→Lead section: new section |
CurryTime7-24 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
I found both those problems in this article, and I fixed them. [[User:Melodia]], editing in bad faith, undid my edit, and has refused to respond to a simple request for an explanation. So I wish to record here their disruptive, frankly despicable behaviour. I undid their revert, and the problems are no longer present. I hope in the future, [[User:Melodia]] will not engage in such bad faith behaviour. [[User:Sankura|Sankura]] ([[User talk:Sankura|talk]]) 13:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC) |
I found both those problems in this article, and I fixed them. [[User:Melodia]], editing in bad faith, undid my edit, and has refused to respond to a simple request for an explanation. So I wish to record here their disruptive, frankly despicable behaviour. I undid their revert, and the problems are no longer present. I hope in the future, [[User:Melodia]] will not engage in such bad faith behaviour. [[User:Sankura|Sankura]] ([[User talk:Sankura|talk]]) 13:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC) |
||
:Sankura, thanks for your edits. It would be very helpful for everyone if you could please tone down your combative language. We're all working towards the same goal here; no need for division here. I also undid your revision of the article's header if only because it appears that at least a majority of composition lists articles do not follow your example. I'm not against your ideas, but it would be helpful if you could please explain why this page needs to replicate the header from the composer's main article, when other lists don't. Perhaps you can rewrite the header in such a way that would be more relevant to ''this'' article. Some examples [[List of compositions by Percy Grainger|here]], [[List of compositions by César Franck|here]], [[List of compositions by Leoš Janáček|here]], and [[List of compositions by Ludwig van Beethoven|here]]. Please let me know if I can be of some help. [[User:CurryTime7-24|CurryTime7-24]] ([[User talk:CurryTime7-24|talk]]) 16:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:50, 29 August 2020
Classical music: Compositions | |||||||
|
Soviet Union List‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
- Moved here from List of works by Shostakovich to bring some uniformity to Category:Compositions by composer. David Sneek 14:15, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
- Something slightly odd about Opus 99. As far as I can tell, the Shos vln conc #1 was originally Op 77, then re-written as Op 99. I amended the "Violin Concerto No. 1 (Shostakovich)" article to reflect this, but in checking here, something else is marked as Op 99. Someone with greater knowledge of Shostakovich should correct this; in the meantime, I can at least point out a possible problem. UPDATED: The previous statement is basically wrong (and I have corrected the Violin Conc no 1). I asked Onno van Rijen, whose list this is drawn from, and he replied:
"DSCH's Violin Concerto No. 1 is opus 77. This Concerto is composed between July 1947 and March 1948, though not released until 1955. This is the reason that it was originally issued as opus 99 (opus 77 was then allocated to Three Pieces for orchestra). So this Concerto was NOT rewritten."
- I have credited Rudolf Barshai with having arranged the op 110 and op118 quartets for string orchestra, because the implication was previously that Shostakovich had arranged them himself. However, I have not yet been able to find dates for the arrangements, so if someone them to hand, please drop them in. Andrew1984 18:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Using the translation "The Bright Stream", the 1934 comic ballet "The Limpid Stream" had its European premiere in 2003. It is beginning to look as if this is the preferred translation. Fusspot 10:56, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Orango and The Nose are described as “saterial” operas. What is this word? Is “satirical” meant?
Differences between opus 77 and opus 99
There actually is a very minor difference between the opus 77 and opus 99 versions. In the original opus 77, the opening of the Burlesca had the violin continuing to play without a stop over from the cadenza. During the rehearsals for the premiere, David Oistrakh asked Shostakovich to please give the violinist a rest between the cadenza and the Burlesca. Shostakovich happily complied and re-scored the opening of the finale for the winds and xylophone that we hear today. This became the "new" opus 99. This information is mentioned in Wilson's Shostakovich Remembered and Fay's Shostakovich: A Life.
- Interesting, but I read this to mean that the piece as first performed is the later version. Was the op.77 version published before the premiere? Only in that case, I think, would it be recognized as a distinct version, as opposed to a stage of composition. (Oh, and please sign your posts!) JH(emendator) 21:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Shostakovich's Prelude XXI Bb Major (Allegro) - (Part of opus 87).ogg
Image:Shostakovich's Prelude XXI Bb Major (Allegro) - (Part of opus 87).ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Three 1939 Finnish works – or one, or two
- "Seven Finnish Folk Songs for soprano, tenor and small orchestra" (1939) is listed as Opus 56a.
- Another "Seven Finnish Folk Songs for soprano, tenor and small orchestra" (1939) is listed as a work without opus number.
Are these the same work, or different works with exactly the same title composed the same year? (unlikely, but possible, I guess).
- Now I’ve read about a "Suite on Finnish Folk Themes" for soprano, tenor and orchestra, which was discovered quite recently and had its FP in 2001. It was also written in 1939. Is this the same as either of the above, or is it an omission from our list? If it’s the same work, what explains the difference in the title, and how come Op. 56a got attached to it so quickly when it had been unknown to publishers, and the world at large, before 2001? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Folk Dances/Band music
A piece for concert band called Folk Dances attributed to Shostakovich seems to be popular. The edition I've seen says it's "edited" by one H. Robert Reynolds; it doesn't indicate that the piece has been transcribed. In any case, I don't see a listing of this work in any form in this article or, for that matter, a band music category. Is this list intended to be exhaustive? TheScotch (talk) 07:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
- It is the 'Youth Dance' from Native Leningrad, Op. 63. I was curious for a long time about that one too. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 13:41, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey, thanks!....Armed with this information I was able to find the piece discussed briefly at various places on the web (mostly in performance program notes). There seems to be a difference of opinion about whether the piece uses real folk music. There is the following sentence repeated verbatim on various programs: "Shostakovich collected several native Russian dance tunes and carefully tied them together into this single composition." Then there is this from the Crane Wind Ensemble 4/18/12: "While the melodies used in 'Youth Dance' are reminiscent of folk tunes, Shostakovich's work is original." TheScotch (talk) 03:55, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Dances of the Dolls
Dances of the Dolls appears in the list of Piano Works as 1952 with no Opus number. In the chronological list it does not appear, but there is a piece in the right position with a different name: Seven Doll's Faces - I guess this is probably the same work. I have a published copy named Dances of the Dolls[1], which also has seven movements, so is Seven Doll's Faces incorrect or just an alternative? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogerclarinet (talk • contribs)
- Sounds like they are probably alternative translations of the same thing. Are there in fact seven dances in your copy of Dances of the Dolls? --Deskford (talk) 12:43, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, 7 dances. Lyrical Waltz, Gavotte, Romance, Polka, Waltz-Scherzo, Hurdy-Gurdy, Dance. Published by Boosey & Hawkes (19356).--Rogerclarinet (talk) 16:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- The equivalent article on the Russian Wikipedia lists only one work that seems to match, «Семь танцев кукол» (1952). I recognise "seven", "dance" and "doll" in the three words, but I can't remember enough about Russian case endings to work out how exactly to translate into English. --Deskford (talk) 12:55, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
References
Lead section
List articles should not start with "This is a list..." - see MOS:REDUNDANCY. It should be obvious that a first sentence that simply restates the article title is no use to anyone.
In addition, anyone who speaks English knows that "based off of" is grammatically incorrect.
I found both those problems in this article, and I fixed them. User:Melodia, editing in bad faith, undid my edit, and has refused to respond to a simple request for an explanation. So I wish to record here their disruptive, frankly despicable behaviour. I undid their revert, and the problems are no longer present. I hope in the future, User:Melodia will not engage in such bad faith behaviour. Sankura (talk) 13:45, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sankura, thanks for your edits. It would be very helpful for everyone if you could please tone down your combative language. We're all working towards the same goal here; no need for division here. I also undid your revision of the article's header if only because it appears that at least a majority of composition lists articles do not follow your example. I'm not against your ideas, but it would be helpful if you could please explain why this page needs to replicate the header from the composer's main article, when other lists don't. Perhaps you can rewrite the header in such a way that would be more relevant to this article. Some examples here, here, here, and here. Please let me know if I can be of some help. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 16:50, 29 August 2020 (UTC)