confusion: The Beaux-Arts in Strasbourg does call it a tourte au cassis (blackcurrant pie), not a blackberry pie. (Blackberries and apple do make a very good pie, though, specially at this time of the year.) Frans Fowler (talk) 22:10, 5 September 2022 (UTC)