This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Nothing here is incorrect, but I feel that the article only gives a limited impression of what Ariadne is like. I'm going to work on an expanded synopsis, maybe other material as well....some account of the first version? Herbivore ( talk) 02:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Am updating performers at Stuttgart premiere. The playbill as reproduced in Hartmann's book says the first Harlekin was Albin Swoboda...but maybe there's a reason for the listing for Duhan? Not knowing more about it, I'll leave it as is. 63.3.13.131 ( talk) 01:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Gosh, this is kind of meagre. There really isn't a difference of plot between the two versions. But can I/we add a section like "differences between 1912/1916 versions"? -- kosboot ( talk) 13:03, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
How about something like this? I don't have either score in front of me (which I hope to have later), but I would hope to add more details and even rehearsal numbers (for those with scores). -- kosboot ( talk) 18:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1912 version | 1916 version |
---|---|
Opera is preceded by Der Burger als Edelmann, Hofmannsthal's translation of Moliere's Le Bourgeois gentilhomme | Opera is preceded by Prologue |
Jourdain interjects various spoken comments during the opera, particularly during the opening | no comments are made during the opera |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: The end of "Noch glaub' ich" continues with an instrumental repetition of the tune and ends on a B major chord | "Noch glaub' ich" cuts off and ends on an A major chord |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: "So wär" begins in E major | "So wär" begins in D major |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: "Als ein Gott" begins in E major | "Als ein Gott" begins in D major |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: After the 2nd repetition of "Als ein Gott" the aria continues to develop, including a long accompanied cadenza, ending in E major | The aria is cut down and ends in D major |
Why is the American premiere listed here? Any special reason? Rather than the London premiere, or Paris or . . .? Normally we only list world premieres and first performances of revised versions. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 13:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I have posted the following on User Talk: 71.103.84.212’s page in order to request justification for the constant changes he/she has been making to this article. I support User talk:Francesco Malipiero changes. Viva-Verdi ( talk) 16:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
This same problem occurred with the role of Brangäne ( Tristan und Isolde), and in that case it was decided to keep the voice type mentioned in the score in the roles table, and mention the alternative (which in that case however was not documented by a printed source, only by the voice type used on most recordings) in a footnote. -- Francesco Malipiero ( talk) 16:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Grove voice types follow the composer's description (normally written in the score) so Murray (or his editor) has either made a mistake or been unaware of publication rules. We don't know his reasons, hence it's reasonable to have a footnote. (Referring to Grove is important, but we should remember that all books are fallible.) That fact that mezzos often sing the role is not really relevant. Listing all the alternative voice types in, say, Die Fledermaus would be merely confusing for the reader. -- Klein zach 01:01, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
IMO we have a reasonably consensus here for following our usual practice of going by the score. I've removed the mezzo designation from the table, leaving the footnote, which we may like to develop to make it clear that in practice mezzos often undertake the role and may perfectly legitimately include it in their repertory. -- Klein zach 00:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Am I alone in thinking that "International" is hugely Americo-centric, give or take a bit of British stuff at the beginning? I realise that the Met Database produces lots of interesting material, but perhaps there are also "international" performances of the opera that have taken place in, uh, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, even France, Italy, Sweden, Russia, Holland, Australia ....? -- Guillaume Tell 00:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
First, David Murray may well have listed the role as "mezzo-soprano" based on an analysis of the pitch range of the role rather than a score designation, which may well have been inserted by someone at the publisher (and not specified by Strauss), possibly due to an adventitious casting decision made for the first production which depended on the availability of a particularly outstanding singer well suited to the part. Is it then "cast in stone" that this is a soprano role? Based on the information we have right now, we do not know why David Murray designated the Composer as mezzo-soprano, and he does not say, but I'm not sure we can second guess the author and say it is just an "error". It does seem possible, from the detailed performance history at the Met, that the role is really more suited for a mezzo-soprano, although performable by many singers in either voice category. Many readers, perhaps mostly those who attend the Met (again more performance history at other houses would be helpful), might reasonably be confused if the role is categorized solely as one for a soprano. And this may account for one editor's so-called "vandalism". Anyone who attends the Met might be forgiven for thinking the Composer is primarily a mezzo role, and personally, based on the data now at hand, I would not necessarily disagree. Given the balance of voice types used in the role at that house, is it really a good idea to relegate mezzo-soprano to a footnote?
Second, the Met history as it stands is not an entire list of performers, but one selected based on those who appeared most often in each role. I agree that the easy availability of detailed information from the Met online archive can (temporarily?) result in lack of balance in the article, but I would rather see information from other opera houses added to create more balance (although this may be more difficult), rather than deleting the information we have. (BTW, I do not live in New York, I'm many thousands of miles from there. I looked at the database out of curiosity because I thought it could tell us something about actual performance practice, and hopefully not because I'm chauvinistic.) Regarding "unmanageability", perhaps we could create a "Detailed performance history" section placed near the end of the article, after the roles and synopsis section, i.e. given less prominence, to which detailed information from many opera houses could eventually also be added. Might that be an alternative to actually deleting most of the detail? Myself, I found the information interesting and relevant, and that's why I added it. My initial reaction had been that most sources supported the Composer role as being for a soprano, which is why I added the footnote in the first place. I was hoping to forestall edits deleting "soprano" from the voice type column. Now I'm hoping to forestall deleting "mezzo-soprano" (a bit ironic, no?) -- Robert.Allen ( talk) 09:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I corrected Karl Alwin to Carl Alwin citing the Grove biography of Elisabeth Schumann. I could also have cited the Gerd Puritz biography of Elisabeth Schumann which has extensive material on her husband. He preferred the C selling and indeed Schumann always called him - as a nickname - by his initial 'C'. As noted on page 84 of the biography 'K' was used on record labels (and consequently some reference books) because it was considered 'more Germanic' by some people, but 'C' was preferred by Alwin himself. Unfortunately my correction was reverted.
On a matter of wiki procedure, the norm is to discuss here rather than re-revert, especially in contradiction of a cited reference see BOLD, revert, discuss cycle). -- Klein zach 02:47, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Every change like this tends to get me going through the books for verification, especially when no source or justification for the change is given. The previous cast list probably originated with New Grove Opera which translates the German in the score, "Ein Lakai", to "A Footman". Many other sources translate it as "A Lackey", including Kobbé and The New Penguin Guide. LEO says either can be a translation and also includes "flunky" and "minion". The OED & American Heritage definitions of "lackey" include "footman", "valet", "toady". "Toady" – that sounds good. Maybe we should try that next. As you all know, I love to add footnotes about such things, but I'll refrain this time. ;-) -- Robert.Allen ( talk) 01:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I think it is a mistake to feature the composer on top of the article. If you look at seven opera of the same composer there will always be his pic on top. i think the top pic should feature an extraordinary scene from the opera - as this is the article of Ariadne, I want to see Ariadne - not Richard Strauss.-- Meister und Margarita ( talk) 22:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC) Just like in The Prince of Homburg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meister und Margarita ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
New consensus on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera that the composer templates be moved to the bottom of the article. Therefore I will undo the changes made by a user who did not read or respect the will of the majority. I will do so after 15 more minutes unless someone disputes the changes.-- Meister und Margarita ( talk) 23:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Nothing here is incorrect, but I feel that the article only gives a limited impression of what Ariadne is like. I'm going to work on an expanded synopsis, maybe other material as well....some account of the first version? Herbivore ( talk) 02:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Am updating performers at Stuttgart premiere. The playbill as reproduced in Hartmann's book says the first Harlekin was Albin Swoboda...but maybe there's a reason for the listing for Duhan? Not knowing more about it, I'll leave it as is. 63.3.13.131 ( talk) 01:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Gosh, this is kind of meagre. There really isn't a difference of plot between the two versions. But can I/we add a section like "differences between 1912/1916 versions"? -- kosboot ( talk) 13:03, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
How about something like this? I don't have either score in front of me (which I hope to have later), but I would hope to add more details and even rehearsal numbers (for those with scores). -- kosboot ( talk) 18:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
1912 version | 1916 version |
---|---|
Opera is preceded by Der Burger als Edelmann, Hofmannsthal's translation of Moliere's Le Bourgeois gentilhomme | Opera is preceded by Prologue |
Jourdain interjects various spoken comments during the opera, particularly during the opening | no comments are made during the opera |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: The end of "Noch glaub' ich" continues with an instrumental repetition of the tune and ends on a B major chord | "Noch glaub' ich" cuts off and ends on an A major chord |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: "So wär" begins in E major | "So wär" begins in D major |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: "Als ein Gott" begins in E major | "Als ein Gott" begins in D major |
Grossmächtige Prinzessin: After the 2nd repetition of "Als ein Gott" the aria continues to develop, including a long accompanied cadenza, ending in E major | The aria is cut down and ends in D major |
Why is the American premiere listed here? Any special reason? Rather than the London premiere, or Paris or . . .? Normally we only list world premieres and first performances of revised versions. -- Kleinzach ( talk) 13:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I have posted the following on User Talk: 71.103.84.212’s page in order to request justification for the constant changes he/she has been making to this article. I support User talk:Francesco Malipiero changes. Viva-Verdi ( talk) 16:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
This same problem occurred with the role of Brangäne ( Tristan und Isolde), and in that case it was decided to keep the voice type mentioned in the score in the roles table, and mention the alternative (which in that case however was not documented by a printed source, only by the voice type used on most recordings) in a footnote. -- Francesco Malipiero ( talk) 16:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Grove voice types follow the composer's description (normally written in the score) so Murray (or his editor) has either made a mistake or been unaware of publication rules. We don't know his reasons, hence it's reasonable to have a footnote. (Referring to Grove is important, but we should remember that all books are fallible.) That fact that mezzos often sing the role is not really relevant. Listing all the alternative voice types in, say, Die Fledermaus would be merely confusing for the reader. -- Klein zach 01:01, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
IMO we have a reasonably consensus here for following our usual practice of going by the score. I've removed the mezzo designation from the table, leaving the footnote, which we may like to develop to make it clear that in practice mezzos often undertake the role and may perfectly legitimately include it in their repertory. -- Klein zach 00:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Am I alone in thinking that "International" is hugely Americo-centric, give or take a bit of British stuff at the beginning? I realise that the Met Database produces lots of interesting material, but perhaps there are also "international" performances of the opera that have taken place in, uh, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, even France, Italy, Sweden, Russia, Holland, Australia ....? -- Guillaume Tell 00:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
First, David Murray may well have listed the role as "mezzo-soprano" based on an analysis of the pitch range of the role rather than a score designation, which may well have been inserted by someone at the publisher (and not specified by Strauss), possibly due to an adventitious casting decision made for the first production which depended on the availability of a particularly outstanding singer well suited to the part. Is it then "cast in stone" that this is a soprano role? Based on the information we have right now, we do not know why David Murray designated the Composer as mezzo-soprano, and he does not say, but I'm not sure we can second guess the author and say it is just an "error". It does seem possible, from the detailed performance history at the Met, that the role is really more suited for a mezzo-soprano, although performable by many singers in either voice category. Many readers, perhaps mostly those who attend the Met (again more performance history at other houses would be helpful), might reasonably be confused if the role is categorized solely as one for a soprano. And this may account for one editor's so-called "vandalism". Anyone who attends the Met might be forgiven for thinking the Composer is primarily a mezzo role, and personally, based on the data now at hand, I would not necessarily disagree. Given the balance of voice types used in the role at that house, is it really a good idea to relegate mezzo-soprano to a footnote?
Second, the Met history as it stands is not an entire list of performers, but one selected based on those who appeared most often in each role. I agree that the easy availability of detailed information from the Met online archive can (temporarily?) result in lack of balance in the article, but I would rather see information from other opera houses added to create more balance (although this may be more difficult), rather than deleting the information we have. (BTW, I do not live in New York, I'm many thousands of miles from there. I looked at the database out of curiosity because I thought it could tell us something about actual performance practice, and hopefully not because I'm chauvinistic.) Regarding "unmanageability", perhaps we could create a "Detailed performance history" section placed near the end of the article, after the roles and synopsis section, i.e. given less prominence, to which detailed information from many opera houses could eventually also be added. Might that be an alternative to actually deleting most of the detail? Myself, I found the information interesting and relevant, and that's why I added it. My initial reaction had been that most sources supported the Composer role as being for a soprano, which is why I added the footnote in the first place. I was hoping to forestall edits deleting "soprano" from the voice type column. Now I'm hoping to forestall deleting "mezzo-soprano" (a bit ironic, no?) -- Robert.Allen ( talk) 09:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
I corrected Karl Alwin to Carl Alwin citing the Grove biography of Elisabeth Schumann. I could also have cited the Gerd Puritz biography of Elisabeth Schumann which has extensive material on her husband. He preferred the C selling and indeed Schumann always called him - as a nickname - by his initial 'C'. As noted on page 84 of the biography 'K' was used on record labels (and consequently some reference books) because it was considered 'more Germanic' by some people, but 'C' was preferred by Alwin himself. Unfortunately my correction was reverted.
On a matter of wiki procedure, the norm is to discuss here rather than re-revert, especially in contradiction of a cited reference see BOLD, revert, discuss cycle). -- Klein zach 02:47, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Every change like this tends to get me going through the books for verification, especially when no source or justification for the change is given. The previous cast list probably originated with New Grove Opera which translates the German in the score, "Ein Lakai", to "A Footman". Many other sources translate it as "A Lackey", including Kobbé and The New Penguin Guide. LEO says either can be a translation and also includes "flunky" and "minion". The OED & American Heritage definitions of "lackey" include "footman", "valet", "toady". "Toady" – that sounds good. Maybe we should try that next. As you all know, I love to add footnotes about such things, but I'll refrain this time. ;-) -- Robert.Allen ( talk) 01:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I think it is a mistake to feature the composer on top of the article. If you look at seven opera of the same composer there will always be his pic on top. i think the top pic should feature an extraordinary scene from the opera - as this is the article of Ariadne, I want to see Ariadne - not Richard Strauss.-- Meister und Margarita ( talk) 22:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC) Just like in The Prince of Homburg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meister und Margarita ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
New consensus on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Opera that the composer templates be moved to the bottom of the article. Therefore I will undo the changes made by a user who did not read or respect the will of the majority. I will do so after 15 more minutes unless someone disputes the changes.-- Meister und Margarita ( talk) 23:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)