Talk:V&A Rotunda Chandelier

Location of the sculpture

Photo of the Dale Chihuly chandelier at the Victoria and Albert Museum, London. Photographed above a notice for the Disobedient Objects" exhibition of 2014

I just viewed this sculpture at the V&A in London. Has the culture returned to the V&A? The article writes that it had moved to Singapore.

Isabel.chun (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. If you saw it today then that suggests it has been returned! I think it was always on loan – did a quick search and this is all I found: [1]. Perhaps worth taking a more thorough look look tomorrow to see if there is any news about its arrival back in London. Libby norman (talk) 23:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I call nonsense. Am 99.99% positive that the V&A chandelier hasn't gone anywhere since the original 1999 chandelier was expanded in 2001 to make it larger for the rotunda. Whatever is in Singapore must be a copy or something from the same series. It's pretty off for this place to make such a big deal out of having a former V&A piece when the actual piece has pretty much been firmly installed in the V&A for the last 14+ years. Mabalu (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually, this article has naffed me off. I wonder if the V&A know that some shopping centre in Singapore is boasting about having THEIR chandelier when the actual chandelier is still right there in London and being seen by tens of thousands of visitors a year? Mabalu (talk) 16:28, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm, it could be reverted to the version I put through back in May 2013, since there would appear to be an element of untruth going on here? Libby norman (talk) 16:41, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I think Singapore have a duplicate of the earlier version. Probably. But it's not the V&A Chandelier - I just popped over and took a photo of it before they closed for the day! (Pic to come) Mabalu (talk) 16:50, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Also a point to note - the V&A Chandelier is significantly larger than the Singapore one. There's an extra bit at the bottom that is obviously missing from the Singapore one (so the Singapore one is at best a duplicate of the original chandelier before it was enlarged. The V&A database entry for the chandelier explicitly says that Chihuly added to the original chandelier, rather than making a second one, so Singapore probably don't even have the first version. Mabalu (talk) 20:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

I think this may just have been an attempt to publicise the shopping centre, looking at the history and user name of the person who made the changes. I put the article through Afc originally and did quite a bit of background work to improve the refs so I know the story of how it was enlarged. I have sent a message to the talk page of the person who made the changes explaining the revert and suggesting he might want to join the talk page discussion. The shopping centre doesn't even have a Wiki page and the editor who made the changes doesn't appear to have contributed to any other articles, so I think this was a good call. Libby norman (talk) 22:02, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Italic title? Infobox artwork?

Is V&A Chandelier the actual name of the work? If so, it should probably be italicized. And, is there a reason the article is not at V&A Chandelier? Finally, would Template:Infobox artwork be appropriate? Great job on the article! I saw this sculpture during my recent visit to London--beautiful! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:44, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, as suggested in the article it is V&A Chandelier or V&A Rotunda Chandelier if you look at this link from the V&A itself: [2]. I'm inclined not to italicise as it seems quite a fluid name at present – as in the name may change in time – but willing to be persuaded if you can find solid evidence that there is an official name. I did a quick Google search and I'd say the name we have at present is covered if anyone is looking – it's perhaps important to note that it wasn't named and donated but commissioned and grew over time, which may explain why it's finding its name. Interestingly, the name has spread to Singapore if you look at the dialogue above. I'm not sure an infobox is essential, but generally am in favour if it serves to improve the article. Libby norman (talk) 22:22, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

It appears there was another name early on, as described in the article: "The original name was 'Ice Blue and Spring Green Chandelier', but it is now generally known as the V&A Chandelier". Libby norman (talk) 22:26, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I am not sure "by Dale Chichuly" is necessary, though. That almost acts as a disambiguator and I can't imagine there are other works called something along the lines of "V&A Chandelier". ----Another Believer _(Talk) 23:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

It could possibly be changed to V&A Rotunda Chandelier [3] and [4]– as it would need to be distinguished from other chandeliers at the V&A. I'd be in favour of bolding up more than one name as it does seem to be called various things when you search. A few more viewpoints might be useful before a name change. Libby norman (talk) 23:51, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. I've posted a note on the talk page for the Public Art/London task force. :) Feel free to invite others to the discussion as well. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

I've posted on visual arts and glass talk pages – I'll also contact a couple of editors who know the V&A well and might have a view. Libby norman (talk) 18:57, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

His own website calls it V&A Chandelier as well. JMiall₰ 10:21, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the name change because "by Dale Chichuly" is not needed, and that it would be good to add it's "also known as" names to the intro.--CaroleHenson (talk) 20:58, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

So, does removing "by Dale Chihuly" seem appropriate at this time? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 07:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was just thinking last night that it was about time. Could we use the V&A's own name for it as the primary title as this is also how you'd look it up on the V&A website and it serves as a distinguisher from any other chandeliers now or in the future. So, something like, V&A Rotunda Chandelier (also known as the V&A Chandelier) is a glass installation by Dale Chihuly that hangs... and so on. I'm not convinced I would italicise as Dale Chihuly didn't call it this originally but Ice Blue and Spring Green Chandelier (I've been looking on MoS and can't really say it helped me reach a definitive view!), but will be persuaded if you think this is meeting itals guidelines. I'm happy to make the changes to copy and move to the new name or you can if you prefer? Libby norman (talk) 11:38, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for moving the article! I don't have a preference re: italics. ----Another Believer _(Talk) 23:09, 14 November 2014 (UTC)