Jump to content

Talk:Richard Wagner/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15

Specific reference needed.

The description of Tristan as "fifty years ahead of its time" needs its own citation as it is a direct quote.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:06, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

English (and something else)

I have gone through the sources and attempted to make them consistent. While doing that, I noticed that with reference to websites, there are four expressions being used: "consulted online", "consulted", "retrieved" and "accessed". There are also several references to "Faber", but they tend to vary.

Furthermore, the website issue makes me think: what English does this article use? It has both "realized" and "realized". I haven't looked for other inconsistencies of this kind, though, so maybe I'm pointing out a non-problem. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I write in English English. I also take the view that 'realize' is English English, (both when spelt 'realized' and when spelt 'realized' :-} ). 'Faber' was at various times 'Faber' or 'Faber & Faber', so both forms may be correct.--Smerus (talk) 20:28, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Obviously, I meant "realized" and "realised". Toccata quarta (talk) 21:09, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
BTW, I don't understand the quotation logic in the last two sentences of the second paragraph in the section "Starting the Ring". Toccata quarta (talk) 21:24, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
I've copyedited this--Smerus (talk) 12:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
There is still a need for consistency about whether to use Oxford spelling or not.--Peter cohen (talk) 15:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Little query about some language

These two comments are very much IMHO, so if they deserved to be dismissed, please don't be offended.

1. In the biography sections there are moments which are portrayed with language that seems unneccessarily loaded. eg: "debt would plague Wagner for most of his life", "Richard made a scant living writing articles", "Wagner found himself in grim personal straits". Was Wagner truly close to destitution? Or merely imperiled by middle-class standards?

2. Pardon my not knowing the correct name for this grammatical feature (is it a modal verb?) - cumulatively it feels to me like the word "would" gets overused, again in the biography sections: "This opera, which imitated the style of Carl Maria von Weber, would go unproduced", "a troubled marriage that would end in misery three decades later", "a scenario that would eventually become the four-opera cycle", "Wagner would later call this", "He would remain an adherent of Schopenhauer", "which would not be resumed for the next twelve years"

These two points seem connected to me: they both seem to be heading in the direction of giving a heroic gloss to Wagner's life story. Yours, over-using the defensive verb "seem", almost-instinct 10:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Well Wagner was in debt for most of his adult life, frequently fleeing debtors, even apparently spending some time in debtors prison in Paris. Money was a life-long problem with him. I'm not quite sure how this makes him seem 'heroic' - clearly as regards his finances he was a bit of a shit, reneging on those who helped him out, etc.... It doesn't seem to me that these hazards are regularly faced by the middle-class (at least until the last couple of years :-}). As far as I am concerned you can if you like simply change the 'woulds' into straightforward past tenses; I don't see however that this would will alter the sense or the implications in any way. Best, --Smerus (talk) 12:06, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Yes the threat of prison definitely puts one in actual peril, not merely risking one's social rank! almost-instinct 19:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Better musical example?

Rather than just having one leitmotiv written out, would it be better to give an example of the transformation of a motiv? I'm thinking of maybe the Rhinemaidens call of "Rheingold" in Scene 1 of RG, its transformation to represent the power of the Ring in Sc. 3 and it's further transformation in Scene 4 when the Rhinemaidens are mourning their loss. This can be referenced to Cooke's audio guide to the Ring that accompanied the Solti big box. This will make it clear that the motivs aren't just musical calling cards but are actually treated as fluid.

Is anyone willing to do the work in Sibelius to produce the musical layout? And does anybody here know how to make files of audio extracts to accompany this?--Peter cohen (talk) 16:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Wouldn't that more appropriate in the article Leitmotif? Given time (if it were available), I could do it in Sibelius and produce soundfiles, but here it would I think put the article out of kilter.--Smerus (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Debussy

  • "The 20th-century harmonic revolutions of Claude Debussy [...]"

I'm not an expert on Debussy, but I'm sure that at least some of his harmonic innovations come from the 19th century. Toccata quarta (talk) 19:38, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

Comments Well done. I've been following the comments on Brian's page about this. I feel duty bound as I borrow my name from Wagner. The article is long, so I will likely break up the review. I'm going to be thorough and picky, so this will take time, especially as I am "on tour".
Lede
  • The article begins with Wagner's full name, of course, but the next two sentences begin "Wagner". Can this be adjusted?
  • "Wagner pioneered advances in musical language, such as extreme chromaticism and quickly shifting tonal centres, which greatly influenced the development of European classical music." I warn you that most people will not know what extreme chromaticism is. At the least, I suggest recasting the sentence, "Wagner's (or, keeping in mind my previous comment, "His") advances in musical language, including extreme ..." I really though, question whether the terms used in this sentence will be understood by the average reader, making me think that they are perhaps not best suited for the lede paragraph.
  • "This was supposed to achieve ..." This beginning is awkward.
  • "announced" I dislike this term here. Wagner is not a public relations firm. Possibly "theorised" or "conceptualised"
  • Mildly dislike the "operatic forms" bit due to the use of the word "opera" just a bit earlier. I would strike the word "operatic".
  • I would toss in a "(the Ring)" after you first give its full name.
  • "relative importance of music and drama " You discussed the synthesis of music and other aspects of opera, but I did not read that to indicate anything about Wagner's views of their relative importance. Therefore, the information that he rebalanced them late in life comes as something of a surprise to the reader.
  • " The effect of his ideas can be traced in many of the arts throughout the 20th century." This seems basically duplicative of what you said two sentences earlier. Can you consolidate?
Early life
  • " at No. 3 (The House of the Red and White Lions), the Brühl," the parenthetical, I think, should be moved to the end of the street address. As it is, it took me to reads to understand what was meant.
  • "following which" perhaps "after which" as more formal?
  • Is it possible to briefly state why they "probably" married? That is, in the article? After all, the documentary evidence seems to argue the other way.
  • "almost certainly suspected". As what he may have suspected was not actually the case, suggest "thought" or perhaps "initially thought" for suspected.
  • "was shared" suggest "came to be shared".
  • For the edification of those who may not be familiar, I would mention that Weber's work was an opera.
  • "He could not manage a proper scale but preferred playing theatre overtures by ear. " I'm a little uncertain of the "but" as the second part of the sentence is entirely consistent with the first. Perhaps, "He could not manage a proper scale, preferring to play theatre overtures by ear." I assume the first half of the sentence is proper terminology re "manage" (which I understand you are including to avoid the repeat of "play".
  • "the family had moved back to Leipzig." Is "moved back" proper? Geyer had not lived there, according to what you have said.
  • Can a few words be said about why Wilhelmine Schröder-Devrient so impressed Wagner? Preferably his own words?
  • "Weinlig was so impressed with Wagner's musical ability that he refused any payment for his lessons, and arranged for Wagner's Piano Sonata in B flat (which was consequently dedicated to him) to be published as the composer's Op. 1." This sentence is a bit confused due to the "he" and "him"s. Suggest a split into two sentences. Additionally, as Weinlig was a composer (a quick glance at the popup from his article), the ending left me scratching my head as to who was meant.
More coming.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:56, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
"Extreme chromaticism" should, without any doubt, remain in the lead. "Hard to understand" would lead to the deletion of many mathematical articles. See also WP:LEAD. Toccata quarta (talk) 07:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
I was really talking about the first paragraph. However, the alternate phrasing I suggested might help if you are not minded to move it down further (i.e., into the remainder of the lede).--Wehwalt (talk) 07:41, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Lede

Thanks Wehwalt - I might appropriately have adopted your alias as a 'nom de guerre' when setting out on this FA-quest....I have adjusted the lede as you suggested except on a couple of points. "Announced" - this is exactly what W. did, as his tracts were intended to astound the (largely uninterested) world by his new concept. On "extreme chromaticism" I am at one with Toccata quarta, but I have added a link to tonality. Best, --Smerus (talk) 14:01, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. What I am giving is just advice and suggestions. I will probably do a little more tonight.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Early Life

Done and added links for 'scale' and 'by ear'. I am travelling the next few days, so may not respond promptly to further comments, but keep them coming! --Smerus (talk) 14:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

More comments

Early career:
  • You may want to say whether Wagner quit or was fired in Magdeberg. It's rather unclear, you have him going off after Minna. You say he held a "brief position", you should clarify whether it was a temporary position from the outset, or if Wagner could have stayed if he hadn't had an operatic disaster.
  • " Minna had recently " recently is problematical so soon after the wedding day. Perhaps a specific month she went to live with the other man?
  • Is the Newfoundland dog really essential? He doesn't appear before or since in the article, and there's no dog in the opera.
  • "they fled Riga to escape from creditors" Suggest delete "from" as superfluous.
  • Consider combining "Early career" and "Dresden", which would combine two short subsection into one about the same size as the others.
Dresden
  • I think there is no great need to say "Richard Wagner" to disambiguate who you are talking about. "Wagner" conveys, by itself, the man. And I don't see that you ever refer to Minna or Cosima simply as "Wagner".
In exile
  • This subsection seems inordinately long. Can it be divided at some logical point?
  • "In exile" (in the first sentence). From Germany? I would say. Obviously he couldn't go back to Saxony but he was apparently keeping out of Germany.
  • "and now wrote desperately to his friend Franz Liszt to have it staged in his absence." Rather than "now", suggest substituting "from Paris" or "from Zurich", that is, wherever he wrote it from.
  • "grim personal straits" Perhaps "dire straits financially".
  • "Meanwhile," Seems a bit informal. I would suggest "by 1852" (or whatever year works with the source).
  • After the description of the Wagners' health, suggest some sort of bridge, like "Nevertheless," to follow and start the next paragraph. As it is, the short description of their health seems a bit isolated in the text.
  • "a set of notable essays" I would delete "notable". The fact that you are writing about them in a biographic article conveys the importance. They would not be mentioned for no reason.
  • "anti-Jewish abuse" I would tone down the language here a bit. The wrongness of this can be conveyed in a neutral tone, using as few terms like "abuse" and "Jew-hatred" as possible. I would say "strong" rather than "aggressive", same reason. The summary of Wagner's views on the subject is very neutrally phrased and I like it.
  • I would split the paragraph at the end of the discussion of Jews.
  • Are the italics in the blockquote as in Wagner's original words?
  • "Wagner began composing the music" You mention him beginning, but the completion is only implied by his beginning another work. I'm not sure that's enough, especially given you shortly after describe him putting aside one opera to work on another. I'm not sure if he's prodigal or indecisive.
  • I am not sure that the way you frame the sources of inspiration of Tristan works. The mention of two sources of inspiration, followed by two rather heavy and technical (probably necessary, but still slowing down a biographical article with a technical discussion). Then on into a second one. The meantime, I'm thinking "well, wasn't one source the old legend?" and it finally shows up, mentioned in passing. I don't have the sources so can't make an intelligent suggestion on how to smooth this out, but I think it will be easy to do.
  • "based loosely on a historical figure, widely considered Wagner's most sympathetic character," I would delete at least the historical figure part, and preferably all of it. If you like it, well, no great harm. But right there, I feel you are venturing a bit far afield.
  • " Mathilde Wesendonck" I would delete most of the material of the interactions of the various people described, and focus on exactly why Wesendonck's works were an inspiration to Wagner. You've slowed down the telling of a life story for several paragraphs and I don't see the justification for it. Focus, compactly on how and why this was important to Wagner. I agree, Schopenhauer is important, that should be stated, but the focus should be on why this was important, what it changed about Wagner and what he did. The Arthurian legend and the Wesendonck should be mentioned, but more along the lines of "Wagner also based his work on" or some such construction. Sorry about the rant, JMO.
  • The material on the Mathilde-Wagner affair can follow the stuff on the inspiration on Tristan. Sift all the personal details on them to there.
  • "After the resulting confrontation, Wagner left Zurich alone, bound for Venice, where he stayed in the Palazzo Giustinian" I think you should signal more clearly whether this is a lover's tiff, and after hubby stays with a friend for a while, all will be well, or if this is the for-good breakup. It might be educational for the reader to learn who it was that Wagner was staying with, assuming he was a guest and not a tenant.
  • "Support from the Wesendoncks was only one of the expedients to which Wagner resorted at this period of his life for finance." These sentence takes too long to get to the point. Perhaps more along the lines of "In financial difficulties, Wagner was able to gain financial support from the Wesendonks, as well as from other sources." I will add, parenthetically, that Otto's complacency and willingness to financially support the great composer who is (or at least has been) cuckolding him might be worthy of a little more emphasis, since it is interesting in light of Von Bülow events.
  • " In 1850 Julie," consider a comma after the year.
  • The various "hers" and "Julie"s just there gets a little confusing.
  • It's not clear what was aborted, the increase (though you do not say what it was, originally), or the entire pension.
  • "Amongst the conducting engagements" This should begin a new paragraph, it is a very abrupt change of subject.
  • The visit itself was not one of the conducting engagements, the performances were. Suggest modify to match things up better.
  • I would assume the Queen recorded this in her diary?
  • " his patron" Given that she's not mentioned as financially supporting him and she hasn't done anything important enough to be mentioned to this point, suggest "a patron, ".
  • I thought the story on the Paris Tannhaüser was that Wagner refused to alter the piece to suit Parisian tastes and they were very upset?
  • This is a very long section.
More to come. Generally pleased with the quality.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Resuming
Return and resurgence
  • All unsourced bits in the body of the article should be sourced
  • "since childhood" Given he was 18 at the time, I'm not sure this helps the reader. Suggest omit or, if source justifies, "for several years".
  • It's not clear what "significance" to Wagner is being referred to. Can you clarify?
  • Why were bailiffs acting for Wagner's creditors interested? Hadn't Ludwig paid his debts?
  • I would lose the parentheses around the bailiffs/Isolde bit and just make it part of the paragraph.
  • "though the two men were friends". I suggest a change to "nevertheless, the two men were friends" as I would not expect Lizst to encourage his wife to play around on her husband, friend or no friend.
  • It should be mentioned what the pressure on Ludwig was, it is not clear presently.
  • "the complete cycle to be performed" I'd toss in a "first" in there.
  • Given that you mention Minna's death, I'd delete the previous mention of it in this section, stating perhaps that Wagner continued financial support despite the separation.
  • I think you should state more clearly how the divorce came about. "materialize" is not the best way of putting it. The whole thing about repeatedly writing to Hans is unsatisfying as well, what was his reaction? (besides saying no)
  • "Richard and Cosima were now able to marry." Suggest delete in its entirety as superfluous.
  • The reader should be made aware that the Siegfried Idyll had not been previously performed.
  • "with an extended introduction" I would say this should be about where you start a fresh sentence, say "He extended its introduction, " or similar.

Still more

  • Resuming
Bayreuth
  • "decided to move to the town of Bayreuth as the location of his new opera house" some adjustment needed here.
  • the second dash in the "Green Hill" sentence might well be moved to after the word "town".
  • "Wagner announced the first Bayreuth Festival for 1873.[93] Since Ludwig had declined to finance the project, the start of building was delayed and the proposed date for the initial festival was deferred." The first sentence feels very abrupt, especially since you are immediately modifying what you are saying. Perhaps these two sentences can be restructured, using such words as "initially" or "first scheduled"? Additionally, I would clarify that the Festival was for the presentation of the Ring.
  • The first sentence of the second paragraph needs division, and probably some restructuring.
  • "theatrical innovations developed at" I think the "developed" can be omitted, possibly changing the "at" to "for"
  • What about the Wagner curtain, what is now the conventional theatre curtain drawn up and to the sides? Did Wagner develop it for the Festspielhaus?
  • Nietzsche is prominent enough that if he was bitterly disappointed, it would be nice to know why.
  • "amongst others attending were" Perhaps simplify to "attendees included".
  • "still sought other sources of income" Besides what? Perhaps something should be said about how Wagner was supporting himself and family without the Mad King at his back.
thanks again - do please keep on, these comments are extraordinarily helpful - (not that I always agree!). I am away from reference books for a week so am copyediting where possible in odd moments, will go over again when I have returned. (Others also very welcome to editt in the meantime of course!). --Smerus (talk) 07:44, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
They are just suggestions, as I said ... I am glad they are helpful. I am presently traveling so have limited time to devote to this. I'll try to do a few sections tomorrow.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Resuming
Later years
  • "the last of his documented emotional liaisons" Since the others, I believe, were all sexual in nature, your phrasing raises an eyebrow. Did he or didn't he?
  • "Wagner was also much troubled " I'm not sure troubled is the proper word here.
  • "He was once again rescued by the liberality of King Ludwig," The king has paid Wagner's debts once and given him a loan once, so there is a considerable range of options for him here. Less vagueness would be good. Especially since it is unclear whether this refers to money or Parsifal being played outside of Bayreuth.
  • And if financial, given that he had to sell his rights, I'd hesitate to call it a "rescue".
  • "recanting some of his earlier views" Maybe disavowing, repudiating. Also, maybe insert something like ", more liberal" before "views"?
  • "which was premiered" What need "was"? Also, it might be worth mentioning if the Ring was presented in 1882.
  • For secretly, with Levi, suggest "unseen" instead. Given the nature of the pit at Bayreuth ...
  • Should "flower-maiden" have a capital letter?
Operas
  • "use or sanction this term himself". Did he have an opinion on the use of the term? "Sanction" is a rather vague term.
  • "in which the orchestra importance is equal to that of the singers." I would be more specific, and rephrase a bit ("orchestra importance"?) Perhaps relate it to the plot of the opera? "in which the orchestra and singers are equally important in developing the plot"?
The final sentence of this introductory section is not merely expositional, but substantive, since you say how his works are generally divided. You'll need a cite.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Resuming
  • Regarding Wagner's early works being performed at Bayreuth: this.
  • I would reverse the date and translation for Dutchman and also separate with a comma, not a semicolon.
  • "he reworked" I would toss a "nevertheless" before reworked.
  • "both the Dutchman and Tannhäuser on several occasions.[n 9] The three operas are the earliest works included into the Bayreuth canon" I would substitute "in" for "into"
  • "and which he had amply discussed " Hm, maybe "gave considerable attention to" or similar.
  • "Bühnenweihfestspiel" should be italicized.
Non-operatic
  • Why the pipe to Cosima? I raised an eyebrow at the link to Festspielhaus in the previous section but wasn't going to say anything but your linking practices seem a bit off here.
Prose writings
  • I find this section a bit unsatisfying. Surely there is more that can be said? All this says is that he was prolific and that his essays went through lots of editions. I think we need more about the content.
Influence and legacy
  • So why is Tristan linked?
  • "In his lifetime, and for some years after, " Wagner fans today can still be a bit intense. Suggest a rephrase to avoid them.
  • Consider deleting the paragraph on the rock bands and so forth. I think the end of the previous paragraph is a perfectly good ending to the subsection and the inclusion of these borders on the trivial.
  • On the Millington quote. I would not include the name of the source in paragraph like that, but perhaps in an intro phrase just before and outside the blockquote. Blockquotes are not enclosed in quotation marks.
  • In the Influence in literature subsection, the paragraphs seem isolated and there's no narrative flow through it.
  • "have formed many Societies dedicated to Wagner's life and work." Needs citation and why is Societies capped?
More later.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Resuming
Racism
  • "explicitly" Delete. None of them are called Jews in any way, whether or not they are intended as such.
  • Is it worth mentioning Hermann Levi being Jewish here?
  • Actually telling the reader what it is Gobineau espoused seems badly relegated to the end of the paragraph. I would move it to the first mention of him.
Other
  • The final two paragraphs could probably do with expansion. Suggest a few details on their interpretations of Wagner, just very briefly.
  • As these final subsections are short, are there hatnotes you can insert to refer the reader to more information?
Nazi
  • "resented attending these lengthy epics at Hitler's insistence." As you have not yet mentioned that Hitler was a constant attendee at Bayreuth, the reader may not fully grasp what it is you are talking about.
  • I'm not sure that the Nazi section is sufficient, since this is surely a heavily-read part of the article. The second paragraph seems especially weak. I would talk more about how the Nazis used Wagner's music, that is, the appropriation of Bayreuth, use of his music at events.
  • I don't think you should quote Hitler calling Wagner "the Master" if that is what you are doing, because you have already used that phrase to refer to Wagner, sans quotes, when discussing Mahler. Don't associate yourself with Hitler. That being said, I think you should add a fairly long quote by Hitler discussing Wagner's music. It should not be hard to find one.
  • That's about it. Very good job. I would say it's on a good track towards FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:51, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

The "The Controversies" section is larger than all the rest

Not satisfied only in that, this subject deserve an entire article itself? not one about opera, music too at least? Its patethic how a judaism-centric point of view of the world can be so deforming reality influence. In any case, if Hitler is this or that, its a Hitler biography matter, has nothing to do here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.178.150.136 (talk) 08:57, 11 November 2012 (UTC) 190.178.150.136 (talk) 10:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

"Reception" and "legacy" are important aspects of a subject's notability. And what the heck do you mean by "not one about opera, music too at least"? Have you even noticed the existence of Template:Richard Wagner? Toccata quarta (talk) 09:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Can you give a shoot and SEE that the topic is about the overall looking of the article.
Even more, lets do some serious talking about the contents of this section. For example:
  • "Other interpretation" you know that the movie Fantasia have his own socialism interpretation for some people, you know that? Can you consent that we are putting on in this level of speculations -in a biography-?
  • "Nazi appropriation" OK ok, Hitler like his music, so? put that in Hitler's biography. Hitler was Christian too, Are we have to go on the Christianity controversy section with that too?
About structure. I say leave an introduction of his political and social views in main, since you already have an ENTIRE section where you can develope all this.... political agenda.
And wake up the importance of this guy is MUSIC. 190.178.150.136 (talk) 10:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Please see WP:RS. It says the following:
The association of Wagner and Nazism is very common in literature. Wikipedia is not here to present original research, but to report what reliable sources say. It's not our fault that so many people have discussed this topic. Your second complaint is irrelevant; put together, the articles Die Hochzeit, Die Feen, Das Liebesverbot, Männerlist grösser als Frauenlist, Rienzi, The Flying Dutchman, Tannhäuser, Lohengrin, Das Rheingold, Die Walküre, Siegfried, Götterdämmerung, Tristan und Isolde, Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, Parsifal, Symphony in C major (Wagner), Das Liebesmahl der Apostel, Wesendonck Lieder, Siegfried Idyll, Wagner tuba, Parsifal bell, Bayreuth Festival, Bayreuth Festspielhaus and Bayreuth canon amount (according to Wikipedia) to 420,367 bytes at the moment, which is the length of a substantial novel (cf. List of longest novels). Toccata quarta (talk) 11:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Leit...

The article contains the sheet music of a leitmotif from the opera Siegfried. Perhaps there could also be a link to a recording of it or a relevant passage from the opera with a remark like "The leitmotif can be heard in [insert instrument(s)]"?

On a slightly different note, the article uses both "leitmotiv" and "leitmotif". Toccata quarta (talk) 20:40, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

should be 'leitmotif' throughout as in WP article, so please edit any 'v' s you see. I suggest that fancy sonics attached to the pic can be reserved for the leitmotif article itself, they would be superfluous to this article. Best,--Smerus (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)--Smerus (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

New German School template

This has been added by User:Hyacinth but I'm not convinced that it actually enhances the article (the article does not presently mention the NGS, which might itself involve a substantial excursus)- comments?--Smerus (talk) 15:45, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

A few questions

A simple question to kick this section off:

  • How should en dashes be used for page numbers? The article has both "261–3" and "276–278".

The references to letters are fairly inconsistent. We have the following four:

  • Wagner (1987) 199 Letter of 21 April 1850
  • Letter of April 1859, quoted in Daverio (208) 116
  • Letter from Debussy to Pierre Louÿs, 17 January 1896
  • Letter to Emile Naumann, April 1867, quoted in E. Naumann, Italienische Tondichter (1883) IV, 5

The Debussy letter reference has no "quoted in". Shouldn't the Naumann source be moved into the "Sources" section?

Lastly:

  • He was once again assisted by the liberality of King Ludwig, but was still forced by his personal financial situation in 1877 to sell the rights of a number of his earlier miscellaneous works (including the Siegfried Idyll) to the publisher Schotts.

Are the words "earlier" (rather than "unpublished") and "miscellaneous" (rather than "non-operatic") necessary here? Toccata quarta (talk) 21:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I suggest the format for citing letters should be: [source], [(date)], [page]. Letter from [x] to [y] dated [letter date].
Thus: Wagner (1987), 1999. Letter from Wagner to Liszt of 21 April 1850.
Page numbering formats should I think be: 261-3, or 276-8; 284-95; 295-301.
I have given a better (and corrected) source for the Rossini quote; will find a source for the Debussy quote.
You are quite right of course about deleting unnecessary words and, even better, replacing them with meaningful descriptors - I don't think it needs to await a reference here to make such corrections!! Best ---Smerus (talk) 16:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

What's next?

Is an FAC nomination next? Toccata quarta (talk) 10:45, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Well still a bit of cleaning up to do. I have never done FAC nomination before - do we ideally want to get it lined up for RW's birthday 22 May? Doesn't it go to Peer Review first? - I am vague about procedures - can anyone out there advise?--Smerus (talk) 15:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
You can have a peer review, but among the comments you have already had, you have effectively had one. I suggest that you ask Brianboulton if he feels it is ready. I note you have not yet dealt with all of my comments (or at least if you've considered and rejected them, you haven't said so).--Wehwalt (talk) 16:23, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Before we start to follow Wikipedia:Featured article candidates rules, there are a few things that I would like to sort out. As for a peer review, there has already been one done by User:Brianboulton, and there numerous comments on this talk page. It has been edited 420 times since User:Sjones23 made his FA proposal. Toccata quarta (talk) 16:32, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I haven't yet had a chance to catch up with all of User:Wehwalt's comments....so let's plough through the various bits and pieces and review the situation at the end of the month....... --Smerus (talk) 13:02, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

That sounds good. I'll give it another run through if you like prior to a nomination.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Titles

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles says that titles of books and pieces of music should be in italics, thus - Mein Leben, Parsifal. Titles of essays and other shorter works should be in quotes , thus - "A Communication to my Friends".--Smerus (talk) 23:23, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Rock music para

User:Wehwalt suggests removing. Removal of this section (which is already a lot smaller than it used to be) in the past has resulted in storms of protest. I think on balance it is worth retaining; I am almost inclined to add Tony Palmer's remark that 'if Wagner were alive to day, he'd be playing with King Crimson' but perhaps I will restrain myself....--Smerus (talk) 14:52, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments

Some time ago I replied to a comment that User:Smerus made on my talk page. As he has not modified the article on the basis of any of what I wrote there and has not commented on it either, I will repost it here, to be sure that he reads it:

Start of quotation

There are several things that are of concern to me:

(Disclaimer: English is not my first language, so that may influence my areas of focus.)
  • "described as marking the start of modern music"
Wouldn't "described as the start of modern music" be better?
  • At times there is "Ring cycle", but at others there is "Ring Cycle". I think the first form is better (as the second is not related to the work's full title in German).
"However, Wagner continued his correspondence with Mathilde and his friendship with (and support from) her husband Otto."
What is the "(and support from)" part supposed to convey?
  • "Richard Wagner's Visit to Rossini (Paris 1860): and an Evening at Rossini's in Beau-Sejour (Passy) 1858"
This is missing an ISBN number. I found two at http://trove.nla.gov.au/work/10782590?versionId=46412229. Sources also differ on the use of a colon in the title; some use a semicolon, others a comma and some nothing instead of it. Some of them also capitalise the word "an".
  • "Italienische Tondichter, von Palestrina bis auf die Gegenwart"
A Google search shows various approaches to capitalising the title of this work. Google Books also adds ": Eine reihe von vortragen" at the end of the title.

End of quotation

I would also like to stress that there should be a link to a sound file of the Siegfried leitmotif found in this article. It may seem redundant to musically learned people or those with perfect pitch, but I think you will change your minds if you place yourselves in the position of somebody who has little/no knowledge of the opera or can't read sheet music. Toccata quarta (talk) 23:44, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for overlooking - I lost myself in User:Wehwalt's comments.
1) "Ring cycle" / "Ring Cycle". This is a matter of taste, but if we have to go for one or the other I suggest "Ring cycle" (which allows for the shortened form Ring as well).
2) "described as marking the start of modern music" - seems OK to me as it gives the opera the 'weight' of a marker.
3) (and support from) - I will correct this.
4) Titles: As the sources seem to differ, I have no problems with whichever versions are preferred.
5) sound file link: It seems to me rather arbitrary to link these couple of bars when there are no soiund files which give an inidication of Wagner's musical style as he meant it to be heard. I don't see sound file links of this sort in other composer articles. I would be grateful for other opinions on this.
Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 08:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I still don't understand the "support" sentence. Toccata quarta (talk) 08:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
'However, Wagner continued his correspondence with Mathilde and his friendship with (and financial support from) her husband Otto.' Sorry, can you explain what is unclear about this? Best, --Smerus (talk) 10:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
"Wagner continued" implies Wagner continued correspondence with Mathilde and his friendship with her husband Otto. But is it possible "to continue financial support from"? I would rephrase it like this: "and his friendship with her husband Otto (who kept supporting him financially)." Toccata quarta (talk) 11:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Try the new version. Best, --Smerus (talk) 11:51, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

What now?

I feel that I have finished tinkering with the article for the present. Do others have changes they propose as regards FA status? When, in any case, should we submit - now, asking to keep the date of 22 May 2013, or nearer the date?--Smerus (talk) 08:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I may go through the whole article in the near future, and will post here or edit it if needed. As for WP:TFA, I would definitely go for 22 May 2013, if that date is possible. Toccata quarta (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I got distracted but hope to have another look at the article soon.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:28, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Lutheran?

Category:German Lutherans has just been excised from this article. Is that justifiable? Toccata quarta (talk) 12:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Now that I think of it, the article might mention Wagner's religious beliefs and practices; at the moment, it "only" discusses his philosophical affinities and Nietzsche's perception of his late personality. Toccata quarta (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
I have added sometihng here as some of his late writings on Xtianity were already mentioned.--Smerus (talk) 14:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

NPV

Here are the passages that sound biased/"peacockish" to me:

  • "to ensure musical coherence"

"With the goal of providing musical coherence" sounds better to me. The passage also seems to be unsourced.

  • "mature"

This word makes three appearances in the article (and in one of them it appears to belong to an unsourced sentence), but there is no solid definition of it. (For an example of what I would deem an appropriate solution, I refer you to Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji#Mature works and symphonic thought, which I wrote.)

*"but cannot credibly be regarded" [emphasis added]

  • "who proved to be a true friend"

Sounds like original research. "Who proved loyal" or "[text removed]" seems better to me.

  • "is without credible evidence" [emphasis added]

More to come (though not on this topic anymore). Toccata quarta (talk) 21:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

'Credible evidence' - the sources cited indicate that that the evidence is not credible, hence the citation is correct. This cannot be construed as either 'peacockish' or biased. Where an editor provides a source, WP:AGF should apply. There seems to be some problem with appreciation of English usage here: 'who proved to be a true friend' means exactly the same as 'who proved to be loyal'. Similarly 'to ensure/with the goal of'. 'Mature' is a standard dictionary word without 'peacock' overtones, it simply means what it says. Most particualrly I bridle at the suggestion, in the heading of this section, that the items selected are in any way NPV. A source is a source. If an editor has a counter-source, let him or her quote it. If we are going to nit-pick in this fruitless and petty way over all the wordings in the article which different editors don't especially fancy, we will all be wasting I think a lot of time. The essence it seems to me of WP is that we concentrate on the facts and verifiability. We will also risk sacrificing the work that many editors have undertaken in attmepting to get this article up to FA. (I point out by the way that none of the wordings raised by Toccata quarta, most of which were in the article when it obtained GA status, were ever objected to by any reviewer).
I would appreciate the comments of other editors on all this. Thanks, --Smerus (talk) 23:06, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
I repeat what I said before—attribution is my main concern. Providing a source is not the same as providing attribution. "Mature" implies a level of quality, which necessarily leads to expressions such as "great", "outstanding", etc. Toccata quarta (talk) 23:15, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
On a slightly different note, the sentence about Liszt premiering Lohengrin appears to need another source. Toccata quarta (talk) 23:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
It's given in the existing citations, but I will add yet another.--Smerus (talk) 15:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Ambiguous

There are a few passages in this article that I find unclear (or might be unclear to others). Here they are:

*"with orchestral accompaniment"

I seem to remember the orchestration was done by Wagner, but not all readers may know that.

This is a reference to the Wesendonck Lieder. Wagner orchestrated only "Träume". The rest were orchestrated by Felix Mottl (Hans Werner Henze has done a more recent version). -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 22:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
  • "integrated musical expression"

What does this mean? Is it the opposite of number opera? A wikilink may help readers.

*"Cosima Wagner, 28 March 1881"

This is a reference (currently #157). It lacks either 1978 or 1994, and mentions no page number. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Points 1 and 3 dealt with. Point 2 rephrased for clarity. Best, --Smerus (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for that, but I still fail to understand what "integrated" means in this case. Is there a synonym or wikilink that could make it clearer to me? Toccata quarta (talk) 09:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
I am afraid it means only what it says; that leifmotifs increase the density of references which the music can evoke in the listener.--Smerus (talk) 16:16, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Density as in "quantity of motifs", or "motivic saturation"? Toccata quarta (talk) 16:32, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Richard Wagner as FA candidate

The discussion here contains a number of points, particularly in the recent reviews by User:SandyGeorgia and User:Gerda Arendt, which spark some general issues on which project members may wish to reflect and/or comment.--Smerus (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Words and Music

Gerda Arendt's claim that Wagner wrote the libretto for the Ring before he wrote the music is of extreme importance. It shows how he had emphasized conceptual narrative before he was influenced by Schopenhauer. After reading Schopenhauer, Wagner considered music to be absolutely primary.Lestrade (talk) 03:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)Lestrade

Blockquote

This article contains a quote from The Perfect Wagnerite, which is meant to be a "blockquote", but is not displayed as one (at least on my computer). Does anyone here know how to fix that? Toccata quarta (talk) 21:25, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm.. it appears to be a consequence of the image on the left.....--Smerus (talk) 21:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Richard_Wagner/Archive_12&oldid=1137157430"