Talk:Das Floß der Medusa

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

Spelling of title

This article should be moved to Das Floß der Medusa.

Floss is wrong; it means flowed, not raft. See ß.
While the Medusa in the title refers to Medusa (ship), the oratorio's title in German is usually given without the quotes around it; see this page by Schott, the publishers of the work.

Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Title revisited

Shouldn't it be the English title "The Raft of the Medusa" anyway, for an English language encyclopedia? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 02:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that? The articles on (for example) the Gurre-Lieder, Das Lied von der Erde, Le marteau sans maître, Symphonie fantastique, Feste romane (miscapitalised here on Wikipedia), and Die Soldaten are not rendered as "Songs of Gurre", "The Song of the Earth", "The Hammer without a Master", "Fantastic Symphony", "Roman Holidays", or "The Soldiers". The usual rule in such cases is to translate when the work is widely known in English by the translated English title (e.g., The Rite of Spring, Symphony of Psalms, or The Four Seasons). It does not seem to me that the Floß der Medusa is at all well-known by its translated English title, and therefore the article should remain under the original German form.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 03:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not well known at all. But to the extent that it's ever referred to at all, I've only ever heard it as "The Raft of the Medusa". Maybe it usually gets the original title in learned musicological writings, but they are not works that the general reader reads. Interesting that you mention Feste romane, as I've just suggested that Pini di Roma be changed to Pines of Rome. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought perhaps you may have had in mind that the painting on which Henze's work is based is often referred to (in English writings) by the English translation of its title. Whether or not this would be a valid reason to change Henze's title here is an interesting question, that might require finding some parallel examples. I personally do not often come across references to Das Floß that translate the title, but I have encountered two different versions: "The Raft of the Medusa", and "The Raft of the Frigate Medusa" (the latter presumably to dispel confusion that the mythological Gorgon might somehow be involved). Feste romane vs Pines of Rome is an interesting conundrum since, as far as I am aware, Feste romane is never translated in English sources, whereas both of the other parts of the trilogy, Pines of Rome and Fountains of Rome, almost invariably are. Once upon a time, it was normal in English sources to translate the titles of the components of Wagner's Ring cycle; this is now less common, and I find that references to The Rhine Gold or Twilight of the Gods make me automatically assume I am reading from a Victorian or Edwardian source. In any case, it is perfectly silly when in one and the same article one finds The Rhine Gold and Gotterdämmerung used consistently throughout.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That silliness is matched only by what we currently have here: It marks ... and was later immortalised in the painting of the same name by Théodore Géricault. And worse, misleading, because when we click or hover over the link, we find it is NOT the same name. But since we're equating the title of the painting (originally in French, rendered here in English) with the title of the musical work (originally in German, and still so rendered here), we may as well go ahead and actually make them the same (in English, please).

I didn't mean for us to have a discussion about the Respighi works here, but thanks for your thoughts anyway, Jerome. I will report them at the relevant talk page. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should have thought to take my observations on Pines of Rome to the talk page there, thank you. However, to stick with the issue at hand, the principle of using English translations of titles originally in other languages only when that English name is widely recognized still applies, I think, and Henze's composition is not widely known in English, as you yourself admit. The problem in the text that you mention can be solved in other ways than by changing the title of the article! However, I think it is a good point that merits some discussion, and I would be interested to hear the views of some other editors. In particular, I would like to look at a list of similar cases where an artwork in one medium takes its (originally non-English) title from a work in another medium (originally titled in some other language, but widely known in English translation).—Jerome Kohl (talk) 16:11, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune springs to mind. There's been some argy-bargy on the talk page about whether it should have the French or the English title, and it's gone backwards and forwards. Currently we're using the French title. (If I'd been involved in those discussions, I'd have argued strongly for the English title, but never mind that.) But the lede was still using the English title as the primary name, with the French original as the secondary one. I’ve just fixed that. (I can never get over how editors move articles to different titles but don't adjust the original text, which still talks about the old title.) But then, the Mallarmé poem on which the Debussy work was based has always been called Afternoon of a Faun (poem) (not even The Afternoon of a Faun, mind you) – and there’s never been any discussion about why some people insist (successfully at the moment) that the Debussy work must be referenced by its French title but the original French poem itself, which is virtually unknown to English speakers, is perfectly OK to appear under its English title, and a faulty title at that. How weird and inconsistent! Again, the lede para was using the French title first and the English second. I’ve now fixed that by moving the article to L'après-midi d'un faune (poem). What a schemozzle! What ever happened to thoroughness? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From what I gather, in the UK it's often refered to by its French title where in the US people will usually call it by its English one. Certainly most CD covers use the French one, but from personal experiance, almost every time I've heard it on the radio (here in the US) I've heard the English title. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 20:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One presumes you mean the Prélude a l'après-midi d'un faune, rather than L'Après-midi d'un faune or Le Radeau de la Méduse (though a CD cover might well reproduce Géricault's painting). This raises a potential problem with differences in national styles of English, but I am immediately put in mind of a related composition by the American composer Robert Moran who, despite his nationality, chose the French L'Après-midi du Dracula, presumably in order to maintain a clear connection to Debussy and Mallarmé.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:21, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The black flag of North Vietnam"?

"The black flag of North Vietnam" ?!--91.148.159.4 (talk) 22:59, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears as if this comes from Andrew Porter's April 1970 review of the recording. It shouldn't be difficult to check.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]