Talk:Frank Zappa/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Joe's Menage

I've started adding content about the new album that's coming out. Some help would be much appreciated, thank you. Zazaban (talk) 21:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I have "stub-started" it now. Cheers.--HJensen, talk 00:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Revert War

EVERYBODY PLEASE NOTE: An earlier version of this note was itself "reverted!" Somebody is not playing fair?

I have been trying to add a paragraph about Frank's actual conducting of the music of Varese, and it keeps being "reverted." This is unfair to one of the most significant days of Frank's life.

Zappa was a hero not only to pop iconoclasts but to classical composers, who were grateful to him for faithfully championing one of their one. Zappa had his own nomenclature for Varese, whom he called the GLC - the Greatest Living Composer. This alone should suggest that when Frank finally actually conducted Varese's music it was a significant act for him.

Lame Name wants me to believe that the article should not be included because, as he puts it, "Zappa was never a notable orchestral conductor." This is irrelevant; it really misses the point. Zappa was notable enough to lead members of three of the best orchestras in the country in an event that was created for him. He was notable generally enough to attract 3000 people to an event that might otherwise have attracted only 200.

Since Zappa never had a hit above 32 on the charts, it could also be claimed that he was not notable pop musician either. But if Elvis had conducted an orchestra, no one would wonder whether his effort was "notable." It would be notable by definition. So with Frank Zappa. This incident is much more significant in the history of music than when Frank Sinatra released an album of himself conducting the music of Alec Wilder. But perhaps even the novelty of such things merits remark.

To answer in point of fact about whether Zappa was "notable," Judith Cline, who sang under him in the Offrandes, is a Full Professor and university Department head. Nobody questions whether a full professor is "notable" in her field, and she sang UNDER Zappa. But quantifying "notability" is, again, to miss the point.

The Varese/Webern concert was a major milestone not only in Zappa's life, but in the history of any and all classical-pop crossover efforts. It was an outreach program unlike any other: there need be no apologies, qualifiers, or compromises. It was the highest point in Zappa's achievement as a hero of contemporary composers who so desperately - now more than ever - need popular support for their more genuinely modernist efforts. I ask Zappa scholars to find other occasions in his life when Zappa made an equal or greater crossover contribution to the music he said he loved since he was a boy.

To relegate the event to the Varese article is to bury it back in the same obscurity that the effort itself was trying to remedy. It needs to be in the Zappa article. Zappa fans need to be able to find it.

It is not true that there are no references in my piece. There were none in the first version of the paragraph, but there have been no fewer than one such note in all recent versions; there are now two. I hope it is not thought that program notes are insufficient references. Program notes have been important references since no later than the time of Berlioz. In any case the SFCMP note in question is available from the SFCMP, and will be online in a PDF in less than three weeks.

In case it has been again "reverted," I include the paragraph here for discussion:

Frank Zappa’s debut as a conductor of classical music took place on February 9, 1983, at the San Francisco Opera House, conducting two works – Ionization and Offrandes – by his idol, Edgar Varese, with whom in his youth he had spoken on the telephone and whom he had called “the GLC” – the Greatest Living Composer. The concert was given by the San Francisco Contemporary Music players and dedicated to the dual centenaries of Varese and Anton Webern Judith Cline was the soprano soloist in the Offrandes. The idea for the concert had come to Jean-Louis LeRoux from his assistant Christopher Fulkerson, who wrote the letter inviting Mr. Zappa to participate in the planned fundraiser for the SFCMP. The musicians, mostly players from the San Francisco Ballet, San Francisco Opera, and San Francisco Symphony orchestras, found Frank to be perfectly up to the task of conducting difficult contemporary classical music, and extraordinarily clear minded and diplomatic in rehearsal. The program included the first public broadcast of the Varese Poeme Electronique in many years. Rock diva Grace Slick served as “Mistress of Ceremonies.” http://cloudsurfing.gdhour.com/?m=200702 Zappa conducted quite competently in a clear and un-choreographed manner, well suited to getting good results from contemporary scores under their usual circumstances of under-rehearsal and production constraints. He was well-liked by the players, and graciously donated his fee back to the SFCMP, saying the experience was a good one. Xophorus (talk) 22:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that this is a featured article and must follow the Featured article criteria including only using Reliable sources. This article had four feature article review before it passed. Below are the last two reviews.

• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frank Zappa/archive2
• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Frank Zappa

That is why every editor must be careful in adding to the article. Perhaps you can add your material to another article, or start your own. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 22:45, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Conducting debut was probably at Mount St. Mary's College on May 19, 1963. When did he call Varèse “the GLC” - given that Varèse died in 1965? This article mentions Varèse in the second paragraph of the introduction so is hardly selling him short. If the ZFT ever get around to releasing The Rage And The Fury it will be a very good day. If this one off concert were to be mentioned in the article (without all the unverifiable tittle-tattle) perhaps the SF Chronical and the Concert notes might be more appropriate references. Lame Name (talk) 23:05, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

And according to this and this, Zappa conducted "Ionisation" and "Integrales" (not "Offrandes", which was conducted by Leroux!). So could we please stop wasting time on this minor thing?--HJensen, talk 23:22, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

When you say "But quantifying "notability" is, again, to miss the point." we should bear in mind that notability is the point. Lame Name (talk) 23:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll dig into the sources later, but St. Mary's in 1963 sounds right for his conductorial debut. Even if St. Mary's never happened (thus defying reality as we know it), Frank's work with the 20-piece Grand Wazoo band in September 1972 or the "Orchestral Favorites" shows of 1975 would probably count as conducting-asterisk-also-vocals-and-guitar. --Badger Drink (talk) 06:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

FA Status

From a longterm Zappa fan, congratulations on the FA status to everybody involved in improving this article. If I had known you were all working so hard on it, I would have offered my help, for what it's worth. But it's a great article and I'm sure that you are all glad to see it get FA on the 15th anniversary of FZ's death. Cheers! Lexo (talk) 00:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

comma errors

This article just went featured, I guess, because I was editing it for comma errors, but now it's protected. There are many cases where a sentence will have no need for a comma, and has one (like this sentence). There are a few cases where the sentence needs a comma and it lacks one (like this one). And, there are cases of the serial comma being used; although it is mostly avoided. Theses cases need to be made consistent. Finally, there is at least one use of a typographer's apostrophe, as in "Zappa’s", thought (of course) most of the article uses straight ticks (i.e. '). This should be made consistent.

Thanks, 68.49.50.181 (talk) 00:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

This is a problem in most Wikipedia articles. I tend to have problems with commas myself. I'll have a quick look through the article, but since you seem to be so proficient in their correct use, why can't you do it? Edit: Fixed the typographer's apostrophes. --Teggles (talk) 06:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Protected?

Where were all these editors when the article actually needed working on? I was going to suggest that the article be locked for the day but I see from the Protection log that it was protected from midnight. In what sense is it protected? Lame Name (talk) 13:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea. It seems like anon IPs can edit and has done so during the day. But the page have been doing quite well today. Not much vandalism compared to what I have seen other times for TFAs.--HJensen, talk 16:04, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Crazy! You work it up to an FA. Have it featured as TFA - "the best articles in Wikipedia" - and then let everybody hack it to pieces. I give up. I'll help put it back together tomorrow if needed. :-( Lame Name (talk) 19:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

As I said, it went relatively smoothly. A few minor issues were actually caught by som alert editors. I think the article is in great shape as of now. And judging from the slowness of the page yesterday, a lot have been reading into Zappa yesterday. That I am happy for. :-) --HJensen, talk 06:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Greenjeans myth

I was surprised not to see some mention of the myth (thoroughly debunked, but widely circulated nonetheless)[1] that Zappa was the son of "Mr. Greenjeans" o(of the old Captain Kangaroo show). Maybe it was handled in some earlier discussion, maybe it's just infra dig. I won't impose it on a current FA. DavidOaks (talk) 20:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Reference to "LOOK" magazine

The story about LOOK Magazine is folklore, as explained in detail (fact & fiction) in Greg Russo's "Cosmik Debris. The collected history and improvisations of Frank Zappa" (Crossfire Publications, USA, 1998, ISBN: ISBN 0-9648157-4-5). --Emdebe (talk) 19:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

You are right that it has been challenged; good point. Why don't you put in that the magazine has never been recovered (and use the Russo as ref)?--HJensen, talk 02:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Or... maybe this should be part of a 'general disclaimer': many stories of the early years can be challenged... --Emdebe (talk) 17:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Bibliography?

Apparently the 'References' section can only contain items that are referenced in the actual article... which sounds OK to me. But what about a section that lists all books, articles, whatever, ever written about FZ? --Emdebe (talk) 17:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

My guess is that such a list is not "permitted" in articles. It would more qualify as a list. I don't know, however, whether such a list would be regarded as sufficiently notable to survive around here. But you could give it a try.--HJensen, talk 07:58, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

The FA criteria are not clear on the subject (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria), so maybe we should give it a try... --Emdebe (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

What about the Featured List criteria: [2]? Does that permit it? I couldn't immediately find some examples of bibliographies. But there must be some! --HJensen, talk 20:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I guess notability would be an issue. Are the authors notable enough for an article such as Barry Miles or the book itself such as The Real Frank Zappa Book. If they are not referenced here do they add anything or just cover similar ground? Lame Name (talk) 20:59, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Several authors can stand up against Miles. Instead of calling it 'Bibliography', we could call it 'Further reading' or something... BTW: even Miles has 'Bibliography' and 'Further reading' sections is his book...--Emdebe (talk) 12:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Would a "further reading" section add anything to the article? Miles can put whatever he wants in his books. This is Wikipedia - with it's own set of rules. Lame Name (talk) 13:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

If, and only if, Wikipedia will become the place where everything FZ can be found, then there is no need for anything 'Bibliography'- or 'Further reading'-like. For the time being, this is not the case (this is an observation, not a critique). --Emdebe (talk) 13:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes - but that is why we have ZWJ ;-) Lame Name (talk) 14:14, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Picture

I think this picture is better as the "main" picture on the top of the page.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/The_famous_mustache_and_goatee.jpg

217.211.92.186 (talk) 13:08, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it is a great picture. I think, however, that the current "main" picture is better. It is mainly for "technical" reasons: The "main" picture is always aligned to the right. Therefore, a picture where he looks to the right makes him look "out of the page". In the current "main" picture, he is facing left, which makes it a more natural choice when it is aligned to the right. See also MOS:IMAGES.--HJensen, talk 14:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)