Talk:Palazzo del Te

message: This article treats such a signal monument in the history of Western art that the coverage deserves to be expanded. Here are some quotes from the Britannica, for processing by more experienced editors:
#"This palace is almost a parody of the serene classicism of Donato Bramante while retaining the forms of Roman antiquity. The building consists of a square block around a central court with a garden opening off at right angles to the main axis--in itself characteristic of the way in which all the elements are slightly different from what would be expected. The design is particularly famous for its capricious misuse of ancient Greek and Roman ornamental motifs."
#"The various exterior aspects of the Palazzo del Te provide a succession of changing moods, which are contrived so as to retain the surprised attention of the spectator rather than to present him with a building that can be comprehended at a glance. In the courtyard the oddly fractured cornice sections create an air of ponderous tension, whereas the loggia is lightly elegant. Similarly, the illusionistic decoration of the interior runs the full gamut from heavy (if self-parodying) tragedy to pretty delicacy. Giulio also created a series of contrived vistas, through arches and doors, much like that later projected by Michelangelo for the Palazzo Farnese in Rome."
#"This showpiece of trompe l'oeil (illusionistic) decoration is painted from floor to ceiling... Even the fireplace was incorporated into the decoration, and the flames had a part to play. The colour is very crude; the subject is suited to facile virtuosity and tends to bring out the streak of cruelty and obscenity that runs just below the surface in much of Giulio's painting."
P.S. The breathtakenly obscene murals need to be enlarged upon as well. --Ghirla | talk 00:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for expansion 

message: I just wonder if the Emperor Charles V came to Mantua to visit the Federico's Palazzo and then decided to elevate him to the title of Duke. That's what appears in the sentence ! I'm sure it's the opposite ! ℍenry, encyclophile (speak slowly, please) 07:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Charles V]] 

message: :Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.
====Survey - in support of the move====
#Support, for reasons give below. --Amandajm 11:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: #Support, for reasons give below. --Amandajm 11:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in support of the move

message: #Oppose - I think it is clear that "Palazzo Te" is now the correct name in Italian, but "Palazzo del Te" in English, probably because that is what Vasari calls it (well he calls it the "Palazzo del T" - pronounced the same ) - as I expect did all Italians in the centuries between its construction and tea becoming popular. See this from JSTOR - reviews of 2 books on the Palazzo, one in Italian using Palazzo Te, one in English using Palazzo del Te.   Also here  and .  Britannica and the Grove Art dictionary also use "del Te".  Even the article says the island it is built on is called "del Te".  Perhaps in time the English usage will change, but not yet.  A bit should be added to the article to explain the difference. Johnbod 21:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey - in opposition to the move

message: I do not think it is polite inserting ad links of private companies, such as e.g tourist guides, in the external links. At least they should be handled as information links; this is why it would be surely better inserting only the links to the official service lists, such as, in this case, the official list of the authorized tourist guides for Mantua http://www.turismo.mantova.it/index.php/guida. Of course, this should be true also for every context.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.7.93.74 (talk) 08:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ad links 

message: Andrea Palladio was 26 years old or so at the time the palace was complete, so Giulio Romano could not use any of those "motifs". --Submixster (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It's right IN ENGLISH - see above (and those particles and prepositions really need work). Johnbod (talk) 19:54, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think it is interpretable by language ... it is an ITALIAN name, it is not that we write Nuova Iorca in italian is New York .... is an english name! However as you prefer. --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Palladian motifs 

message: It might be nice to mention I Modi here, although I'm not sure exactly how to work it in (and I haven't visited to know exactly how much was duplicated in the engravings, or to what extent). GreenReaper (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Wikipedia's I Modi article needs to be cleaned up before someone makes a connection to Romano's work at Palazzo Te. The Current I Modi article highlights a series of late 18th-century engravings by Jacques Joseph Coiny (the so-called "Carracci" engravings after Agostino Carracci) that have little to do with Marcantonio Raimondi's I Modi (after Romano) about which we know little except he discarded any premise of depicting mythological characters making love. It was basically a sex positions manual. There are some crude woodcut prints that may be reasonable approximations of Raimondi's work. There is also a lot of misinformation floating around on the Internet (including Wikipedia - e.g., History_of_erotic_depictions#Printing) about the drawings that became I Modi being drafted while Romano was in Mantua or being commissioned by Federico. This appears to be false (see Talvacchia, p. 79). Randy Wagner (talk) 23:08, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of ''I Modi''? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:51, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion