Talk:The Burghers of Calais

Material?

What is it made of?

coords in article of calais france

• victoria place, london example {{coord|51.49751|N|0.12486|W|source:placeopedia|display=title}}Slowking4 (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

G.K. Chesteron quote

Search all the parks in all your cities, You'll find no statues of committees

I've often thought that this statue contradicts G.K. Chesterton's well-known aphorism. I wonder if there's any source discussing it. Leoniceno (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

He said: "I've searched all the parks in all the cities and found no statues of committees.", 29 May 1874 – 14 June 1936, the one in London is 1911 so it may be true that he never saw it. Did he really say it or was it one of his characters in a play? You'll have to locate the quote first and check its context. Anyway I don't really think it should be mentioned in this article. QuentinUK (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Counting to twelve

Why does the article say, "Under French law no more than twelve casts of this piece were permitted after Rodin’s death," and then add, "This is the 12th and final cast in the edition, cast 1995," when there are in fact thirteen entries in the list of casts? Cottonshirtτ 07:39, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

The phrase after Rodin's death may be the reason. But clearly support is needed for the claim, and clarification as well-- does it mean single casts of the entire ensemble? Kablammo (talk) 14:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Some clarification is on the French Wikipedia, Les Bourgeois de Calais: Les douze éditions originales, which lists twelve total, including Calais, and excludes the work in Jerusalem, which does not appear to be of the entire grouping. While the French article is also uncited, it at least is internally consistent. Kablammo (talk) 16:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I have now conformed the article to the French wiki article, which resulted in removal from the list of the works in Brooklyn[1] and Jerusalem, which appears to be a single figure rather than all six.[2] Kablammo (talk) 16:16, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

So, what is the status of the copy in the National Gallery of Australia? A photo of it is appended and I have seen it there. The National Gallery of Australia says that it is one of a different series, without pedestal. The Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art says (page 27) that reproduction is restricted by French laws of 1956 and 1968, but a search for "Rodin" in French law sites Legifrance and EasyDroit does not find them.--Wikiain (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

If you manage to sort this one out, please have a go at The Thinker .... Johnbod (talk) 14:43, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I shall request M. Poirot to turn his mind to that. But, as to the Burghers, I nave some traction. The Musée Rodin commits itself to observing Article R122-3 of the Code of Intellectual Property. This provides that no more than 12 copies (exemplaires) of a sculpture - numbered or signed or in some other way authorised by the artist - may be considered to be original works. The Musée states that this provision has been specifically applied to the Musée by laws of 1993 and 2005. The National Gallery of Australia identifies two "variants" of the sculpture, both of which exist in 12 authentic copies. The main difference between these variants is that one has a pedestal and the other does not, which was Rodin's own preference. The Gallery's copy is number 9 of the variant without a pedestal, cast in 1973. It is inscribed "A Rodin/No 9" on the upper surface of the base and, on the rear of the base, "c By Musee Rodin/E. Goddard/Fondeur" (Musée Rodin and Goddard Foundry). It appears that the Musée, to which Rodin assigned all of his property rights, considers itself able to sign on his behalf. On this evidence, the Burghers of Calais exists in 24 original copies. --Wikiain (talk) 23:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

But are those not castings of the maquettes, rather than of the full-sized sculpture? Kablammo (talk) 00:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I was confusing it with the full-sized individual figures that are in the Gallery's Sculpture Garden and are pictured in the "Gallery" section of the article.--Wikiain (talk) 01:47, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Not directly connected with the counting issue, but I have viewed another casting (not listed here) at the Ca' Pesaro gallery in Venice (https://capesaro.visitmuve.it/en/mostre-en/archivio-mostre-en/paradoxes-ca-pesaro-candida-hofer/2015/01/6438/the-burghers-of-calais/). Is there some reason it is not listed in this article? Cupid1889 (talk) 13:13, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Kablammo, you have altered to "Under French law no more than twelve casts of works of Rodin may be made." This doesn't seem to be quite the full story, but I'm not sure how to express it. As I read the Musée's statement and the relevant law, there seems to be a mixture of law and policy:

1. Article R122-3 applies the limit of 12 to sculptures and other forms of plastic art, with different limits for other types of art. Those other limits would apply to other works by Rodin, such as sketches.
2. Article R122-3 doesn't say that no more than 12 casts of a sculpture may be made: it says that no more than 12 casts, authorised by the sculptor and duly identified, may be presented as "original" works.
3. Rodin bequeathed his estate to the Musée, along with such a right of authorisation. This was not done under the Code, which dates from 1992. Also, Article R122-3 appears to suppose that the authorisation must be given personally by the artist. Perhaps Décret no. 93-163 was, in part, intended to resolve that issue, if indeed there is any doubt on that score.
4. Décret no. 93-163 of 7 February 1993 (as amended) provides in Article 2: "5. Il [le Musée] procède ou fait procéder, sous son contrôle, à des éditions originales de bronzes tirées à partir des moules et des modèles en plâtre figurant dans les collections. Ces éditions sont limitées à douze, numérotées de 1/8 à 8/8 et de I/IV à IV/IV, y compris les éditions originales existantes" (It shall produce, or cause to be produced under its supervision, original copies of bronzes cast from the moulds or plaster models in its collections. These copies are limited to twelve, numbered 1/8 to 8/8 and I/IV to IV/IV, including original copies already in existence." This seems to limit the copies to 12 in total, not permitting any further direct castings even if they were not to be claimed to be "original". Maybe that is not so - research would be needed - but I expect the Musée would be reluctant to risk deterioration of its moulds and models. (In any case now, why cast from the models when they or existing direct copies can be printed in 3D?)
5. The Musée declares that it will adhere strictly to these laws and and threatens legal action against anyone who has been claiming, or may claim, that any other copy is an "original".
6. This does not prevent the Musée from making and selling further (and presumably indirect) copies, which obviously could be a major source of revenue. Indeed, the Décret goes on to provide specifically that the Musée shall market "reproductions" of Rodin's works: "6. Il édite et commercialise des reproductions d'oeuvres de Rodin, des publications et des produits audiovisuels." Little "Thinkers" as bookends - no problem.
7. This does not prevent others too from making and using copies, including a copy that had been claimed to be original, but they must not claim that their copy is an "original" unless it had been authorised and authenticated by Rodin; they must clearly designate it as a "reproduction" (reproduction or surmoulage).
8. In the case of a living or more recently deceased artist, general copyright law would also apply.
9. Where a work has more than one version, presumably each version counts as a separate work and the law applies separately to it. So there could be quite a few "original" Burghers, as a group or individually, in various versions.

Perhaps this would help with The Thinker, Johnbod. But evidently historical knowledge is needed. All I can suggest is that copies that were not authorised and authenticated by Rodin himself or (if any) the Musée cannot be claimed to be "original". Wikiain (talk) 01:27, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Wikiaian, for this explanation, which makes a lot of sense. Can you suggest how we can reword the section?

My changes to add a citation to existing text, and adapting that text to the cited source (which was not specific to this work). And a recent change re-added the Stanford statutes to the list of twelve. Unlike the Hirshhorn cast, which is eight of an edition of twelve[3], the SIRIS entry for the Stanford group does not list a number.[4]

Kablammo (talk) 11:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the Musée Rodin, "editions of sculptures limited to twelve numbered casts, including artist’s copies, are considered to be original works of art". Respecting Rodin's moral right: A warning to collectors about the notion of authenticity". Kablammo (talk)

Only the twelve listed in the article are originals. Kablammo (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Role of Camille Claudel

Recent edits have altered the first line to state that the work is "one of the most famous sculptures by Auguste Rodin and Camille Claudel". I reverted it as unsourced. Although Claudel was his assistant and there is scholarly opinion that she contributed the hands and feet, it seems to go too far to attribute the sculpture to her. A properly-cited edit on her role may be appropriate. Kablammo (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

This item on the role of C. Claudel is cited in the article on French wikipedia. Kablammo (talk) 13:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Froissart-- fact or fable?

The sculpture embodies an event in the Siege of Calais, an event apparently found only in Froissart.[5] (see note 2.) Without delving too far into that discussion, does anyone have any suggestions how to word our text of that event, without necessarily accepting it as factual? Kablammo (talk) 18:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)