Talk:Carnival of Venice

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wikinerd03. Peer reviewers: Carleighrosenberg.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

External links

I have added a fair amount to the History section, including some of the Carnival from 1979-present. In it I have tried to address some of the comments below. Such as: the renewal of Carnevale during the 1870s and 1880s, why/how it was outlawed by the Facists. when it was started again, in 1979, and one of the reasons... and a book that might be useful... UncaBob, 13 July 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 22:03, 13 July 2009 (UTC).

I deleted the external link for a site that lists bed and breakfasts and other low cost accomodations for Venice. I believe it is the kind of commercial advertising that is not within the Wikipedia policy. If anyone thinks different, please let me know.Ninarosa 15:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely agree, it is naked commerce, that link was also inserted into the Italian article. I removed it (again). Ryancolm 12:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Carnival hiatus

I am confused about the claim that Fascism outlawed Carnival. AFAIK, Carnival in Venice was pretty much dead since the Austria-Hungarian invasion, and it was revived in 1979--as an initiative by the Comune di Venezia, not because of a mask shop. Any source for these claims?--Ninarosa 17:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

My wife (who's Italian) says she distinctly remembers that the Venice Carnival was revived by the Comune di Venezia in or around 1981 (so it could be 1979 as you say). I'll see if I can find some Italian-language references. Ryancolm 09:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The fascists would have opposed anything that overtly competed with Italian nationalism. Venetian carnival would probably have been seen as decadent local expression at the very least. As an international event, Venetian carnival could only be celebrated in a highly controlled manner such as the film festival. The film festival was created by the fascists as a vehicle for propaganda. To better understand social changes during pre war italy, see Filippo Tommaso Marinetti. American media was often screened for internal consumption. Mickey Mouse was renamed to the more Italian Topolino. So I don't really understand why you are so confused. I personally know some of the very talented people who first experimented with Venetian masks in the 1980s and like my aunt they remain mostly anonymous. Is it the masks makers who created carnival or the alderman for tourism? --M.tieuli 23:52, 6 February 2009 (GMT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.199.68 (talk)

So far I've found that Maurizio Cecconi, the then alderman for tourism in Venice, together with Maurizio Scaparro of the Venice Biennale was responsible for reviving Carnival in Venice (http://www.golemindispensabile.it/chisiamo.asp, scroll down to the bio notes for Maurizio Cecconi, in Italian).

There's a website that looks promising, www.storiadivenezia.it, which somebody else might have the time to plough through - I don't, sorry. Ryancolm 12:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Title

im not sure whether the title should be renamed as its more about the masks than the whole carnival Skullkid 3 11:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC) skullkid 3

redundancies and bad share with article about Venetian masks

The Carnival_of_Venice article contains a whole section about the different types of masks, while the Venetian_masks article (where it would belong) does not contain such information about the masks. Since the Venetian_masks article is linked at the beginning of the text about the masks, it might be wiser to move the mask type description from Carnival_of_Venice to Venetian_masks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.194.115.191 (talk) 13:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the Carnival_of_Venice article and the Venetian_masks article are badly structured and have too much overlapping. I also wonder if one of the articles should contain a reference to Commedia dell'arte. M.tieuli 23:58, 6 February 2009 (GMT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.199.68 (talk)

--This article does not have any photos of the mask types! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.73.53.145 (talk) 00:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

carnival fun

carnival fun —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.30.108.239 (talk) 09:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

A good article

A good article should give a clear outline right away about what the article is about. The reader is left wanting and asking what actually does the carnival celebrate?--Tubs uk (talk) 15:47, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

History Section

I have added the tags to the history section after a brief reading. It seems as though it has been sourced particularly heavily from a book or other medium; however, I'm unable to verify my point further, so I won't go about deleting anything. Also, it seems as though the editor has used a personal (and informal) tone, as if he were narrating the history. I know nothing of the history of the Carnival of Venice, so I am unable to modify or improve the article myself, but have highlighted my concerns in the hope that others (share them and) will work to rectify them. Thanks. 79.71.124.92 (talk) 21:13, 22 August 2009 (UTC) im not findind anithing abput the origin of carnival i venezxa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.24.147.216 (talk) 17:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Let the Carnival Stay!

This article gives enough information about the carnival. If one knew anything about the Italian renaissance they would know that masquerade balls were a frequent, fun, and unique part of their society, which is why they continue this tradition yearly.--Giovannacivetta (talk) 01:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Abolition and resurrection of Venice carnival

It's interesting that the suppression of the Carnival of Venice has been attributed in this article to the Fascist regime. I'm sure that elsewhere I was told that the Carnival was suppressed by Napoleon. He also had his troops destroy the Doge's splendid gilded barge, the Bucentaur, used in the annual marriage of the city to the sea.

Many writers have recently identified carnival as in some respects a form of political resistance, so it is quite possible to imagine that it would be revived and suppressed on numerous occasions. It may well have been suppressed by Napoleon, revived during the Risorgimento, suppressed by the Austro-Hungarian regime, revived again, suppressed by the Fascists, and as we know eventually revived again in the 70s and 80s.

Today it looks much more "showy" than what one can see in Canaletto's 18th century paintings. Perhaps, though, he was painting for an aristocratic and not a popular audience. Or perhaps South German and Flemish traditions have got introduced in the process of carnival revival.

There is plenty for someone to research! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glpjne (talk • contribs) 08:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Errors/lack of clarity

The article states: "The Carnival starts starts 40 days before easter and ends on Shrove Tuesday (Fat Tuesday or Martedì Grasso), the day before Easter." Shrove Tuesday is not the day before Easter, as this article seems to say. It is the day before Ash Wednesday, the start of Lent. Furthermore, 40 days before Easter is sometime during Lent, which is not a time in which carnivals are held.

The above paragraph is correct. Shrove Tuesday is 47 days before Easter, and the carnival commences on Friday and includes one more Friday before ending on Tuesday - which means it's 58 days before Easter. Zelevin (talk) 04:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)zelevin

References

Please correct typo in 1st paragraph that states that Carnevale starts "4000 days before Easter", should be 40. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.235.110.194 (talk) 02:26, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Too many images?

What exactly does "two masked figures in dark red look at the camera" illustrate that "two masked figures in orange look at one another" does not? Or "four masked figures walk down a street" compared to "two masked figures stand next to a canal"? Given that the article goes into some detail about different types of masks, we should avoid misleading the reader by putting a photograph alongside a piece of text when it is not specifically illustrating that text. --McGeddon (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

The two masked figures in orange are close up, so we get a good look at the masks. The two masked figures in dark red are further away and we get to see additionally (a) their body costumes and (b) a stereotypical view of Venice waterfront with the Piazza San Marco in the background. The masks in those two photos are the most common and usual masks for women (milk white faces with red lips). Picking two photos with that particular maske type will give the reader a more representative impresssion than picking one of the photos to have an off-beat or unusual mask. Regarding the third photo, i.e. four masked figures walking down the street, on thinking about it, you are making me come around to the view that it doesn't have enough new information after the reader has seen the first two. Okay, let's delete it then. Or maybe add a different photo that has more new content.

On the consideration you have that the subject of a photo ought to be tightly connected to the local text it is placed at, it's a good general rule, but I say it's not strictly necessary when other considerations are tending to override it. As I've said already, it's my view that for this subject, i.e. Carnival of Venice and Venetian masks, photos are more telling than thousands of words. So it's my view that the photos should be there one way or another. Seanwal111111 (talk) 23:45, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, but we shouldn't overwhelm the reader with too many thousands of words! Not in the body of the article, at least. The gallery can do the heavy lifting.

Good point about showing the full-body costumes. It'd be helpful to clarify in captions that we're looking at "common" masks, if that's the case. The "Masks at the Carnival of Venice, with the "Bauta" mask shown on the left." image is particularly useful for both giving an impression of the carnival and illustrating a particular mask style, so it'd be good if we could use other pictures to serve a similar dual purpose. --McGeddon (talk) 09:33, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Copy/paste

I've noticed that in the section, Carnival mask, Types of mask, Colombina. The whole section is nearly completely copied and pasted from http://themascherade.com/contents/en-us/d5_Page_5.html I believe this page should be reviewed for plagiarism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naruto9181 (talk • contribs) 06:58, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Splitting masks section to its own article

I believe the section on carnival masks is inaccurately titled, as the masks described were worn year-round in Venice, not just at carnival time. Also, readers searching for information on particular masks have to jump through a bunch of dab hoops to get to this article, creating a sad situation where questionably-sourced Pinterests and Tumblrs are serving as the de facto authoritative online reference on this subject. So, I think this section should be split into a separate article.

Lastly, as the above section correctly states, the masks section text seems to be copied from a single source – also bad, and should be cleaned up as part of the split. There are plenty of other, more reliable sources out there on this subject, and it shouldn't be too hard to get this into better shape. I'm going to tackle this part first (i.e., clean up the copyvio in that section, add more refs, etc.) and if no one objects to a split, I'll probably go ahead and move it off to its own page. Accedie^{talk to me} 22:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good, Accedie; do go ahead and do it! This consultation has run long enough. I've already improved the images a bit. HLHJ (talk) 01:07, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Venice Carnival - Masked Lovers (2010).jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Venice Carnival - Masked Lovers (2010).jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 27, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-01-27. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Picture of the day

Masked lovers during the 2010 Carnival of Venice, an annual festival held in Venice, Italy, which ends on Shrove Tuesday. Although it traces its roots to the 12th century, the current festival only began in 1979, when the Italian government used the Carnival as the centerpiece of its efforts to bring back the history and culture of Venice. Elaborate masks such as those shown here play a central role in the festival, and have become part of popular culture.Photograph: Frank Kovalchek

Photos by Onderkokturk

Carnival of Venice 2020

Eokokturk and Onderkokturk have replaced all the gallery photos in this article (here and here) with some taken by Onderturk. While the photos are good-quality, I think this replacement should be discussed by independent editors. I also feel it's recentist to have only 2020 photos in the gallery, especially as the Carnival was reportedly cancelled this year as a COVID-19 measure; more varied captions would also be good. HLHJ (talk) 01:00, 4 September 2020 (UTC) user: onderkokturk: I'am not replaced, I added news!

Wiki Education assignment: Venetian Renaissance Art

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2023 and 12 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Venice Art (article contribs). Peer reviewers: AadityaGupta19, Jen.ellis.

— Assignment last updated by MayaHBu (talk) 21:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)