Talk:Feuersnot

Needs some more detail

A couple of points. First, the opera was successful in its performances in Dresden and Vienna: the problem came when it was performed in Berlin and the Empress took a dislike to its bawdy nature. Kaiser Wilhelm then banned it after only a few performances and it has remained largely unperformed since then (the details are in Norman del Mar volume 1 (second edition) page 236).

It should be pointed out that the librettist Ernst von Wolzogen went on to found the Überbrettl, from which German Kabarett developed.

There is also a comment on the opera by Strauss at the end of his life: "“In nearly all of the biographical articles I read…I miss the correct attitude..towards…Fueursnot. One forgets that this certainly far from perfect work…still introduces into the nature of the old opera a new subjective style at just the very beginning of the century. It is in its way a sort of upbeat.”(page NDM 234.). Byronmercury (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added detail. Had to go back to the mahler-strauss correspondence to sort it out. The opera was a failure in Vienna but success in Dresden and Berlin. Anyway, I kept all of the pr-existing material but mixed it into a more detailed narrative of the performance history.Byronmercury (talk) 10:29, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

somehow the references got lost: I will sort this outByronmercury (talk) 10:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Have sorted things out now. I suspect there have been quite a few performances in 2014 (150th anniversary and all that), but none in the UK alas for me. On my to do list. Find reviews of the Berlin performances and a little more about the Kaiserin. In one "opera notes" they claim that she "walked out" of the performance. This might just be poetic license. Must find out....Any help here welcome!Byronmercury (talk) 17:30, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For information. The performances conducted by Mahler in 1905. In the letter to Strauss no number is mentioned. However, there is a whole page Repertory_of_the_Vienna_Court_Opera_under_Gustav_Mahler which enumerates the totals based on the de la Grange. This also provided the information that there was a new production. I did toy with putting in a link to this page: if anyone can find an unobtrusive way to hyperlink, feel free.Byronmercury (talk) 08:54, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Librettist's pic

[User:Byronmercury|Byronmercury]] (talk) 09:49, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's OK to use it, but it could be cropped to include only the photo itself and not all that surrounding "stuff". As far as I know - and I've done it for 19C lithographs, for example - out of copywright works are OK to crop. Viva-Verdi (talk) 15:38, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

will do. I was thinking of expanding the synopsis (it is rather brief here). Once I have gotten around to doing that I will add the (cropped) picture next to the synopsis. Thanks for improving the formatting etc.Byronmercury (talk) 14:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

done Byronmercury (talk) 23:33, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Feuersnot" as a word

I'm not sure about this comment in the first footnote:

The use of Feuersnot as title for this work where it indicates a lack of fire is a reversal of the word's normal meaning, blaze, conflagration.

The prefix/suffix 'not' is used for danger, or emergency, so the word "Feuersnot" signifies danger or emergency related to fire (but doesn't, in itself, indicate whether it's the presence or absence that is the problem). My big single-volume Collins German/English dictionary defines "Feuersnot" as

Feuersnot f (liter) fiery peril (poet)

so some sort of trial related to fire, which fits the opera perfectly. The current wording of the footnote implies an inversion or wordplay which I am not sure is there in the German. I suggest cutting it. Scarabocchio (talk) 09:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that the prefix/suffix "-not" can be seen as an indicator for any kind of danger or emergency, but here, the link to the German Wiktionary explains that Feuersnot is an archaic term for a large destructive fire. I interpret your finding of "fiery peril" the same way and don't see where you get "trial related to fire". In this opera, the word indicates a lack of fire. The same ambiguity exists with "Wassernot" (or "Wassersnot") which may mean a lack of water or a flood. I thought it warrants an explanation. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]