Jump to content

Talk:Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 talk 00:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Britten in 1968
Britten in 1968
Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 2123 past nominations.

Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: No - n
  • Other problems: No - Too complicated.
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article itself is very fine. It is long enough and new enough; Earwig detects no problems. The chosen ALT, however, would not be attractive to people unfamiliar with classical music. Looking at the second paragraph in "Background" I find two pieces of information which could provide better hooks: 1.) Britten composed the Canticle V in the wake of his heart surgery and 2.) he revised its instrumentation because his declining health left him unable to play its piano accompaniment as he originally intended. I'm sure there's more material in the article that could be used for alternative hooks. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 02:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please word that for me? I have a hard time thinking about something I don't like, such as a hook about his health problems. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CurryTime7-24: Perhaps:
ALT1 ... that Benjamin Britten (pictured) composed Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus after recovering from heart surgery? (This might require revisions to the article, as it is not mentioned when the piece was composed or when the surgery took place).
ALT2 ... that Benjamin Britten (pictured) composed Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus for tenor and harp as he was unable to play the piano following heart surgery?
Another possible alternate could be the connection to Narcissus from Greek mythology, but that might be slightly more specialist than the heart surgery angle hooks so I'll only suggest such wordings if you think that would be better. I agree that the original hook is too long and complicated to meet either DYKINT or DYKTRIM. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for your help! ALT2 would be best here, but it needs a further tweak. It ought to make clear to the reader that Britten had originally conceived the accompaniment for piano and that he intended to play it himself, but that failing health precluded this option. Therefore he rescored it for harp instead. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:37, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to understand why you want to focus on his health problems, instead of mentioning that he wrote the music with friends in mind, tenor Peter Pears who was his partner at a time when that was a problem, harpist Ellis for whom he had written many parts, and in memory of his libretto-writing friend. - I have no source for times of surgery and composition, just a serious source saying that he couldn't play the piano because of it ("not well enough"), and a less serious source saying that his right hand was partly paralyzed. I haven't heard that he had to rescore, - just that in the four previous canticles, written over decades, there was piano, and he had played it in the premieres, accompanying his partner. - I'll leave for vacation in two days, with unpredictable access to the internet (I won't take my laptop). Perhaps I just let you do it and unwatch what was intended as a memorial of lasting friendship. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ps: I believe that the title of this piece alone is already interesting, raising curiosity. As it's not obvious from that title that is is a composition for tenor and harp, I believe this information should be presented in some form, which ALT0 and ALT2 have but not ALT1. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:53, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
pps: Template:Did you know nominations/Canticle IV: The Journey of the Magi (6 January 2022), Template:Did you know nominations/Canticle II: Abraham and Isaac (22 November 2022), Template:Did you know nominations/Canticle I: My beloved is mine and I am his (22 November 2023). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CurryTime7-24: I was going by what was written in the article, so ALT2 reflects the current article wording. Your suggestion would need to be reflected in the article. Still, maybe:
ALT3 ... that Benjamin Britten (pictured) intended Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus to be scored for piano, but scored it for harp instead due to health reasons?
@Gerda Arendt: Perhaps CurryTime, or another editor like 4meter4 or Theleekycauldron may be able to explain it better than I can, but this is not about wanting to highlight his health issues. In fact, I would rather not if there were alternatives and it wasn't the most interesting or eyecatchy part of the article. It's not about focusing on his health problems: it's about highlight a hook fact that is likely to catch the attention of readers and entice them to click on the article and learn more about the Canticle. By contrast, a hook mentioning the writer and the tenor is unlikely to have the same effect. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You will have read in the article that all five canticles were written with the tenor voice of Peter Pears in mind. Compare last year's. Not to mention at least the word "tenor", better his name, seems against the composer's sentiments for his beloved. - The article title alone is catchy, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's lots I could say about ALT0, but (a) I was pinged and (b) I don't have much to say outside of what I already said at the RfC where we decided we didn't want hooks like ALT0. I will say that Canticles I, II, and IV, which Gerda linked above as examples of her successful hooks, were all in the bottom 10% of hooks by viewcount in their respective months. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 22:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't link to "successful" hooks, but to hooks in a series, begun in 2013, the composer's centenary. I am happy to take low viewcounts, it spares others to be blamed. Template:Did you know nominations/A Hymn of St Columba (2019), Template:Did you know nominations/Te Deum in C (2013).
I would like to mention the poet, because Britten liked his writing, + the youthful work was printed late.
I would like to mention the dedicatee because he wrote many librettos for Britten. However, trying to please:
ALT0a: ... that Benjamin Britten (pictured) composed Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus to be performed by his friends, tenor Peter Pears and harpist Osian Ellis. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, if you are trying to please, then please drop the Pears/Ellis angle, as it simply is not going to happen. If you want to avoid long DYK discussions and have brief ones, either propose hooks that will catch the attention of most readers as opposed to just yourself, or agree to such hooks proposed by others. Again, please drop ALT0's angle as no matter how it is worded, no such hook is going to be approved here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:46, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Two things. One, not even most Christians know who Saint Narcissus is, so I don't think most readers will find the title alone catchy. Second, consensus can change. What may be acceptable angles or focuses for hooks in the past will not always be so. Just because it was accepted before to use angles related to Pears does not mean necessarily mean that such proposals will be accepted now. Indeed, consensus develops from previous experience. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) You will have read in the article that the character is none of two Christian Saints, but rather Greek mythology in disguise. What I meant is more that "Death of" (whoever) may raise curiosity. It seems to be the title of that poem. 2) Re-reading the former reviews, I enjoyed their brevity. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was talking more about the title of the song, not the article. You were asking if the article title alone is catchy, and the article title mentions Saint Narcissus, so I was commenting based on that fact, not about the article. Death alone will probably not raise interest without additional context. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:46, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think I understood that, and we see again that we find different things interesting. And so may readers. I find this title enigmatic and would like to find out more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3 is better; we're almost there. It only needs to mention that he intended to play it himself and the specific reasons that prevented the scoring for piano. "Health reasons" borders on MOS:EUPHEMISM. A reader may well wonder whether his hands simply cramped up, he had a flu, or some such. @Gerda Arendt: I'm not "focusing" on health problems. My only concern is to bring wider attention to your wonderful article and to meet the guidelines set forth in WP:DYKINT: "The hook should be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest". That Britten's declining health forced him to alter the scoring for an accompaniment he had originally intended to play himself is "unusual" and "intriguing". Your preferred hooks are neither unusual nor interesting, even to somebody like myself whose passion for classical music verges on the obsessive. :) Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms, Schoenberg, Stravinsky, Eisler, Revueltas, Shostakovich, Salgado, Schnittke, et al are just a few of the composers who wrote music for musician friends. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 08:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3 misses "tenor" at all, and thus the key information about how this piece sounds. Please find a way to add those five characters, or people will think he changed a piano solo to a harp solo. - We are not there regarding my intended homage of the partnership of Britten and Pears, but I have no time. Off for two weeks. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trying:
ALT0b: ... that after four Canticles with tenor and piano, Benjamin Britten (pictured) composed Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus for tenor and harp?
You can fill that with more information, such as poem/heart surgery/unable to play piano/ a year before his own death. You could also leave it open, to make curious. Do we even know why? He could still have written for piano, for someone else to play. My OR: the combination of tenor and harp had worked well in Death in Venice, - all canticles were related to some opera. By the same players who were his friends. I find especially touching that Ellis still played in a much later recording. - Off to packing, finally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CurryTime7-24: The issue I see right now with the article is that the specific information about the scoring for harp instead of piano is not in the article, so that will need to be addressed anyway regardless of the ultimate wording. As for revising ALT3, would replacing "due to health reasons" with "as he was recovering from heart surgery" work? It would make the hook longer though, which was my main concern. I do not see "health reasons" as a euphemism as it's still accurate. This isn't like using "passed away" instead of "died". In any case, I'm really not sure how to get your point across without making the hook too long or complicated that would get the attention of the trimming police.
As for the above concern about the details not being included in the hook, again, WP:DYKTRIM is relevant. We do not need to cram information into the hook, catching readers' attention is the main objective. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand. The fact was in the article. I duplicated the refs from a sentence later, perhaps that helps finding it. My hook would by ALT1b, without more details. I said 'you' can fill it with what you find so interesting. Sorry, some days I think I don't speak English. Off to Portuguese. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm referring to the suggestion of including the five characters, him being a tenor, or other extra details that do not add to the main point of the hook (that he intended to arrange for piano but could not due to his heart surgery). Again, DYKTRIM: avoid including extra details whenever possible, especially if they distract from the hook fact and are not directly relevant. As for the new wording, ALT0b is essentially a non-starter and is even less likely to attract readers. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:29, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: I'll be adding new sources confirming the reasons for the scoring shortly. @Gerda Arendt: Struck through ALT0b. I encourage and would appreciate it if you could devise brand new hooks, but anything based on ALT0 is not going to meet the threshold of "unusual" and "intriguing". —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: OK, new sources confirming information that could be used in a modified ALT3 has been added. The material I added to the article could also be the basis of an entirely new ALT as well. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article still doesn't directly say that his stroke and its effects resulted directly in the switch from piano to harp, so either the hook or the article still need to be fixed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please give me a couple hours to get back home and retrieve my sources. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Alright, take a look at the new citation with quote and let me know what you think! :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Can you try proposing a new wording? Though with your contributions to the article, a new reviewer might be needed here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. Give me a couple more hours to log into my desktop computer and I'll go ahead and add two more ALTs. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I won't, but added the fact that Britten played the piano in the first 4 premieres. Generally, there are Musical compositions with titles that show who performs, in a cello sonata cello and piano, in an oboe concerto oboe and orchestra, but in cases of titles like this, it seems fair to simply add "for tenor und harp", to give readers an idea. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: What do you think of these?

Either ALT4 or ALT5 works. Could be left to the reviewer. Not too fond of ALT6 since, from experience, review quote hooks tend to underperform. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed about ALT6. Just in case, here's a modified version. If you think it works, great. If not, I tried! :)
ALT6a: ... that the Canticle V: The Death of Saint Narcissus by Benjamin Britten was said to illustrate not only the "new physical limitations" that he faced after his stroke, but "also the workings of his innovative imagination"? (Source: Ibid) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The harp's part is described in the article as not an accompaniment. Also accompaniment of what? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hutcheons describe it as such in their book [italics mine for clarity]: "[Britten] would never again write for the piano: the vocal works written after the surgery were either unaccompanied or accompanied by harp, harpsichord, or small orchestra. (p. 82)" —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:55, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT6a is above 200 characters so it's probably best to just drop the idea. We'll need a new, unpinged and uninvolved reviewer to check ALT4 and ALT5. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
in the face of death - a dear friend died today, I suddenly like ALT4 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CurryTime7-24, Narutolovehinata5, and Gerda Arendt: I'll assess ALT4 then. Unfortunately, I can't approve it as it needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 02:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good to go.--Launchballer 10:48, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Canticle_V:_The_Death_of_Saint_Narcissus&oldid=1258850367"