Talk:Adolf Martin Schlesinger

German Jewish?

Will this ever end?--Tom 22:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tom. Would you mind elaborating a bit on your comment, please? Thank you! Matthias Röder 22:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I cannot understand why Schlesinger's Jewishness should be a matter of contention. His Jewish origins, and those of his son Moritz/Maurice were frequently referred to by their clients (including Beethoven and Wagner) and rivals (including C. F. Peters), and these origins are therefore clearly relevant to their lives and significance in musical and publishing history. I have expanded the article to include appropriate references.If editors have personal problems with this, they should refrain from expressing them, however cryptically, on Wikipedia, which is there to report the facts.--Smerus 07:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm in full support of what SMerus says. also, the guideline you're citing, Tom, does not provide sufficient ground to exclude reference to Schlesinger's Jewishness. At the time, Jewishness was regarded to be a nationality by the Prussian authorities. If you're not familiar with Prussian history please refrain from editing this article. Thank you, Matthias Röder 08:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide a source for that claim? Thanks--Tom 23:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Sure: Hans-Ulrich Wehler: "Stadtbürger - Bürgerliche - Staatsbürger" in: Deutsche Gesellschaftsgeschichte, vol. 1. München, 1987, pp. 202-209. Matthias Röder 23:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matthias Röder (talk • contribs) 23:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC).

Talk about Schlesinger's ethnicity and family background under family history or family background or whatever. Per wp:mosbio this does not belong in the lead sentence. Sorry for being criptic but I'm at my wits end regarding this issue. Thanks --Tom 16:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

wp:mosbio states clearly 'Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability'. The ethnicity is relevant to this subject's notability, and the mention thus conforms. I don't know why you are at your wit's end over Schlesinger, but that is a matter between you and your health advisers, and not for Wikipedia. Thanks. And thank you for your compliments, in your editline, about how I have improved the article. --Smerus 17:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please provide reliable, verifiable, sources that say that Schlesinger's notability is due to his ethnicity please. Otherwise, it does not belong in the LEAD sentence. Thanks, --Tom 17:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Has anyone read my comment? Jewish is NOT a question of ethnicity when dealing with a late 18th- or early 19th-century person in Prussia! It was considered a nationality. This ends all further discussion since nationality should be mentioned in the lead section. (Before anyone thinks too hard and argues that one cannot have two nationalities: in Prussia you could). Thanks everyone! Matthias Röder 23:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. Your analysis is original rezearch/POV. Have you looked at ALL the other bios out there? Regardless of your agenda, this is not appropriate per Wiki's manual of style in the LEAD sentence. Thanks,--Tom 13:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Jewish was not considered a nationality in 18th-19th century Germany. It is fine to mention someone's Jewishness in the introduction if it is vital to their notoriety as in Moses Mendelsohn. If it is not vital it just looks inappropriate. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 00:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Was asked to comment on this - what I always tell people who say there's a good reason for putting an ethnicity in header is: Put that exact reason in the header! So, since there is a whole paragraph on the attitudes towards his Jewishness, and the header is supposed to summarize the article, what can go in the header is a sentence summarizing that paragraph. As for his nationality, what do WP:RS say? If they don't refer to him as German or Prussian, we shouldn't. The header can say "was a musician, etc." without a specific nationality, if he was not considered actually a German or Prussian citizen. But it's hard to say what "Jewish musician" actually means in the header. Aside from the fact that he was Jewish (which can be said of thousands of other people in bios on Wikipedia), what does it mean? That he only was involved in Jewish music? That's exactly what should be explained in the header. Mad Jack 05:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

thank you for your advice, which I have followed. --Smerus 09:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Smerus, thank you, looks MUCH better. I've found MadJAck to be a voice of reason in the madness Wiki can sometime be. As he points out, when a bio says "Joe Blow was a Jewish painter" what does that mean? Is he of Jewish descent or Jewish or does he only paint Jewish subject matter?? The way the article now reads makes more sense and does not deny or his ethnicity and also provides for standardization of these type of issues. I myself am of Polish-Jewish descent but was raised as a Quaker and consider myself an American first and foremost not that that should have ANY bearing on this discussion. Anyways, sorry for the tiff but this has been an ongoing issue for awhile. Unforetunately there is a MINORITY of editors who seem to have more sinister motives when adding ethnicity to bios, especially folks of Jewish descent. I'm glad we could resolve this with civility. Cheers! --Tom 14:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to stay neutral on this whole discussion, but I think ascribing "sinister motives" to those adding ethnicity is going too far in psychoanalyzing contributors whom you don't know. --Myke Cuthbert 21:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Myke, fair enough. As long as we stick to Wiki policies and manuals of style --Tom 13:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I reworded the intro to point out that he was on the receiving end of anti-semitism from a major figure in music history. One thing I'm not clear on is the phrase Jewish origins- was Schlesinger a non practicing Jew or had he actually converted? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I going to fact tag this. We shouldn't say "X said this, so this means Y". Do reliable source say that Beethoven practiced anti-semitism? Anyways, --Tom 13:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I have reverted Gustav von Humpelschmumpel's edit. I do not think that Beethoven's comments can count in any way as 'antisemitism', and it would I believe misleading to suggest this.--Smerus 16:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

If it was non anti-semitism what was it? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 16:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

not every pointedbad comment about a Jew is anti-semitism, any more than every crack by a Jew about a goy is anti-Christian. Let's keep a sense of proportion.--Smerus 22:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Introduction

Here is how the intro currently reads:"Adolf Martin Schlesinger (b. Sülz, Silesia,1769-10-04, d. Berlin, 1838-10-11, originally Aaron Moses Schlesinger) was a German music publisher whose firm became one of the most influential in Berlin in the early nineteenth century. Due to his Jewish origins he often fell victim to anti-Jewish jibes from figures as prominent as Beethoven."

IMO, I'm not sure that the anti-Jewish jibes business belongs in the opening. Anyways, its better than basically calling Beethoven an anti-semite even though he might have been. Also, is it fair to single Beethoven out? I'm NO expert on this guy, so again, sources are needed going forward it seems. Thanks guys, --Tom 20:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted again. It's not fair to single Beethoven out. And what is 'often'? There are a number of cracks at him in the correspondence of Zelter, Beethoven, Peters and others. But 'often'? And what exactly do you mean by 'victim'? I really believe the wording which I used after MadJack's comments suits the situation best. I don't see what purpose is served by stoking up the facts beyond what we can evidence. The material is in the article - readers can form their own judgments, we don't need to lead them on. --Smerus 22:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, who knew this relatively unknown person could amass so much discussion! (Talk:Georg Cantor or Talk:Otto Lilienthal, I understand, but this...) I do prefer Smerus' version, if I may say, not the least because I didn't think "jibes" is really encyclopedic wording. Mad Jack 23:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I might agree with Tom whether the fact that Schlesinger was subject to anti-Jewish mutterings should really be in the introduction. Otherwise are we not going to add similar things in the introduction to gay people who have been subject to anti-gay taunts or black people, german people, chinese people, fat people etc. etc. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 11:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The end result works for me here, as I care more about the ability to reflect that he was Jewish.

I do feel that it would be appropriate for the fact that he is Jewish to be in the lead for various reasons, but just want to point it out here to dispel the notion that there is only one point of view on this.

The Wikipedia entry for "Jew" indicates, inter alia, that Jews are "members of the Jewish people (also known as the Jewish nation ...)." The Wiki definition of "nationality" states, inter alia: "Generally, nationality is established at birth by a child's place of birth (jus soli) and/or bloodline (jus sanguinis)." Thus, in the (unusual) case of Jews, who consist of a nation that has largely been dispersed from its homeland, it would not be appropriate to delete.

Other religions are in the "normal case" distinct from the nation. In other words, there was not a Protestant, or Buddhist, or Christian, or Hindu, or Aethiest nation per se. They are not a "people." They are not a "nation." Jews, peculiarly, are not just a religion. They are also a nation. Dispersed (largely) for a couple of thousand years.

Also, the Wiki bio page lists examples of bios, so that one can look at them for form. Asimov is there. And the fact that he is Jewish is reflected .... you guessed it. While this flies in the face of some interpretations of Wiki guidelines presented above, I would suggest that it supports the notion that those interpretations are incorrect. --Epeefleche 20:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Do we know if Schlesinger converted as the phrase "by birth" would seem to indicate that he did or at least that he no longer involved in going to Synagogue or observing any Jewish holidays or rituals etc.? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I, for one, in the absence of any such evidence would be fine with the entry reflicing simply that he was Jewish. Epeefleche 06:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

He did not convert and his sons acknowledged that they were Jewish (see ref. to Wagner's 'My Life', which reports a conversation to this effect by Maurice Schlesinger, in article). Nor is there any evidence that he went to synagogue, etc., though I can't see what difference that makes. Can I suggest that folk are getting a bit over-obsessed about this? Smerus 07:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Smerus it is just the previous version of the article said he had "Jewish origins", and saying "born Jewish" sounds like an indication that he converted or became atheist or agnostic. If there is no evidence he did convert I will change the article to simply say he was Jewish. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 09:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)