![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Isn't the whole first section ripped directly out of the liner notes to the Boulez 1996 recording?!?
Much as I love it, I don't think Schoenberg's painting "Der Rote Blick" really has much direct relevance to Moses und Aron; it should probably be removed from this article, unless anyone has objections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.156.241 ( talk) 02:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I changed the recordings section to a list because lists are easier to read. I eliminated mention of which company originally issued them because this always changes through merges and through corporate evolution. There was one live performance mentioned and I eliminated that since it's not commercially available. -- kosboot ( talk) 15:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I've read that the opera is based on a single tone row, which is heard as the one line sung by Moses ("Reinige dein Denken..." The row itself has some interesting characteristics. Perhaps someone can show that in musical notation and explain how it works throughout the opera. -- kosboot ( talk) 22:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
The trouble with rendering 'Moses und Aron' as 'Moses and Aaron' and claiming that 'Aaron' is 'the English version of Aron' or some such, is that 'Aron' isn't actually the German version of anything: Schoenberg made a conscious creative decision to simplify and shorten the spelling he found in Luther's Bible -- whence *we don't have the right to change it back*. Since 'Aron' is thus *part of the work*, it follows that to refer to Schoenberg's Aron as 'Aaron' is as deplorably high-handed and ignorant as it would be to refer to Wagner's Wotan as 'Odin' and Berg's Wozzeck as 'Woyzeck', and for precisely equivalent reasons. So let's keep Schoenberg's spelling, please: an ignorant editor's busy-work should not trump the facts of the case, even if he does work at the New Grove. Pfistermeister ( talk) 19:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Re this revert: The article says
If that doesn't amount to an unfinished composition completed by another, what is it? -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 11:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Isn't the whole first section ripped directly out of the liner notes to the Boulez 1996 recording?!?
Much as I love it, I don't think Schoenberg's painting "Der Rote Blick" really has much direct relevance to Moses und Aron; it should probably be removed from this article, unless anyone has objections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.156.241 ( talk) 02:24, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
I changed the recordings section to a list because lists are easier to read. I eliminated mention of which company originally issued them because this always changes through merges and through corporate evolution. There was one live performance mentioned and I eliminated that since it's not commercially available. -- kosboot ( talk) 15:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I've read that the opera is based on a single tone row, which is heard as the one line sung by Moses ("Reinige dein Denken..." The row itself has some interesting characteristics. Perhaps someone can show that in musical notation and explain how it works throughout the opera. -- kosboot ( talk) 22:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
The trouble with rendering 'Moses und Aron' as 'Moses and Aaron' and claiming that 'Aaron' is 'the English version of Aron' or some such, is that 'Aron' isn't actually the German version of anything: Schoenberg made a conscious creative decision to simplify and shorten the spelling he found in Luther's Bible -- whence *we don't have the right to change it back*. Since 'Aron' is thus *part of the work*, it follows that to refer to Schoenberg's Aron as 'Aaron' is as deplorably high-handed and ignorant as it would be to refer to Wagner's Wotan as 'Odin' and Berg's Wozzeck as 'Woyzeck', and for precisely equivalent reasons. So let's keep Schoenberg's spelling, please: an ignorant editor's busy-work should not trump the facts of the case, even if he does work at the New Grove. Pfistermeister ( talk) 19:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Re this revert: The article says
If that doesn't amount to an unfinished composition completed by another, what is it? -- ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 11:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)