Talk:Leoš Janáček/Archive 1

Name

Why isn't this page at Leoš Janácek? Hyacinth 21:51, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)

Well, the problem is that it isn't possible to have "č" in an article title at present. Whether it's better to have article titles which have some but not all diacritical marks (which might give the impression the title is actually correct when it's not), or to just leave them all out when we can't get them all right (which at least makes it obvious that it's completely wrong, but is, well, completely wrong), I don't know. If you want to move the page to Leoš Janácek, then I for one will not complain (it should at the very least be a redirect, which I'll make now). --Camembert

Thanks, just curious. Hyacinth 00:13, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wow! It's now at Leoš Janáček? When did that become possible? Hyacinth 20:08, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Ah, welcome back! The diacritics came with the MediaWiki 1.5 upgrade (couple weeks ago?) Antandrus (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

---

many gaps - what about his education in Leipzig and Vienna?

--Fandorin 23:37, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What about it? Hyacinth 01:50, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Various!

Cello sonata? He wrote two pieces for cello, but not a cello sonata. Also, without the diacritics, this is easier to link to (consider the mess caused by trying to link to Dvorak pages on other sites, not all browsers can do this. I didn’t choose that, but I would have. Would agree that a larger worklist, e.g., would be appropriate. Schissel‐bowl listen 15:53, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

I changed Cello Sonata to Pohádka for cello and piano, which is the piece on that soundtrack. — [[User:Flamurai|flamurai^TM]] 20:16, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! There is also a Presto (according to one listing it's in E minor, I seem to recall it may (!) have been intended to be related to the Pohádka (1910 – 1923) at one point, one site gives it a timing of around 2 1/2 minutes as against 13-odd, and at least according to this site it dates from 1910. Which also lists a separate Allegro for vn/pno, but judging from recordings etc. In CD descriptions etc I see the Presto paired with the Pohádka more often than I ever see the Allegro, which I've just heard of.) I sometimes do (will try to see where, but not at 11:27 pm local) see (at least one of?) the two piano concertante works described as a large chamber work because of the use of a chamber ensemble accompaniment (hrm, or both of them? Need to check. Capriccio for piano left hand and eight winds, concertino for piano and an ensemble of six winds and strings.. both are in that sense, I guess.) Schissel‐bowl listen 04:27, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)

A complaint by a passer-by

My god! Wikipedia has gone downhill (well, i had i high expectations). I cant even tell when the man was born or died. No more wikipedia sources for my students. Teacher at a Major university. check how other encyclopedias list date of birth and death, for a start. although, i have a feeling an 8 year old child could add his account here. White board this site, no real info. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.99.219.56 (talk • contribs).

You could not tell when he was born or died? Did you try reading the first sentence of the article? Antandrus (talk) 13:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I partially agree with the passer-by: the biography is rather short and mentiones nothing about Janáček's later years.

TomyDuby 03:07, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know something about Janáček's unfinished violin concerto "Pilgrimage of the soul" ? I would add something brief about it in the article, but it's quite hard to find information about it on the Internet... - Tanynep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.226.112.111 (talk) 22:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Excuse my terrible english... Pilgrimage of a Little (or dear?) Soul ("Putování dušičky") Janáček started to write in 1926, during his visit in England. Three score sources where the torso of his composition has been found are known today, but none of them is dated. The sketched material of concerto was only in one movement(12-15 min. duration) with few remarks: p.29 "in a human being", p. 30 "the dear soul inborn in every human being", p.40 "eagle", p.49 "without the soul until the end", p. 64 "instruments die out". In 1927 Janáček abandoned the idea of concerto and used some of its material in "From the House of the Dead" opera. In 1928 J. composed incidental music to "Schluck und Jau", which contains violin solos closely related to motives known from the concerto.Dr. Miloš Štědroň and dr. Leoš Faltus reconstructed concerto in 1988. First performance took place on 29. September 1988 in Janáček Theatre, Petr Vronský conducted the State Philharmonic of Brno, and the violin part played Jan Stanovský. I know at least two recordings of the concerto, first with Václav Neumann conducting Czech Philharmony and with Josef Suk on Violin, second with František Jílek and Brno State Phiharmony, violin part performed by Ivan Ženatý. my sources: Putování dušičky. Ricostituzione critica. Partitura. Editio Supraphon 1997. H 7738. by wikifan:Antonín Vejvančický—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.208.123.168 (talk) 15:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Ooops!

I'm a fan both of this composer and Wikipedia who entered this page merely to commend this article: it is accurate, brief and complete while being suitable for expanding, in which case please have at it. To me, this is Wikipedia at its best. But "Passer-by's" post scares me: like him/her I taught at "major universities" (Clemson [SC USA] and the US Naval Academy) but (unlike him/her) I still worry about writing complete sentences, using punctuation properly and capitalizing proper nouns. If s/he represents the present of higher education I am very scared about the future of the culture. And, yes, Janáček's */+ dates are right there in the article in front of God (capitalization as the reader prefers) and everybody (same caveat). Congratulations to whoever wrote this in the first place--I'd like to take it as my model! Clay2 (talk) 02:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Emerson, Lake, and Palmer

Re: "Entitled "Knife-Edge," the song (for which Janáček is co-credited as composer) appeared on their 1970 debut LP Emerson Lake & Palmer":

I'll check again to make sure when I get home, but although Janacek may have been credited in a later edition, as I remember it "their 1970 debut LP Emerson Lake & Palmer" in its original LP form credited neither Janacek nor Bartok (the entirety of Bartok's Allegro Barbaro is eventually present in the opening piece "The Barbarian"). Moreover the group took considerable flak for this. I remember a particularly scathing attack in Stereo Review. The footnote at the end of the quoted passage above as it appears in the article, by the way, seems to lead directly to the "Emerson, Lake, and Palmer" article, implying that one wikipedia article can be a valid source for another, which, of course, it never can. TheScotch (talk) 10:45, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Jenufa

'The operas of his mature period Káťa Kabanová (1921), The Cunning Little Vixen (1924), The Makropulos Affair (1926) and From the House of the Dead (after a novel by Dostoevsky, premiered in 1930, after his death) are considered as his finest works'. I think Jenufa is the most famous, and the most often played of his operas. A source would be welcome for this point of view. Glatisant (talk) 05:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

You´re right, I´ve added Jenůfa to the paragraph with the reliable citation. My source is unfortunately only in Czech language, but I´m sure, that at least the French version exists. Originally it was Kundera´s text for the Le Monde de la musique magazine from May, 1995, later the part of the programme of the Paris opera... However, I´ve found only the Czech version. Vejvančický (talk) 10:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Composer project review

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. The article is B-class; it has a number of issues, most notably requiring copyediting to improve the English, but there are also content-related issues. Read the full review on the comments page; questions or comments can be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 03:37, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help copyedit the slightly creaky English. Haploidavey (talk) 13:22, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I've read and noted the linked comments. Haploidavey (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Copyedit queries

Hello! Just want to make sure I understand your intentions. You describe him as (among other things) a folklorist. Can you clarify this? Did he have an academic interest in folk music and dialect, or a combination of folklore (as per the Grimms), or just local folk music and dialects. Or something else? Haploidavey (talk) 03:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

re: It is possible to call Janáček´s attitude as "academic". He studied and examined mainly Moravian and Slovak folk music, however, his approach was scientific (he was experienced musicologist), and he arranged his collections with good knowledge of the folk culture and musicology. Janáček was also one of the organizers of the Czech-Slavic Folklore Exhibition, an important event in Czech culture at the end of 19th century. Since 1905 he was also the President of the Working Commitee for Czech National Folksong in Moravia and Silesia (the branch of the Austrian institute Das Volkslied in Österreich (Folksong in Austria), established in 1902 by Viennese publisher Universal Edition.

That's usefull. As "folklorist" has multiple shades in modern academia (as per link), another term might serve your intention better. Can't think of one right now - any suggestions? Haploidavey (talk) 14:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

re: Would it be appropriate to rename that section to Folk music research?. Or Folklore activities? My sources call him folkorist, it is confusing? Folkloristics is the formal academic study of folklore, according to the relevant article... And the term folk (or traditional) music is well established in the English speaking world, I guess. I´m not sure.

See also: Moravian traditional music, it may be useful.--Vejvančický (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

IMHO retitling as "Folk music research" would help. It would disambiguate "folklorist", to the benefit of most English speakers. Folklorist is an umbrella term and implies a broader range of studies than music. Haploidavey (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Source:

• Procházková, Jarmila (2006). Janáčkovy záznamy hudebního a tanečního fokloru I. Prague, Brno: Etnologický ústav AV ČR, Doplněk. ISBN 80-85010-83-6. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) (in Czech) (English summary)

--Vejvančický (talk) 12:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Next one. Introduction - "reached his own modern expression independently, in a different manner than other modernists". Could you expand a little, please? Can you tell me how other modernists achieved their own modern expression? Was it Janacek's sense of national musical identity that made him different? Haploidavey (talk) 04:08, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

re: Cited sentence is from essay by Milan Kundera: Liška Bystrouška, drásavá idyla. Kundera points out, that Janáček developed his original style as a solitaire (solitudinarian), relatively hidden from the musical world, unlike many modernists of his time. They often collaborated and worked in the groups, influenced by each other. I agree, it needs expansion, unfortunately, I own only the Czech version of that essay - I´ll work on it. Btw, Kundera is author of many interesting musicological essays, I own his 3 books of essays - The Art of Novel, Testaments Betrayed and The Curtain - here is the citation from the essay The Unloved Child of the Family (Testaments Betrayed), p. 180:

"In the twenties (20th century of course), his compositions appeared on modern-music concert programs alongside Stravinsky, Bartók and Hindemith; but we was thirty, forty years older than they. A solitary conservative in his youth, he became an innovator when he was old. But he was still alone. For though he stood with the great modernists, he was different from them. He came to his style without them, his modernism had a different nature, a different genesis, different roots."

Sources:

• Kundera, Milan (2004). Můj Janáček. Brno: Atlantis. ISBN 80-7108-256-2. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)(in Czech)
• Kundera, Milan (1996). Testaments Betrayed. London: Faber and Faber. ISBN 0-571-17337-3. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

Thanks for your interest. --Vejvančický (talk) 12:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks are not required, as it's a pleasure to help on this very interesting article. Kundera's account is probably enough as a basis for editing that section. Haploidavey (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Question: would it be accurate to say that "all Slavic folk music" qualifies as "pan-Slavic folk music"? I ask because it excludes non-slavic musical influences and ephemera which doubtless were common throughout the Slavic world, and of which Janacek would probably have disapproved. The pan-Slavic movement was multi-dimensional and international, was it not? Haploidavey (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)Haploidavey (talk) 02:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

re:Yes, it is possible to use the term pan-Slavic, since that movement was very popular among Czech artists in the second half of 19th century. Janáček was enthusiastic supporter of Slavic world and music. I´m not sure with Janáček´s disapproving of non-slavic musical influences - his early works (Thema con variazioni e. g.) contain many elements of non-Slavic musical cultures. He didn´t refused any important music elements, when he was a student.

Further question:

From October 1879 to February 1880 he studied piano, organ, and composition at the Leipzig Conservatory; among his teachers there were Oskar Paul and Leo Grill. He wasn't satisfied with the teachers in Leipzig, and he tried to change the place of his studies. In Leipzig Janáček also composed Thema con variazioni for piano in B flat subtitled Zdenka’s Variations. From April to June 1880 he studied composition at the Vienna Conservatory with Franz Krenn. However, he wasn't satisfied with Krenn's neo-romantic approach, and spent his stay in Vienna in silent opposition.

Question: did his dissatisfaction with Leipzig's teachers lead him directly to the Viennese Conservatory? Haploidavey (talk) 19:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

My cop-edit is based on the assumption that it did. Haploidavey (talk) 22:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

re: Yes, Janáček began to find a new place for his studies, and in his letter to Zdeňka Schulzová from 24 November 1879 he wrote about his intention to study in Paris, as a pupil of Saint-Saëns. His plan wasn´t approved by the Schulz family, and Janáček therefore decided to move to Vienna. He finished his studies in Leipzig on 24 May, 1880.

Source:

• Firkušný, Leoš (2005). Janáčkův život. Prague. p. 44-45. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) (in Czech)

And could you say a little more about the form of his silent opposition? Haploidavey (talk) 19:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

re: Janáček was at odds with his teacher Joseph Dachs in Vienna. Dachs wasn´t satisfied with Janáček´s piano style and technique. Janáček therefore left his class, and even quit his piano studies totally. Vienna conservatory - and particularly Franz Krenn, Janáček´s second teacher - was very influenced by the neo-romantic "Wagnerian" style. This wasn´t satisfying for Janáček, who was an opponent of neo-romantism. His "formalist" Violin Sonata (today lost) was refused by the commitee of the Vienna Conservatory, and this was the break point, disappointed Janáček left the conservatory in June, 1880. Franz Krenn, however, gave him a very complimentary personal school report.

Sources:

• Firkušný, Leoš (2005). Janáčkův život. Prague. p. 45-46. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) (in Czech)
• Štědroň, Bohumír (1946). Janáček ve vzpomínkách a dopisech. Prague: Topičova edice. p. 55. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) (in Czech) - the note about the silent opposition

--Vejvančický (talk) 10:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

edited copy

Please see edited introduction. Feedback (if any) here, please. Haploidavey (talk) 17:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)Haploidavey (talk) 02:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Introduction

• I´ve removed the claim, that Janáček was influenced by Czech folk music - he studied predominantly Moravian music.
• One of my sources mentions the cantata Amarus as one of the first examples of the Janáček´s mature style. The expertise in the foreword of the score by Jiří Vysloužil connects Amarus rather with the romantic opera Šárka. "Amarus was the climax of the first creative stage in Janáček´s artictic development, in which this work, together with Šárka, represents the romantic line." This source is more reputable. Removed.

Source:

• Janáček, Leoš (2000). Amarus. Cantata per soli, coro misto ed orchestra. Partitura. Prague: Bärenreiter. p. XIII. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) ISMN M-2601-0000-8, H 7382.

In view of the above, would a description of Amarus as a "transitional work" be acceptable? Haploidavey (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

re: It isn´t necessary to mention Amarus in the lead. Stylistically, Amarus is a work that bears many traces of groping. It retreats from "symphonism", which influenced the musical style of Šárka, but it isn´t considered as a transitional work.

Haploidavey, feel free to add informations collected here on the talk page, everything is sourced, and I can add needed citations. I don´t want to break your translation. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Could you clarify this passage? "A fundamental break in Janáček´s output came with the start of the 20th century". This sounds like something very significant, but the copy is vague. The English is partly my editing, but your original offered an equally mixed impression. In what way did this period represent a significant change? I realise he was having a difficult time of it personally, but it's not clear whether the "break in output" comes from this, and it's not obvious how the characteristics of his music changed (if they did). Haploidavey (talk) 13:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

re:The fundamental break in his work came with his first mature opera - Jenůfa (premiered 1904). Janáček in that opera builded up his own musical and dramatical style, completely independent on "Wagnerian" dramatic method. He developed and applied the concept of "speech tunes" for the first time in his work. He studied and examined the circumstances, under which the "speech tunes" change, he explored the psychology and temperament of speaking persons and the coherence with the human speech. The study of speech melodies enabled and helped Janáček to give a true picture of the dramatic roles in his mature operas, and became also one of the most significant signs of his style.

Selected and translated from:

• Firkušný, Leoš (2005). Janáčkův život. Prague. p. 91-92. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) (in Czech)

It is of course possible to find other sources, since this is in Czech, but the formulation about the significance of Jenůfa is very precise in Firkušný´s book.

Btw, I think, that the section "Later years and masterworks" is a bit underdeveloped. If you have any suggestions, let me know, I´ll offer my explanations here. --Vejvančický (talk) 14:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

re: "fundamental break" & your reply. I think the phrase (if not most of first sentence) is redundant. I'll remove it.Haploidavey (talk) 20:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, I think this (Jenůfa) was very important for another development of Janáček´s career and the informations about that work and the premiere should be mentioned in the first paragraph of the section "Later works...", even with explanation of the change of his style. This is really crucial point. Do you intend to mention it in the section "Style"? --Vejvančický (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

IMHO you've vastly improved the "later works" etc section. I agree that stylistic significance of Jenůfa should be discussed in detail (under "style", of course) but will try no further copy-edit until you're substantially done with those sections. Regards! Haploidavey (talk) 15:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I (scatterbrain:)) was offline for a while and I forgot to notify you, sorry. I think it´ll be better to add more to the "later works" section before your copyedit - you don´t have to fix it twice. I apologise. Btw, I have to leave my library tomorrow, but I´ll be back soon. I really enjoy this cooperation and your interesting questions! Ask whatever. --Vejvančický (talk) 16:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem at all. Your changes clarified the material, which makes editing much easier. Regards.Haploidavey (talk) 16:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

same section: replaced "informal divorce" with separation.

Janáček and his wife Zdeňka were not separated. They lived still together, and my sources speak about their informal divorce. Somewhat strange, but that´s how it was. See ref, it´s online. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Very strange, but true, so have reverted. Various other web-sources confirm this practice as a feature of the early modern era (considered less difficult and disgraceful than open proceedings). Well, I definitely learned something new today. Haploidavey (talk) 12:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

re: "Later years and masterworks" - yes, a bit thin, compared to the earlier sections. I was surprised to find major works under "Legacy" - why not in ""Later years and Masterworks"? Btw, a fairly recent (?) BBC Radio 3 piece gave a very moving account of his infatuation and last days. If I remember correctly, he became ill because he stayed too long out in the cold, searching for the son of his unattainable beloved - the boy was thought to be lost but was in fact quite safe. If that's an accurate account (and it may well not be) I for one find it magnificently and appealingly quixotic. Haploidavey (talk) 21:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I don´t know, if he stayed too long in the cold, it was in August... (I´ve got it: ...the wind was cold... says my source) otherwise you are right, the name of the lost child (a son of Stösslová) was Otto. Janáček died of pneumonia, and his diagnosis mentioned also heart disorder. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Source:

• Ort, Jiří (2005). Pozdní divoch. Lása a život Leoše Janáčka v operách a dopisech. Prague: Mladá fronta. p. 191. ISBN 80-204-1256-5. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help) (in Czech)

re: Early life, paras 1 & 2. My grasp of Czech and Moravian geography is poor! I take it that he lived in Brno, then moved to Prague to enroll at the organ school (correct me if I'm wrong), but where was the Svatopluk Artisan´s Association? The overlap in dates has thrown me. Haploidavey (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Svatopluk Artisan´s Association (founded in 1868) resided in Brno. He didn´t spent all his time in Prague. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

references: you'd best check the ref position for Krenn's complimentary report. Haploidavey (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Done --Vejvančický (talk) 11:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

edited copy 2

Was getting lost up there...

Query: "created several remarkable choirs, chamber and orchestral works" - choirs, or choral works? Haploidavey (talk) 16:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Choral works, of course. --Vejvančický (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

(sorry, that's mid-paragraph two, under "Later years...". Haploidavey (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Query: "In 1920 Janáček was relieved of his duties as director of the Brno Conservatory": in UK English, this can be euphemismistic for "getting kicked out". Can you elaborate on the circumstances a little? Haploidavey (talk) 17:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Reply: My source says vaguely, that "he was relieved of his duties" (in Czech: zproštěn povinností), but we can simply write, that he retired, he was not kicked out. I´m a bit confused now, since another source claims, that "Janáček was a professor of the Prague Consevatory (subdivision in Brno) from 25 September 1919 to 11 February 1925, when he retired." I´ll try to carify that later. --Vejvančický (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, will hold. Haploidavey (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Reply: It´s clear now - he was "relieved of his duties" as the director of the conservatory, but he continued his teaching career till 1925, when he retired.

Comment: I've added some important facts related to Janáček's later years, it's somewhat drily and heavy-footed (it's rather listing of his works) - it needs improvements, I want to make it more readable.. Any thoughts?--Vejvančický (talk) 19:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Will take a look asap, and post here with any questions. (Later): Have read through. It's become quite impressive. I'm competent to do no more than make a few very minor edits: otherwise the English is fine, on a first reading. I'll come back tomorrow night for another look, as I've run out of steam for the day. I think you now need the attentions of someone who knows your subject. Haploidavey (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Have jumped down to queries 3 (sorry, edited copy 3) for this topic. Haploidavey (talk) 03:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)Haploidavey (talk) 03:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment2: The sentence He was a great admirer of Tchaikovsky, and he appreciated particularly the highly developed musical thinking in connection with using of Russian folk motifs in his music. in the last paragraph of "Early life" section was more accurate, I think. Was it unintelligible? --Vejvančický (talk) 19:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Currently reads: "He greatly admired Tchaikovsky, and particularly appreciated his highly developed use of Russian folk motifs:

Sorry, yes, I rather slaughtered that one. The problem begins after the comma: "he" is obviously Janacek, but the final "his" is less obviously Tchaikovsky. The sentence is not at all unintelligible but slows the reading. What about:

"Janáček was a great admirer of Tchaikovsky, and appreciated particularly the latter's highly developed musical thought in connection with the use of Russian folk motifs in his music." Haploidavey (talk) 22:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

re-edit: changed "thinking" to "thought". Haploidavey (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Reply: Perfect. Thank you, Davey --Vejvančický (talk) 08:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

That sentence was still really bothering me, so here's what I feel reads less awkwardly. The "in his music" was redundant. Hopefully, the revision retains the exact meaning, (it does to me) but do say if you think otherwise. I've already pasted it into the article:

Janáček was a great admirer of Tchaikovsky, and particularly appreciated his highly developed musical thought in connection with the use of Russian folk motifs. Haploidavey (talk) 02:42, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

re: Agree. --Vejvančický (talk) 12:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

But still not right. Best leave it for now. Haploidavey (talk) 19:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Leoš Janáček/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==Composers Project Assessment of Leoš Janáček: 2008-12-17== This is an assessment of article Leoš Janáček by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. ===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? ok, but could use more detail; who were his teachers, whose music was he exposed to? ===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok ===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? ok ===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. Compositions are listed; a bibliography of his major writings is missing (all his books, and any notable articles and essays). ===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? Good, but more critical and public reception could be given. ===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) Good ===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? Article is referenced, has inline citations (which may be insufficient for GA). Inconsistencies in cite placement with respect to punctuation. ===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) Good ===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review=== Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE) Article lead needs work (WP:LEAD) Article prose needs work (WP:MOS) (copyedit to improve English) ===Summary=== This is a somewhat informative article. The facts of his life and works are presented somewhat drily, and in English that needs copyediting due to its presumed non-native-English contributions. At times the English is stilted enough to be quite distracting. (For example: "The fundamental break in Janáček´s output came with the start of the 20th century." Does the "break" refer to a disruption, or to a positive event, as when an actor gets his "big break"?) There were a number of places where I would have liked to know more: in his early life, whose music was he exposed to? what role did his parents play in fostering musical education? more on his conflict(s) with Kovarovic; quote his negative review of The Bridegrooms. The first mention is a hint; elaborate more on it later. more on Janacek and Tchaikovsky -- how did J feel about T, his music? (T is not mentioned later in subsection on Russia) a more nuanced discussion of his emotional problems (especially with respect to the death of his daughter) more on how audiences and critics received his works I liked the sections on influences and theory. The article is reasonably well structured. The lead should be 3-4 paragraphs; it does not mention is theoretic contributions. Inline citations, while present, are inconsistenly placed with respect to punctuation (WP:REFPUNC); either before or after. (I think after looks better, myself.) The inline citations present are probably insufficient to support a formal review; however, the article should be copyedited before more are added in significant numbers. Article is B-class; it has some room to improve, but all of the major elements are present. Magic♪piano 03:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC) == Comment by a contributor == It seems, that I'm currently the main contibutor to the article, and I'm therefore to a large extent responsible for its quality. I agree, it needs the assistance of a native English speaker with a good knowledge of that topic. I'm able to add all missing citations, to clarify the problematical parts and to fill the gaps, but I have to admit, my English language skills aren't sufficient enough to promote the article to GA... I agree with some recommendations, the article needs section "Personality", since Janáček was very temperament and his emotional problems substantially influenced his works. We also need the section concentrated on more detailed critical response, and his mature years and major works need also more attention, the section is rather underdeveloped. Tchaikovski influence on Janáček wasn't important, the fact about their meeting serves rather to illustrate Janáček's connections with musical world of his time. The conflict with Kovařovic was somewhat important, it influenced Janáček's career for many years, but whole that thing was related to opera "Jenůfa", and detailed analysis should be maybe developed in the Jenůfa article. Janáček's relationship to Kamila Stösslová was very important, she influenced many of his major works and the last decade of his life, the article needs more detailed information. Thanks to Magicpiano for useful advice. --Vejvančický (talk) 10:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Well, I saw you in the edit history, so I figured you'd understand about the English. My advice is to deal with content issues, and then seek someone to copyedit -- you can do this by sections if you think they are complete enough. (I may be able to help with that, and the polish needed for a GA or FA review.) Re Kovarovic and Jenufa: it is probably appropriate to give the full story of the issues around its staging in the Jenufa article. My complaint here is that "story elements" are missing or misplaced. In the first mention, Janacek criticizes Kovarovic's work. Rather than immediately saying that this resulted in the rejection of Jenufa, foreshadow the conflict by indicating that e.g. this led to bad blood or dislike between the two, that would later result in professional difficulties between them. Then when you get to the section on Jenufa (and any other times they clashed), you can elaborate what K did or said in retaliation. Biographies are stories -- they often have these sorts of plot elements that actually make the bio more interesting to read. Re Tchaikovsky: I asked about this for the same reason as the Jenufa business (and, come to think of it, the emotional issues) -- is there plot to develop here? Where and why does it begin, what is the "climax" if any, and so on. -- Magic♪piano 16:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC) I added some missing informations to the "Early life" section. My source is old (1946) and it's written in Czech, but it contains many useful and relevant facts - the author was the foremost Czech expert on Janáček. It's difficult to write about the influence of Janáček's parents, he lived alone in Brno since his eleven, and was "raised" rather by Křížkovský. I found in my library the review of the Bridgerooms, however, it's written in older Czech language and therefore hard for translation. It's roughly translated, but it contains the substantive part of Janáček's opinion. Unfortunately I don't own Tyrell's biography of Janáček - the most detailed source on his life... I added also information on Janáček and Tchaikovsky, but it's not related to their meeting... I'll continue later. Would you mind to check the English? --Vejvančický (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC) Sure, but I may not get to it for a few days. Magic♪piano 17:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 17:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 20:41, 3 May 2016 (UTC)