This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Painting, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.PaintingWikipedia:WikiProject PaintingTemplate:WikiProject PaintingPainting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 April 2020 and 7 May 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Margaritamanrique7.
A couple of things seem weird here: the value judgment saying he was never as good a painter as his master (we're talking about DIEGO VELAZQUEZ; that doesn't even need to be said, I think) and "only" minor works, which I think comes across as unnecessarily demeaning--let's talk about what he DID accomplish only; and later, the article mentions that the Innocent X picture was difficult because Velazquez had to paint "from life"... unlike his other portraits, which were ??? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
67.169.231.108 (
talk)
14:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)reply
REDIRECT [[fsdrfsetfrftre4t<nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here
ftesfte</nowiki>4rfwe4]]
You are correct,
67.169.231.108. If the authors ever said that he wasn't "as good" as Velázquez, beyond artists the caliber of Rembrandt and Vermeer, who was? As for "minor" paintings, The Calling of Saint Matthew (which includes a self-portrait of de Pareja) is held by the
Museo de Prado, after all. That renowned museum saw value in Pareja's work. I saw, and was stunned/arrested/transfixed by, the painting Juan de Pareja at the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, but it was when I took art history in college that I discovered the artist, Juan de Pareja, and learned about his body of work. That course and accompanying textbook didn't waste time on minor artists. The article, happily, no longer calls de Pareja "not as good" or a "minor" painter. Thank you,
Wordreader (
talk)
04:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)reply
I just dropped by to point that out, too. It's interesting if you are are a Velázquez and de Pareja fan, but it is a novel, a fictionalized version of de Pareja's life. As you can see from it's WP article, the book won a "
Newbery Medal for excellence in American children's literature". Unfortunately, it's not a scholarly work at all and should not be cited as a source for this article for these reasons. Thank you,
Wordreader (
talk)
04:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)reply
Life of Juan de Pareja--sources?
I remember hearing some interesting stories about Juan de Pareja a while ago--unfortunately I cannot now find sources for them. Here's what I recall:
It was forbidden for slaves to learn how to paint, but Juan de Pareja taught himself in secret to be a painter. de Pareja was a devout man, and was troubled not to be able to confess to his priest that he was secretly painting. Eventually, although afraid of the consequences, he told Velazquez, who freed him. (The "taught himself in secret" part is in the Maxwell reference, which has an interesting story about how he didn't reveal to Velazquez that he was a painter until he was 45 years old, when he left a painting where King Phillip would find it. But the story in Maxwell is otherwise different from the story I remember hearing...)
Velazquez injured his right hand while traveling to Rome to paint the pope. de Pareja helped heal it, so that Velazquez was able to paint again. In gratitude for de Pareja's help, and to make sure that the hand had regained its skill, Velazquez painted de Pareja's portrait.
I'm confused by this article. Is it meant to be about the masterpiece PAINTING, Juan de Pareja or the wonderful ARTIST, Juan de Pareja? It blurs both topics together and really shortchanges the man, who went on to have a successful career. Although he didn't reach the pinnacle that Velásquez did, he was darned good; his work is still included in college-level art history courses.
I went to JSTOR to see the article on his manumission papers, and was able to access a preview of "Velázquez Marginalia: His Slave Juan de Pareja and His Illegitimate Son Antonio" by Jennifer Montagu, The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 125, No. 968 (Nov., 1983), pp. 683-685. The documents are not mentioned on that first page. Is this the correct article? Thank you,
Wordreader (
talk)
06:42, 5 September 2014 (UTC)reply