Talk:Robert Hughes (critic)

message: Robert Hughes is no longer Australian. It seems that in 2003 he relinquished his AO and Australian passport, and became a US citizen.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/26/1067103267044.html
:Nationality or culture is more than a matter of choice/citizenship. And there is an Australian culture which has nothing to do with citzenship. Germaine Greer and Jill Ker Conway are hardly ever in Australia. Rupert Murdoch is a U.S. citizen. I'm sure many people would argue that there is much about Hughes that remains Australian, including his decision to live overseas and become a U.S. citizen. :-) Grant65 | Talk 15:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If he became a U.S. citizen on or after 4 April 2002 he would not have lost his Australian citizenship automatically.   In order to cease being Australian he would have needed to formally renounce his Australian citizenship under Australian law.  Handing back an Australian passport in itself would not cause loss of citizenship. JAJ 23:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Hughes no longer Australian 

message: This is better presented in a chronological order of the three wives. Happy with other changes, just recommend to keep the order. ROxBo 14:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal life

message: Surely his life does not need to have every event displayed as a list of dot points.  Dot points should only be used where there is an actual list and not for blocks of text to separate paragraphs. Stellar 08:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not rejected just discouraged.  Have fun. Stellar 11:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't there an excess of dot points? 

message: His son's rather extraordinary life is relevant, IMHO ROxBo 04:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this page did exist but was recently deleted after merge discussion ROxBo 00:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Danton

message: If anyone can find the date for the award- NYPL Literary Lion, please add - have searched and it is not giving a date, but a reference to this achievement??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DownUndr (talk • contribs) 19:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Awards

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:40, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: www.trinivangheluwe.com189.217.84.231 (talk) 22:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contact with Robert Hughes 

message: I removed this section in accordance with WP:BLP, as it contained negative allegations about Hughes and had no sources. Looking higher up this talk page, I see that sources do exist; I'm not sure whether or not the content belongs in the article, though. In any case, anyone who wants to restore it should make sure the sources are incorporated. Robofish (talk) 16:26, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Road accident section removed 

message: The book "Barcelona" is not mentioned in the Career section.
Lifeofthemind (talk) 09:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barcelona 

message: If you want to include and discuss Hughes's smoking, drinking, and otherwise bad habits - do so in a separate section with references...Modernist (talk) 10:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If so, it was the sixties and the Push, so I suspect behaviour wasn't egregious for the subculture involved.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad Habits

message: Beyond the purely biographical, this would greatly profit from an elaboration as to why he was the major critic of his era. There are good sources that refer to his personality and tone as a writer , , , an explanation of which is more important than the facts of his personal life. For a writer who's compared to Ruskin and Shaw, this is the missing piece we've yet to fill in. JNW (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, someone who is more familiar with his life and career could beef up the lead. I don't know what other aspects would be considered the most important to include. -- Dianna (talk) 05:39, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further sources, and what's missing 

message: I am pretty sure User:Downundr is a relative or close associate of Hughes, and therefore has a conflict of interest. I have reverted the recent addition, as some of the material inserted into the article does not appear in the quoted sources. For example, the quoted source does not say that Downes flew with Danton after the accident. Another example: the quoted source does not say that Lorna Pegram directed Shock of the New. Excessive details about Downes have been removed. This article is not about Downes. All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy.  People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging.  People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. -- Dianna (talk) 01:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest 

message: One of the brothers of art-critic Robert Hughes is/was (according to "Early life" section) Thomas Eyre Forrest Hughes, former Attorney General of Australia, born 26 November 1923. ANOTHER brother of art-critic Robert Hughes is/was (according to "Personal life" section) ANOTHER Thomas Hughes (Thomas John Hughes), born 9 September 1892. Thomas John Hughes's parents were Felix Hughes, labourer, and Felix's wife Maria Hughes née Boudan). The parents of art-critic Robert Hughes were Geoffrey Forrest Hughes and Margaret née Vidal. So why didn't Robert Hughes the art critic have EITHER of the same parents as his brother Thomas John Hughes? And why were TWO brothers of Robert Hughes named "Thomas" if they both lived long enough to have adult careers sufficiently noteworthy to get into Wikipedia? Please explain.76.8.67.2 (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brothers 

message: Intrigued by the deletionism of new chum Passacaglia1969, I commenced investigating the source of which he complained, academia.edu, which has the appearance of a reputable site. Before finding the WP link, I sought to read the relevant learned paper 'Robert Hughes and Andy Warhol’s ‘stupidity’' by Jakob Zaaiman [London 2018]. I was amazed to discover that the website was urging me to download 30 other papers (which I was able to avoid)--an experience I've never had with any other 'academic' website. I was relieved to find that situation explained in the WP article.  Bjenks (talk) 07:09, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academia.edu 

message: The questionable deletion excises the derogatory opinion of one Jakob Zaaiman whose notability and reliability have yet to be established. The edit was appropriately reverted by User:Modernist, calling for a discussion on this page. In my view, there's nothing wrong in allowing space for a disparaging critique, provided same is intelligently reasoned by a qualified author and is not merely a jaundiced POV. So far, I haven't found that is true of Mr Zaaiman, but reserve my opinion pending more study and discussion. Bjenks (talk) 07:09, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The Zaaiman critique is reasonable to me; providing a useful reference...Modernist (talk) 11:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: In a way, it's always refreshing to see a challenging alternative POV. But there is a weakness here, in that Zaaiman trenchantly pushes a dichotomy between "modern art" (which he loves) and "classical, museum-quality ‘beauty’" (which he seems to be disparaging as something he believes Bob Hughes was addicted to). Personally, (as a big fan of, e.g., Turner, Matisse, Cézanne and bits of Picasso) I can see plenty of continuity between the "classical" and "modern" themes and techniques—and I have no doubt that Hughes also saw that continuity. In other words, Hughes is being artfully misrepresented by Zaaiman, but that's nothing new in the space of art criticism. Bjenks (talk) 05:50, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Jakob Zaaiman