Talk:Classical mythology in culture

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Greece Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Culture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This topic might be more manageable and more disciplined if it were split into two articles, one on Greek mythology in art, with subheads by historical periods, and another on literature. Even then, either article by itself would be potentially of book length. But if the art article were split into periods, then each section could be developed into its own article on separate pages. Otherwise the article as it stands is going to be pretty useless — and it should be noted that it doesn't have an intro, probably because it lacks internal organization, which in turn leads to major omissions (no pre-Raphaelites). And what's with the gratuitous stab at Christianity? I can't think of a single Christian-era period in Western literature when poets didn't make use of the mythological tradition -- that goes for one of the earliest Christian poets, Prudentius, as well as medieval poets. It just seems like a hostile or defensive way to start.

But back to the main point: I'm not saying it isn't valid to look at the uses of mythology within a given period in both art and literature (the Renaissance being the obvious example), and it could be done, but the user coming to this article is daunted by a sea of text and no points of entry. Also, the sources used are mythology handbooks and the Britannica article, which results in a list-like approach. There are no sources that actually deal with the subject of, say, mythological painting.

There was also a bit of vandalism. This sentence:

In northern Europe, Greek mythology never took the same hold of the visual arts, but its effect was very obvious on literature; the English Elizabethans to classical texts both Latin and Greek were translated with enthusiasm, so that stories of mythology became easily available to mexican dancers.

I have regretfully deleted the mexican dancers, whose presence was lively. I must say that the vandalism here does point out that the article is essentially a laundry list surrounded by a lot of broad and breathy exclamation, and the topic takes us into territory where angels fear to tread. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have the material to split and then expand the articles?--Yannismarou (talk) 10:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

is this actually "Classical" or "Greco-Roman" and should the title be changed? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:09, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What can there be said of the role of classical mythology in the twentieth and twenty-first century? Surely the use of classical mythology in modern art did not disappear altogether? Since the advent of modernism new subjects were found outside of classical mythology, from whence it lost its dominant position as source for inspiration, but its use continued, even if not so overtly. Right? 129.125.156.30 (talk) 11:44, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems as if there is no introduction to the article, rather information is spouted at the reader immediately. Although it is a great task to summarize the entire classical tradition in an introductory paragraph, I do think there should be something to introduce the points and time periods later mentioned in the article. Demilynnn (talk) 03:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The citations in the references seem to be incomplete. Also, there is a lack of variety of sources on the topic here. More sources, especially ones that are easily accessible, would be helpful here. Tul10616 (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]