This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Removed "Willem Pijper (1894–1947) is generally considered the most important figure in modern Dutch music." Not only POV, but just twaddle. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ilja.nieuwland ( talk • contribs) 15:26:46, August 19, 2007 (UTC).
As to the opinions you quote: this David Wright you refer to on my talk page (who he? not a Dutch name and not a professor here, is he the organist from Worcester cathedral?) may say all he want, but Pijper´s stature isn't even close to Sibelius's in Finland. For one thing, unlike Sibelius he has never become a national symbol transcending his musical importance, and his works are rarely ever performed (and significantly less frequent than some other Dutch composers, such as Peter van Anrooy, Johan Wagenaar, Henk Badings, Van Bree or even Matthijs Vermeulen). If there's ONE composer that functions as a national symbol, the choice is between Sweelinck and Diepenbrock. But considering the lack of knowledge about our musical past (in stark contrast to awareness of national painters), none at all would be more realistic. Finally, I would take Grove's opinions on any music outside the UK or the Austro-German realm with a grain of salt. -- Ilja.nieuwland ( talk) 09:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Don't know what should be done about it, but an FYI to anyone who does: nearly half this page as of 5/17/20 is plagiarized from https://mahlerfoundation.org/mahler/personen-2/willem-pijper-1894-1947 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C44:117F:F591:B492:A33A:37E9:6C69 ( talk) 20:39, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Removed "Willem Pijper (1894–1947) is generally considered the most important figure in modern Dutch music." Not only POV, but just twaddle. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ilja.nieuwland ( talk • contribs) 15:26:46, August 19, 2007 (UTC).
As to the opinions you quote: this David Wright you refer to on my talk page (who he? not a Dutch name and not a professor here, is he the organist from Worcester cathedral?) may say all he want, but Pijper´s stature isn't even close to Sibelius's in Finland. For one thing, unlike Sibelius he has never become a national symbol transcending his musical importance, and his works are rarely ever performed (and significantly less frequent than some other Dutch composers, such as Peter van Anrooy, Johan Wagenaar, Henk Badings, Van Bree or even Matthijs Vermeulen). If there's ONE composer that functions as a national symbol, the choice is between Sweelinck and Diepenbrock. But considering the lack of knowledge about our musical past (in stark contrast to awareness of national painters), none at all would be more realistic. Finally, I would take Grove's opinions on any music outside the UK or the Austro-German realm with a grain of salt. -- Ilja.nieuwland ( talk) 09:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Don't know what should be done about it, but an FYI to anyone who does: nearly half this page as of 5/17/20 is plagiarized from https://mahlerfoundation.org/mahler/personen-2/willem-pijper-1894-1947 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C44:117F:F591:B492:A33A:37E9:6C69 ( talk) 20:39, 17 May 2020 (UTC)