Talk:Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven

message: "She related the ways that political structures promote masculine authority figures in family settings, functioning as a means of maintaining the state's patriarchal societal order of which even the patriarch is submissive to her father's behavior. Her discontent with her father's hegemonic masculine control may have fostered her anti-patriarchal activist approach to life."
This makes no sense logically or grammatically. I'd like to correct it, but I don't know where to begin. Her father IS literally the patriarch. How can he submit to his own behavior? Where exactly in her life (in her writings? then say so) did she "relate the ways that political structures promote masculine authority figures in family settings"? Did she do that in her writings? Which ones? Please specify. What antecedent does the word "functioning" modify? Not clear! What does "of which even the patriarch is submissive to her father's behavior" even mean in English? There's no way that "the patriarch is submissive to her father's behavior" can grammatically be "of" anything. It's pure nonsense.
I'm going to prune away the parts that make absolutely no sense & try to leave the rest as best as I can.
Zenomax (talk) 07:21, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incoherence 

message: "Her father, a mason, sexually and physically abused her in her childhood, which possibly contributed to her later lifelong promiscuous behavior, prostitution, venereal disease, and numerous affairs with both men and women throughout her lifetime, including the writer Djuna Barnes."
I think this is kind of original research (the idea that her abuse led to prostitution and bisexaulity), having looked at the source. Andral (talk) 03:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really. It's pretty well known that childhood sexual abuse usually leads to, or rather, victims often exhibit promiscuity and an inability to form meaningful long-lasting relationships. However, I agree that the statement needs a reference. Boneyard90 (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abuse 

message: Just curious when she divorced any of her husbands? She seemed to get married, but she never got divorced :) It'd be great to have citations and information about her relationships regarding this! SarahStierch (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: First divorce now referenced. No evidence of a divorce from Greve though.Nedrutland (talk) 08:26, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Divorces 

message: In the section Collage, Performance and Assemblage the translation of the French doesn't seem quite right to me.
"Une de mes amies sous un pseudonyme masculin, Richard Mutt, avait envoyé une pissotière en porcelaine comme sculpture" 
("One of my female friends, who had adopted the pseudonym, Richard Mutt, sent me a porcelain urinal as a sculpture.")
I don't think that the original says it was sent *to him* does it?
Meaigs (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; now altered. Nedrutland (talk) 08:27, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of French 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141103145411/http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Did-Marcel-Duchamp-steal-Elsas-urinal/36155 to http://www.theartnewspaper.com/articles/Did-Marcel-Duchamp-steal-Elsas-urinal/36155
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140827035957/http://cphdox.dk/en/screening/filmballad-mamadada to http://cphdox.dk/en/screening/filmballad-mamadada
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051215180022/http://home1.gte.net/zzyzlane/write/essay/baroness.html to http://home1.gte.net/zzyzlane/write/essay/baroness.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719055413/http://www.literaturhaus-berlin.de/unten/prosa/p_maerz_05.html to http://www.literaturhaus-berlin.de/unten/prosa/p_maerz_05.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:02, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article now implies that there is no doubt Duchamp made the Fountain (Francis explains...).
I am absolutely not an expert in this field, but I do wonder if this one expert is more of an expert than those who claim Elsa von Freytag-Loringhoven is more likely to be the true artist of this piece (these experts being Irene Gammel, Glynn Thomson, Julian Spalding and John Higgs). After reading https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/06/14/de-leugen-van-marcel-duchamp-a1606507 (sorry, Dutch) and https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/art/features/was-marcel-duchamps-fountain-actually-created-by-a-long-forgotten-pioneering-feminist-10491953.html, I'm not at all convinced we can be certain either of them made the piece. Femkemilene (talk) 20:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Fountain

message: In 2008 a photo of actress Maria Germanova in costume for Maeterlinck's The Blue Bird was posted on a blog. Some time later someone cropped the photo and claimed it was a photo of the Baroness. I have seen it called an image of her on Tumblr. At some point it was added to this Wikipedia article. Unfortunately this error has now been perpetuated in an article in The Guardian, using a similar crop to the one in the Wikipedia article.
--Larrybob (talk) 04:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It actually appears that the photo was added to this article after its publication in The Guardian rather than vice versa as I originally thought.--Larrybob (talk) 04:53, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: VRT agent: We've received Ticket:2021073110002646 regarding this issue. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 11:10, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect photo 

message: Since this is the second reference I have come across concerning the wording of Duchamp's letter (the first being in the article about the "Fountain"), I find it necessary to point out that "avait envoyé une pissotière" should be translated as "submitted a urinal" (or "sent in"). One of the older meanings of the term "envoi" being a submission to an art exhibition or competition, something Duchamp would have known. This rules out speculation on a distinction between "sent" and "made" that would miss the point of the piece. To further speculate that "Rrose Sélavy" might be one of the candidates for authorship seems bizarre, since it means that Duchamp would have hidden behind two pseudonyms ("Richard Mutt" being the other one). Why would he would have played such games with his own sister? Jan van der Zone (talk) 12:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording of Duchamp's letter of April 11, 1917