![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
I'm not registered and I'm no expert on Wagner, so I've opted to leave a comment rather than make the edit myself. But don't you think that last sentence ought to be removed from the "Antisemitism" section? Every bigot I've ever met is forced to work alongside the very people they disparage; just because they lack the strength of their convictions to actually remove themselves from inclusive society doesn't mean that this sort of apology/rationalization has any place. Wagner's writings speak for themselves; the old "but some of my best friends are Jewish/black/gay/etc." schtick doesn't hold water, and never has. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.89.61.7 ( talk) 21:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
I have learned in my music history class that Richard Wagner was influenced by the literary movement called realism, like Puccini. My source is the textbook, Music: The Art of Listening, Sixth Edition, by Jean Ferris. Page 265 has the reference. I'm not sure about the new seventh edition. Does anyone have an opinion on where this would properly go in the article? — Tuvok T @ lk/ Improve me] 23:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The use of this term in the introductory paragraph is highly questionable, in my opinion, and should be removed. Wagner's supreme "achievement" in the area of harmonic writing was not to abolish tonality, ala Schoenberg, but to introduce a style of composition that is marked by constantly shifting tonal centers. In works such as Tristan und Isolde, the music is usually without a conclusive cadence on the tonic ("interrupted cadence"), giving an unsettled feeling to the harmonic movement. Thus, it would be incorrect to call Wagner's later music "atonal"--it is always rooted in some kind of impiied tonality, however ambiguous and constantly moving it may be. Cbrodersen 11:37, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed the claim that Liszt didn't speak to Wagner for years to come after that marriage. In Cosima's diaries, it's clearly shown that that was not the case. Wagner visited Liszt with Cosima in 1872, for example, more than once (abridged edition page 148). Wagner also corresponded with Liszt even earlier than that, after the marriage. Cosima's diaries show that Wagner's and Liszt's relationship was warm and affectionate throughout the former's remaining life (at least from 1872 onward). 88.148.201.133 16:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Richard Wagner's stepfather was Ludwig Meyer, not Geyer, you silly sods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.226.163.33 ( talk) 23:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Alas, once again the silly sods take the day. According to Groves, and Deathridge's biography, it's Geyer. Do the serious sods have some other, more reliable source? -- Ravpapa 05:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
hey..this guy is boring...im only doing a project on him because its a grade and i have to —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.21.247 ( talk) 21:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I can see that this article has an active talk page and is probably watched by many, so I'll mention that I have added Category:Antisemitism to this article. Please understand that the presence of this category is not meant to pass final judgment on whether or to what degree Wagner was a true or confirmed antisemite. It's used on pages on which antisemitism is significantly discussed, including many bios of opponents of antisemitism. -- Steven J. Anderson ( talk) 05:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
There is either a contradiction or lack of explaining in these sentences, I think:
I have edited out a para which rather contentiously links W's vegetarianism with his Jew-hatred, and replaced it with a separate section on vegetarianism and his article against vivisection. The deleted sentences cite modern German references which claim that W. condemned shechita as part of 'Jewish evil'. I am not aware of any primary source which enables such an assertion. If anyone knows of such, then of course I repent my edit.-- Smerus ( talk) 10:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, again my first edit and the included sources:
Wagner was in his late years a devout vegetarian and one of the celebrities to lead the Animal Protection Movement in Germany. He saw Shechita (kosher slaughtering) and vivisection as expressing both 'Jewish Evil' [1] and fought a long but at his lifetime not successfull battle for a stricter regulation instead Germany then very animal-testing friendly [2] law.
[1]Tierliebe Menschenfeinde Hitlers Zuneigung zu seiner Schäferhündin "Blondi" ist legendär. Dass strenger Tierschutz und Verachtung für Menschen für die Nazis ohne weiteres zusammengingen, beweist die Geschichte des „Reichstierschutzgesetzes“ von 1933. Helene Heise, Spiegel Online 19.9.2007 Tatsächlich war die Tierliebe der Nazis mitnichten nur propagandistische Inszenierung. Teile der Tierschutzbewegung - wie auch der Naturschutzbewegung - bezogen sich auf ganz ähnliche ideologische Grundlagen wie die Nationalsozialisten. Beide etwa beriefen sich auf die Vorstellungen des Komponisten Richard Wagner (1813-1883), der in Naturverbundenheit und Tierliebe eine besondere Charaktereigenschaft der "nordischen Rasse" sah. Der Künstler, ein überzeugter Vegetarier wie nach ihm Hitler, wetterte gegen den Fleischverzehr - für ihn eine Vermischung von Rasse und Blut, durch welche die nordisch-germanischen Reinheit verschmutzt werde. Der Tierversuch war für Wagner Inbegriff "des Bösen und Jüdischen". Solch verquastes Mischmasch aus völkischen „Blut und Boden“-Denken, Rassenideologie, Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit und Antisemitismus vertraten keineswegs nur Nationalsozialisten, auch Tierschützern der Zeit war es nicht fremd.
[2] IDB Münster • Ber. Inst. Didaktik Biologie Suppl.2 (2002), 167-184 167, Tierschutz und Nationalsozialismus Die Entstehung und die Auswirkungen des nationalsozialistischen Reichstierschutzgesetzes von 1933 Daniel Jütte
I will have a look in the library tomorrow and check wether i can find some of the old Tierschutz publications of Wagner BR to provide original sources -- Polentario ( talk) 15:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, first the Spiegel article does mention a connection between Wagner, Shechicta and animal testing. I had translated Jewish (and) evil, wicked sounds more appropriate. But its an indirect, not an original source. I however think the track should be checked. Leon Poliakov (about antisemitism) is quoted with "Der besondere Wesenszug, der bei Wagner mit dem Hass gegen die Juden Hand in Hand zu gehen scheint, ist also die Liebe zu den Tieren.", so that wagners antisemitism had to do with animals (meat) / vergetarianism and purity. As an original Wagnerian source, the second part of Religion und Kunst is mentioned and Erkenne Dich selbst of 1881, one of the most inflammatory texts shoudl be checked. Let me have a look and come back. Thnx btw for your thorough reading. Its not standard anymmore here. -- Polentario ( talk) 18:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Smerus, some results:
First I went through Wagners Gesammelte Schriften und Dichtungen, Volume 10, Steiger 1976, a faksimile of the 1888 edition printed by Fritsch in Leipzig. The most signifikant reads were "Religion und Kunst" of 1880 and an open letter to Ernst von Weber, 1879, author of a pathetic anti animal testing essay called "Die Folterkammern der Wissenschaft" (Torture Chambers of Science). Erkenne Dich selbst is similar to Das Judentum in der Musik clearly antisemitic but not specific about animals, as far as I could understand. Wagner recalls in the letter as well an alleged nordic / germanic tradition wehre hunting and eating animals was necessary in cold climates but the hunter offered a part of the animal to the gods as a suitable tradition. He contraposts it with an alleged victory of the old testimony, which introduced cruelty and calculation ("Das alte Testament hat obsiegt und aus dem reißenden ist das rechnende Raubtier geworden", in the letter).
Wagner is a master of omitting, elapse and pretext. E.g. he does not state "the Jews are anti animal" nor does he mention Shechita but denounces any religion, that uses the first book of Moses as base is not very suitable for any pity towards animals and talks about bloody abattoirs and Abrahams blood offers. He denounces as well his own, christian heritage, in so far it is based on the old testimony. He mentions in one paragraph that animal testers should be kicked out of the nation and in the next paragraph (in the open letter, page 209) states that a recent attack against an animal testing research laboratory in Leipzig was not a socialist anti property act but most probably an ethical one. Sounds quite familiar!
All in all, I think its OK modify the entry in so far, that Wagner in his late years contributed to the antisemitic stance of the then Tierschutz (Animal protection) movement.
A source for this antisemitic stance, which is still ongoing in some respect is to be found in Hanna Rheinz, Kabbala der Tiere, Tierrechte im Judentum, in Tierrechte, eine interdiszinplinäre Herausforderung, Hrsg IATE, Heidelberg 2007, S. 234-252 and in [ [3]], a german Website about jewish animal protection, done by Hanna Rheinz, a german Jew as well. According her, Antijudaismus and Antisemitism in 19th century Germany already had developed a certain dynamics with regard to animal protection. The german Animal Protection movement has contraposted a germanic love for animals agains alleged cruelty and hostility of Jewdom and modern medicine. Still and again today, animal protecion would be a difficult topic for German jews, since the jewish community connects Tierschutz with nationalsozialist discrimination against shechita and the german Tierschutz would encounter jewish initiatives with sceptism (bramanic and (red) indian sources are much more fashionable) and more or less hiddden ansemitic prejudice still today. -- Polentario ( talk) 19:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I have done another change and hope to find consent with that. I would agree to to downsize or archive this discussion then. There is an Article about Animal Welfare and the Nazis in the english wikipedia already, I will do some extension about Wagners treehugging phase there, but I prefferred to have it discussed with the Wagner experts first. -- Polentario ( talk) 10:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
e: first youre right - wasn't it so that Wagner was a Übermenscn example for nietzsche? - I assume that Wagner preaching about modesty is a sort of oxymoron with regard to his personal behavior and insofar in line with Nietzsche. -- Polentario ( talk) 12:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
References
It has been disputed (somewhat rudely, by User:Critter beach) that Wagner remains unperformed in Israel - and he deleted the para which says so without any reference (in doing so deleting the genuine reference to the reception of Barenboim's concert). If there is any evidence of Wagner's operas being staged in Israel it would be nice to have that cited-- Smerus ( talk) 09:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I believe that there is an error with the IPA spelling of Richard, which uses [x] rather than the [ç]. Does anybody know if this an exception?
82.13.93.216 ( talk) 19:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
The correct dates for the Ring Cycle operas are as follows:
Das Rheingold - music composed 1853-1854, first performed in 1869. Die Walkure - music composed 1854-1856, first performed in 1870. Seigfried - music composed 1856-1871, first performed in 1876. Gotterdammerung - music composed 1869-1874, first performed in 1876.
Idesofmontreal ( talk) 02:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The so-called "English" pronunciation given is actually the American one. In England the r is silent unless followed by a vowel in the next word. Peter jackson ( talk) 15:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Purely coincidentally, I have my concern about the pronunciation as well. It isn't cited. How can we be sure that it isn't just a hoax? Concerning the comment above, as far as I know there is no rule saying that only the BBC English pronunciation is accepted. Besides, many rhonic accents are not American - a Scot might pronounce the r sound without getting into any trouble. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 05:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
There is no reason to include a pronunciation that never applies to the individual it is trying to describe. No one, not even Americans, pronounce this composers name as /wægnɚ/, though they might pronounce a different individual this way. The pronunciation guide should be just that, a guide to correct pronunciation, not a list of the various ways people mispronounce a name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.85.4.99 ( talk) 21:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
In the controversies section: out side of Wagner's usual anti-Semitic diatribes, the word "Jew" appears to continue to stay with it is antisemitic overtones (i know this is not how it is meant by the author but it is how it reads to me) . While we need to make clear Wagner's "views"; outside of his quotes, could we use language less emotionally and historically "loaded"? Replace "Jews" with "Jewish people" for example. Or something that seems less value laden? Lotus Blossom (ak the 7th) ( talk) 20:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
The article says that Rossini was a composer that resisted Wagner's influence. I think this isn't really a very meaningful comment. Firstly, Rossini was a composer of an older generation than Wagner, and it is relatively uncommon for composers who are much older to be influenced by those who are much younger. But secondly, and perhaps more importantly, Rossini had largely stopped composing by the time that Wagner's seminal works were being written. So which WORKS by Rossini resisted Wagner's influence? It is true that Rossini made various witty comments attacking Wagner, but to say that he resisted Wagner's influence in a musical sense doesn't seem to have much meaning... Museslave ( talk) 07:58, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
I'm not registered and I'm no expert on Wagner, so I've opted to leave a comment rather than make the edit myself. But don't you think that last sentence ought to be removed from the "Antisemitism" section? Every bigot I've ever met is forced to work alongside the very people they disparage; just because they lack the strength of their convictions to actually remove themselves from inclusive society doesn't mean that this sort of apology/rationalization has any place. Wagner's writings speak for themselves; the old "but some of my best friends are Jewish/black/gay/etc." schtick doesn't hold water, and never has. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.89.61.7 ( talk) 21:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
I have learned in my music history class that Richard Wagner was influenced by the literary movement called realism, like Puccini. My source is the textbook, Music: The Art of Listening, Sixth Edition, by Jean Ferris. Page 265 has the reference. I'm not sure about the new seventh edition. Does anyone have an opinion on where this would properly go in the article? — Tuvok T @ lk/ Improve me] 23:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The use of this term in the introductory paragraph is highly questionable, in my opinion, and should be removed. Wagner's supreme "achievement" in the area of harmonic writing was not to abolish tonality, ala Schoenberg, but to introduce a style of composition that is marked by constantly shifting tonal centers. In works such as Tristan und Isolde, the music is usually without a conclusive cadence on the tonic ("interrupted cadence"), giving an unsettled feeling to the harmonic movement. Thus, it would be incorrect to call Wagner's later music "atonal"--it is always rooted in some kind of impiied tonality, however ambiguous and constantly moving it may be. Cbrodersen 11:37, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed the claim that Liszt didn't speak to Wagner for years to come after that marriage. In Cosima's diaries, it's clearly shown that that was not the case. Wagner visited Liszt with Cosima in 1872, for example, more than once (abridged edition page 148). Wagner also corresponded with Liszt even earlier than that, after the marriage. Cosima's diaries show that Wagner's and Liszt's relationship was warm and affectionate throughout the former's remaining life (at least from 1872 onward). 88.148.201.133 16:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Richard Wagner's stepfather was Ludwig Meyer, not Geyer, you silly sods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.226.163.33 ( talk) 23:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Alas, once again the silly sods take the day. According to Groves, and Deathridge's biography, it's Geyer. Do the serious sods have some other, more reliable source? -- Ravpapa 05:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
hey..this guy is boring...im only doing a project on him because its a grade and i have to —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.21.247 ( talk) 21:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I can see that this article has an active talk page and is probably watched by many, so I'll mention that I have added Category:Antisemitism to this article. Please understand that the presence of this category is not meant to pass final judgment on whether or to what degree Wagner was a true or confirmed antisemite. It's used on pages on which antisemitism is significantly discussed, including many bios of opponents of antisemitism. -- Steven J. Anderson ( talk) 05:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
There is either a contradiction or lack of explaining in these sentences, I think:
I have edited out a para which rather contentiously links W's vegetarianism with his Jew-hatred, and replaced it with a separate section on vegetarianism and his article against vivisection. The deleted sentences cite modern German references which claim that W. condemned shechita as part of 'Jewish evil'. I am not aware of any primary source which enables such an assertion. If anyone knows of such, then of course I repent my edit.-- Smerus ( talk) 10:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, again my first edit and the included sources:
Wagner was in his late years a devout vegetarian and one of the celebrities to lead the Animal Protection Movement in Germany. He saw Shechita (kosher slaughtering) and vivisection as expressing both 'Jewish Evil' [1] and fought a long but at his lifetime not successfull battle for a stricter regulation instead Germany then very animal-testing friendly [2] law.
[1]Tierliebe Menschenfeinde Hitlers Zuneigung zu seiner Schäferhündin "Blondi" ist legendär. Dass strenger Tierschutz und Verachtung für Menschen für die Nazis ohne weiteres zusammengingen, beweist die Geschichte des „Reichstierschutzgesetzes“ von 1933. Helene Heise, Spiegel Online 19.9.2007 Tatsächlich war die Tierliebe der Nazis mitnichten nur propagandistische Inszenierung. Teile der Tierschutzbewegung - wie auch der Naturschutzbewegung - bezogen sich auf ganz ähnliche ideologische Grundlagen wie die Nationalsozialisten. Beide etwa beriefen sich auf die Vorstellungen des Komponisten Richard Wagner (1813-1883), der in Naturverbundenheit und Tierliebe eine besondere Charaktereigenschaft der "nordischen Rasse" sah. Der Künstler, ein überzeugter Vegetarier wie nach ihm Hitler, wetterte gegen den Fleischverzehr - für ihn eine Vermischung von Rasse und Blut, durch welche die nordisch-germanischen Reinheit verschmutzt werde. Der Tierversuch war für Wagner Inbegriff "des Bösen und Jüdischen". Solch verquastes Mischmasch aus völkischen „Blut und Boden“-Denken, Rassenideologie, Wissenschaftsfeindlichkeit und Antisemitismus vertraten keineswegs nur Nationalsozialisten, auch Tierschützern der Zeit war es nicht fremd.
[2] IDB Münster • Ber. Inst. Didaktik Biologie Suppl.2 (2002), 167-184 167, Tierschutz und Nationalsozialismus Die Entstehung und die Auswirkungen des nationalsozialistischen Reichstierschutzgesetzes von 1933 Daniel Jütte
I will have a look in the library tomorrow and check wether i can find some of the old Tierschutz publications of Wagner BR to provide original sources -- Polentario ( talk) 15:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, first the Spiegel article does mention a connection between Wagner, Shechicta and animal testing. I had translated Jewish (and) evil, wicked sounds more appropriate. But its an indirect, not an original source. I however think the track should be checked. Leon Poliakov (about antisemitism) is quoted with "Der besondere Wesenszug, der bei Wagner mit dem Hass gegen die Juden Hand in Hand zu gehen scheint, ist also die Liebe zu den Tieren.", so that wagners antisemitism had to do with animals (meat) / vergetarianism and purity. As an original Wagnerian source, the second part of Religion und Kunst is mentioned and Erkenne Dich selbst of 1881, one of the most inflammatory texts shoudl be checked. Let me have a look and come back. Thnx btw for your thorough reading. Its not standard anymmore here. -- Polentario ( talk) 18:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi Smerus, some results:
First I went through Wagners Gesammelte Schriften und Dichtungen, Volume 10, Steiger 1976, a faksimile of the 1888 edition printed by Fritsch in Leipzig. The most signifikant reads were "Religion und Kunst" of 1880 and an open letter to Ernst von Weber, 1879, author of a pathetic anti animal testing essay called "Die Folterkammern der Wissenschaft" (Torture Chambers of Science). Erkenne Dich selbst is similar to Das Judentum in der Musik clearly antisemitic but not specific about animals, as far as I could understand. Wagner recalls in the letter as well an alleged nordic / germanic tradition wehre hunting and eating animals was necessary in cold climates but the hunter offered a part of the animal to the gods as a suitable tradition. He contraposts it with an alleged victory of the old testimony, which introduced cruelty and calculation ("Das alte Testament hat obsiegt und aus dem reißenden ist das rechnende Raubtier geworden", in the letter).
Wagner is a master of omitting, elapse and pretext. E.g. he does not state "the Jews are anti animal" nor does he mention Shechita but denounces any religion, that uses the first book of Moses as base is not very suitable for any pity towards animals and talks about bloody abattoirs and Abrahams blood offers. He denounces as well his own, christian heritage, in so far it is based on the old testimony. He mentions in one paragraph that animal testers should be kicked out of the nation and in the next paragraph (in the open letter, page 209) states that a recent attack against an animal testing research laboratory in Leipzig was not a socialist anti property act but most probably an ethical one. Sounds quite familiar!
All in all, I think its OK modify the entry in so far, that Wagner in his late years contributed to the antisemitic stance of the then Tierschutz (Animal protection) movement.
A source for this antisemitic stance, which is still ongoing in some respect is to be found in Hanna Rheinz, Kabbala der Tiere, Tierrechte im Judentum, in Tierrechte, eine interdiszinplinäre Herausforderung, Hrsg IATE, Heidelberg 2007, S. 234-252 and in [ [3]], a german Website about jewish animal protection, done by Hanna Rheinz, a german Jew as well. According her, Antijudaismus and Antisemitism in 19th century Germany already had developed a certain dynamics with regard to animal protection. The german Animal Protection movement has contraposted a germanic love for animals agains alleged cruelty and hostility of Jewdom and modern medicine. Still and again today, animal protecion would be a difficult topic for German jews, since the jewish community connects Tierschutz with nationalsozialist discrimination against shechita and the german Tierschutz would encounter jewish initiatives with sceptism (bramanic and (red) indian sources are much more fashionable) and more or less hiddden ansemitic prejudice still today. -- Polentario ( talk) 19:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I have done another change and hope to find consent with that. I would agree to to downsize or archive this discussion then. There is an Article about Animal Welfare and the Nazis in the english wikipedia already, I will do some extension about Wagners treehugging phase there, but I prefferred to have it discussed with the Wagner experts first. -- Polentario ( talk) 10:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
e: first youre right - wasn't it so that Wagner was a Übermenscn example for nietzsche? - I assume that Wagner preaching about modesty is a sort of oxymoron with regard to his personal behavior and insofar in line with Nietzsche. -- Polentario ( talk) 12:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
References
It has been disputed (somewhat rudely, by User:Critter beach) that Wagner remains unperformed in Israel - and he deleted the para which says so without any reference (in doing so deleting the genuine reference to the reception of Barenboim's concert). If there is any evidence of Wagner's operas being staged in Israel it would be nice to have that cited-- Smerus ( talk) 09:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I believe that there is an error with the IPA spelling of Richard, which uses [x] rather than the [ç]. Does anybody know if this an exception?
82.13.93.216 ( talk) 19:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
The correct dates for the Ring Cycle operas are as follows:
Das Rheingold - music composed 1853-1854, first performed in 1869. Die Walkure - music composed 1854-1856, first performed in 1870. Seigfried - music composed 1856-1871, first performed in 1876. Gotterdammerung - music composed 1869-1874, first performed in 1876.
Idesofmontreal ( talk) 02:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The so-called "English" pronunciation given is actually the American one. In England the r is silent unless followed by a vowel in the next word. Peter jackson ( talk) 15:41, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Purely coincidentally, I have my concern about the pronunciation as well. It isn't cited. How can we be sure that it isn't just a hoax? Concerning the comment above, as far as I know there is no rule saying that only the BBC English pronunciation is accepted. Besides, many rhonic accents are not American - a Scot might pronounce the r sound without getting into any trouble. Kayau David Copperfield MOBY DICK the great gatsby 05:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
There is no reason to include a pronunciation that never applies to the individual it is trying to describe. No one, not even Americans, pronounce this composers name as /wægnɚ/, though they might pronounce a different individual this way. The pronunciation guide should be just that, a guide to correct pronunciation, not a list of the various ways people mispronounce a name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.85.4.99 ( talk) 21:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
In the controversies section: out side of Wagner's usual anti-Semitic diatribes, the word "Jew" appears to continue to stay with it is antisemitic overtones (i know this is not how it is meant by the author but it is how it reads to me) . While we need to make clear Wagner's "views"; outside of his quotes, could we use language less emotionally and historically "loaded"? Replace "Jews" with "Jewish people" for example. Or something that seems less value laden? Lotus Blossom (ak the 7th) ( talk) 20:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
The article says that Rossini was a composer that resisted Wagner's influence. I think this isn't really a very meaningful comment. Firstly, Rossini was a composer of an older generation than Wagner, and it is relatively uncommon for composers who are much older to be influenced by those who are much younger. But secondly, and perhaps more importantly, Rossini had largely stopped composing by the time that Wagner's seminal works were being written. So which WORKS by Rossini resisted Wagner's influence? It is true that Rossini made various witty comments attacking Wagner, but to say that he resisted Wagner's influence in a musical sense doesn't seem to have much meaning... Museslave ( talk) 07:58, 16 December 2009 (UTC)