Talk:The Treachery of Images

message: * the template on this article claims there's original research. where? i can't spot any. i'm removing the template in a while unless someone can find any evidence of any W guice 14:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: here you go: It might be true that Magritte's point in these "Ceci n'est pas" works is that no matter how closely, through realism-art, we come to depicting an item accurately, we never do catch the item itself, per se, as a Kantian noumenon, but capture only an image on the canvas. But that interpretation trivializes Magritte's insight -- for it is true of any painting, and every artist and child would admit it, that what the painting does is only present an image of a thing, and the thing itself is not on or in the canvas. It might be more plausible to interpret Magritte as commenting on Freudian psychoanalysis -- a topic not very far removed from many of his surrealistic works, anyway. Sigmund Freud, especially in his dream analysis, continually asserted that what clearly and obviously seemed to be an X in a dream was not really an X, that it was an X only patently, on the surface, but not latently or deeply, that the X in the dream represented or was a metaphor for some other thing, Y. The dream-image train is really a penis, for example. So when Magritte says "This is not a pipe," what he means is that it may be possible to think that it is only an image that stands for something else, that the phenomenal reality of the pipe obscures or hides the true reality lying underneath. The difficult question, if we go this far, is whether Magritte intended to provide support for or to illustrate sympathetically Freudian dream analysis -- the treachery of dreams -- or, instead, was mocking it: "You mean this image, which is obviously a pipe-image, is not really a pipe-image? Tell me another!" i can see how you'd miss that, it's only half the article. --dan 05:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *while i appreciate your ever-so-clever sarcasm, i think citation neededs would probably be more apt for this bit W guice 11:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: it reads very strongly to me as the thoughts of whoever wrote that up, but since they don't actually say it is, i suppose citation needed would be more appropriate. --dan 21:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: OR watch

message: http://www.threadless.com/product/543/This_is_not_a_Pipe
Could this be included in the "In Popular Culture" section? Raz.you.up 19:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. P. S. Burton  (talk) 15:14, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: T-shirt

message: Robert Zakheim, author of the webcomic Legendary created a parody of the image consisting of Colonel Mustard hefting a lead pipe. The caption was, "Ceci n'est pas Colonel Moutarde avec une pipe."
Is this really necessary? I hardly think a public comment is 'pop culture' 72.65.22.88 00:52, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Webcomic? 

message: It's an image of "The Treachery of Images". SnappingTurtle 16:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, SnappingTurtle.  You win.  —Aladdin Sane (talk) 22:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  That's not "The Treachery of Images" 

message: I don't have any verification for the quote on this page, but in _Obit Magazine_ <http://www.obit-mag.com/news.php?id=160> there is the quote
:He explained, “Can it be stuffed with tobacco, my pipe? No, it’s only a depiction, isn’t it? If I had written ‘This is a pipe’ under my picture, I would have been lying!”
Unfortunately, that article doesn't cite a reference either... LachlanA (talk) 00:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote attrributed to magritte 

message: I'm removing the Dadaist reference of the first line. Though he was aware of and probably influenced by Dada, I have never heard him termed a Dadaist. Even if someone could find an example where the work is more properly termed Dada instead of Surrealism, I don't think that's enough since he's got examples of Impressionism and Cubism in some of his early works, too. The Magritte article doesn't call him a Dadaist either. Mosfet007 (talk) 03:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dadaist 

message: It's not a pipe. It's an image which represents a pipe, in our minds ;) — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (talk) 20:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Answer 

message: It is my understanding that when this painting was exhibited for the first time, someone hung a photograph of Magritte next to it with the legend, "Ceci n'est pas un idiote" -- "This is not an idiot." Is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.31 (talk) 03:47, 8 April 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.217.212.34 (talk)  
:Understanding of what? GregorB (talk) 20:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ceci n'est pas un idiote 

message: I'd like to thank Joe Decker above for clearing up the "series" confusion and start a new topic (since I found it when researching the "series" topic).  The French Wikipedia article fr:La Trahison des images has this paragraph:
Plus précisément à cette époque, dans la peinture mais aussi dans la littérature des écrivains de science fiction A. E. van Vogt, Isaac Asimov et d'autres, les artistes vont introduire dans l'art des théories humaines et de sociologie vulgarisées dans les années 1950/60. Cela fait référence à la sémantique générale (1933) dont la phrase la plus représentative est « la carte n'est pas le territoire »
Google translate says it says:
Specifically at this time, in painting but also in the literature of science fiction writers A. E. van Vogt, Isaac Asimov and others, the artists will introduce the art of human theories of sociology and popularized in the years 1950/60. This refers to the general semantics (1933) whose most representative sentence is "the map is not the territory"
I'd like to add it to the English article, but I have no sources to back up the assertion that the authors and the painting are linked, and I don't think the addition would be as un-contentious in English as it seems to be in French.  Does anyone know a source on the influence of the image on authors as van Vogt and Asimov so we can add it?  —Aladdin Sane (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The mutual influence is probably Borges' "On Exactitude in Science" - as far as I'm aware GS more or less stole this far more ingenious concept years after the fact and conflated Borges theory with the GS one. K just posited a relatively unsophisticated concept of the abstract blazingly obvious to anyone who studied Euclidean Geometry (itself already largely supplanted by Non-Euclidean) at the time Korbynzski was actually teaching. Borges' concept of the map is a realized abstraction that exceeds the object described, not something so simple as GS' social constructionism via Euclid. Foucault (and Baudrillard and many others) were influenced by Borges. I'd be unsurprised if Asimov was as well. General semantics has never been accepted in the academy and is a fringe element in America due to its lack of any scientific rigor. Asimov, given his scientific background would be unlikely to buy into it. I don't know if he was familiar with Magritte, but Asimov was extremely well-cultured so it's possible. 74.68.23.194 (talk) 18:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to authors in "literature of science fiction" 

message: This section doesn't actually add anything. It basically says that several people talk about the piece in several books. Can anybody actually add what they discuss? 67.193.182.150 (talk) 05:07, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Literary and cultural criticism 

message: I'm sorry that someone apparently watched that movie "The Fault in Our Stars" last weekend and thought it would be appropriate to add a sentence about it to this entry, but I think that that sentence's information pretty obviously fails to meet at least a few criteria for inclusion in wikipedia articles, e.g. significance.  Plus, there's no citation, so I think it pretty obviously needs to be removed.  Can someone who knows more about editing do this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.121.130 (talk) 23:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fault In Our Stars" sentence 

message: Didn't this inspire that whole spoon thing in the Matrix? Anyone have some cites?23:08, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no pipe. 

message: I don't know if this should be included here, or maybe over there: The "Immersion Box" release of the Pink Floyd album Wish You Were Here is inspired by this painting. 
See e.g. https://www.amazon.de/Wish-Were-Here-Immersion-Blu-ray/dp/B004ZNAUVW 85.179.1.3 (talk) 13:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Request from a person who doesn't speak French: Can someone who speaks French fluently please record "Ceci n'est pas une pipe"? Just say it into a microphone, save it as an .ogg, and upload it to WikiMedia with a CC-BY license. I wanted to hear the phrase pronounced correctly, and I am sure I am not the only person. (As evidence, it is fairly easy to find this on Youtube. Copyright prevents me from simply stealing the audio from Youtube.) Fluoborate (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can a French speaker please record themself saying the caption? 

message: I feel like the article ought to make some mention of Magritte's followup painting "The Two Mysteries" ("Les Deux Mystères"), which depicts a giany pipe floating above a print of The Treachery of Images  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.6.113 (talk) 17:13, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Two Mysteries 

message: https://mltshp.com/p/1F1Y8  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.205.14.37 (talk) 12:48, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ceci n'est pas un captcha