Talk:Johann Baptist Wanhal

Proper spelling of his name "Waṅhal" instead of "Vanhal"

The 'Duke University Website' link ( http://library.duke.edu/music/vanhal/wanhal3.html#family ) explains that he signed his name 'Waṅhal' and the variant spellings 'Vanhal/Vanhall/Wanhall' are far less common. The title should be changed to Johann Baptist Waṅhal, shouldn't it?

• I'm not sure I agree that the variant spelling 'Vanhal' is less common - this has been the spelling in the published compositions I have encountered. Tomayres (talk) 10:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

• If you accept the standards adopted by the Library of Congress and New Grove, the present spelling, "Vanhal" is correct. It follows the Czech orthography, except for the caron diacritic on the N (Vaňhal). The spelling with W is the German version, and New Grove concurs that "he himself spelt his name Johann Baptist Wanhal", which only stands to reason given that he spent most of his working life in Austria. It does look a little strange to mix the German form of the given names, "Johann Baptist", with the Czech spelling of the surname, but that is the norm in English-language sources. FWIW, New Grove also points out that the full Czech form, Jan Křtitel Vaňhal, "was erroneously introduced" only after the Second World War.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 19:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The author of the New Grove article has, since that time, started to write Waṅhal consistently, and this version of the name has started to surface more often in musicological discourse in later years (see for instance Robert Gjerdingers book on the Galant Style, and Artaria's modern day publications of Waṅhal's works). I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes the more prevalent spelling within ten years, but it is in any case the one the composer himself prefered. 132.230.239.95 (talk) 13:33, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• Paul Robey Bryan notes the the composer seems to have spent a good portion of his life writing his name as "Johann Baptist Waṅhal" with the W & the n with a dot above it (ṅ). - Paul Michael Dahlen (2010-03-25)

Which is more or less what the first footnote says—apart from the superposed dot on the "n". In handwriting, can we be sure it was a dot, and not the caron found in the Czech orthography?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

This was not a mere typographical one-timer, though. It was, for instance, reproduced in Artaria's print of his string quartets op. 33. According to Alexander Weinmann, editor of the 1988 Waṅhal edition maintains that it was consistently spelled this way by Ignaz Sauer, a Viennese publisher who was very close to Waṅhal. The question that this is the spelling the composer himself preferred is beyond question. 93.194.113.97 (talk) 11:27, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• Paul Robey Bryan's book Johann Waṅhal, Viennese Symphonist: His Life and His Musical Environment, published in 1997 by Pendragon Press and encompasing a full 557 pages (according to books.google.com), uses the spelling "Waṅhal". I believe it also includes an elaboration on why Bryan has chosen to use that spelling. - Paul Michael Dahlen (2012-05-07)

• Of later publications employing the form Wanhal (albeit without the diacritic) are Robert Gjerdingen's Music in the Galant Style, the chapter on him in vol. 1 of The Symphonic Repertoire, and in the newly formed Johann Baptist Wanhal Association. Everything considered, it appears to me that the more seriously a source engages with Wanhal, the more likely they are to use the German version of his name. I believe it is time Wikipedia follows.78.91.81.103 (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

In general, I argue a person should be listed using the spelling that he (she) used primarily. Thus, in this case Wanhal with the dot over the n, especially since this fixes the pronunciation. Keyton (talk) 01:54, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The great Dittersdorf

Dittersdorf is not normally considered a great composer, but one editor insists on referring to him as the great Carl Ditters von Dittersdorf. I tagged the article since I think this violates NPOV and I assume he will revert it to say that again. If not, we can de-tag it. Gene Ward Smith 18:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Grove says the following:

He composed voluminously despite the official responsibilities that occupied him for much of his life, and his generally high standard of craftsmanship earned him recognition as a leading figure of the Viennese Classical school.

...

In Dittersdorf's famous interview with Joseph II, recounted in the autobiography, his music is likened to ‘an ample and finely served meal. The dishes are all savoury, and one can take a good helping of each without risking indigestion’. Alas, though appealing, his music proved vulnerable to audiences' fickle taste, and few works were destined for enduring favour, however enthusiastic their initial reception. Gene Ward Smith (talk) 22:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact that labelling him in this way constitutes "peacock words". It would look extremely odd, for example, to say that Beethoven studied (briefly) with "the great" Franz Joseph Haydn, or Heidegger with "the great" Husserl.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Name furthermore

is it possible that the middle name just means "baptised as" (Jan Krtitel = John/Johann Baptist or Baptized? Vanhal or the other way around , Vanhal, Baptized John?) Maybe not that great a stretch then- I do not know. Schissel | Sound the Note! 06:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Not in the German form, no. In order to say "baptized" one would used the word "getauft". "Johann Baptist" is adapted from Latin and means "John the Baptist". It is a common given name in many European languages (Giovanni Battista, Jean-Baptiste, Juan Bautista, etc.), but is rarely used in English. Exceptional English examples include John Baptist Purcell, John Baptiste Ford, and John Baptist Wolf.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

He was born as "Jan Ignác Manhal" Link and died as "Johann Wannhall" Link --DiCampi (talk) 21:42, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

These are irrelevant misspellings. He signed his name "Wanhal".--178.191.241.26 (talk) 08:42, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

If you look at the same church records, you will see that he and his sisters were born "Manhal", but that his father was recorded as "Wanhal" at the time of his death, and his mother was "Waṅhal" at the time of hers, some three decades later. That this Bohemian spelling was not used by officials in Vienna is no big wonder, but there is ample evidence that Waṅhal himself prefered it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.248.13.2 (talk) 12:54, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved to Johann Baptist Wanhal by Sirion123. --BDD (talk) 23:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Johann Baptist Vanhal → Johann Baptist Waṅhal – In the last few year the forms Waṅhal and Wanhal have become much more common in English publications, for reasons discussed above. With the founding of the Johann Baptist Wanhal Association I believe that a consensus amongst English-speaking Wanhal scholars has been shown, and that it is time for Wikipedia to follow suit. The form Waṅhal will not become much used, probably, as the extra diacritic is hard to create on many computers and not well supported, but it appears to have been the form Waṅhal himself preferred, and is easy to use here. The composers own form, Waṅhal, therefore seems to me to be the most sensible. Sirion123 (talk) 18:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

• Not convinced ...was tempted to say "Neutral on V→W, oppose soft ṅ", but on looking around less sure. As recently noted, en.Wikipedia allows all European living persons accents on their names with 1 exception. However Vanhal/Wanhal isn't a living person, and his preferred Bohemian Weichheitszeichen on the n is getting into the area of paleography rather than orthography. On the subject of the W however, there's a better case, but Grove hasn't switched to W yet, has it? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:59, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • They have not, to the dissatisfaction of the article's author. (See Paul Bryan's book Johann Wanhal, Viennese Symphonist – His Life and His Musical Environment) Regarding the n, you may be right, however; it is in any case of much less importance than the choice of V or W. Sirion123 (talk) 06:58, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Well then no opposition to the V → W, clearly those authors most expert on his life use the W as he did, it may take a few years for Grove to catch up. Have wondered in the past about a German first name with a Czech V surname, your RM highlights why, and I have added a couple of sources to article about his ṅ Weichheitszeichen. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:57, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
      • That is my impression as well: The more invested an English language writer is in Wanhal, the more likely s/he is to use the form Wanhal. Thanks for the clarifying additions to the article, by the way! I plan to rewrite the whole section on his name after the move, as it has a great potential for improvement, but I will surely preserve those parts. Sirion123 (talk) 19:20, 9 June 2013 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sirion123 (talk • contribs) 19:10, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
• Support move to Johann Baptist Wanhal Red Slash 01:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

A week has passed, and I after receiving unanimous support I have moved the page to Johann Baptist Wanhal. I have also, to the best of my ability, changed references to "Johann Baptist Vanhal", "Jan Křtitel Vaňhal" &c. on other pages. Sirion123 (talk) 21:08, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if many editors were watching the page. This might be a bit confusing. Bryan is the cataloguer of this composer's works but every other source I've ever seen (Heartz, Brown, Will, all the record labels, imslp, allmusic) uses the V-spelling. I guess if anyone gets to push for a change in the english spelling convention, it would be Bryan.DavidRF (talk) 23:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Future of the Article, and the List of Selected Works

This article is obviously in need of getting cleaned up and extended, where a greater diversity of sources should be consulted, and the importance of information weighted. As it is today, the biography does not mention what I believe is the single most important fact in his life, viz., that he through his own skills and the political climate of his days managed to buy himself out of serfdom, and was the first Viennese composer to make a living from the burgeoning middle class. Until today, the "Style" section, which barely discusses his style at all, had no mention of any of the music he wrote for the last 30 years of his career.

I don't wish merely to complain about this; I'm going to try to clean the article up in the coming period. I am, however, at a loss about what to do with the "List of Selected Works". As it stands today, it makes the article appear as more than the stub it really is, but the value of the section seems limited as it stands today. I guess what I am failing to grasp is exactly why it is organized as it is, and what one has tried to achieve by making it that way. The list seems to be a combination of a list of the entirety of his works, and a list of works that have been published respectively in historical and recent times. I am not convinced that all of this ought to be included in such a short article, and even less that it ought to be combined. What use is, for instance, the lists of symphonies published in Paris and Amsterdam? This is something I believe would be of interest primarily for the specialist reader, who would also want to know where one can find extant versions of these. The list of chamber music seems to have been intended as a list over the works available on record. However, no mention is made of the enormous majority of his works which have not been recorded, and most of the music available is not included either. Furthermore, no music for solo piano – the primary genre from which he made his livelihood for the last 30 years of his life – is included. No mention is made of the fact that the operas are lost, and the main article mentions three rather than two. Is "Caper Quartet" the name of an ensemble, or of a specific concerto? If the latter, no mention is made of the fact in David Wyn Jones' doctoral dissertation, and if the former, one should either remove it or extend the same courtesy to the rest of the recorded examples included.

I would like to be able to do more than merely complain about this, but I am at a loss about exactly what to do with this list. There is a list like it in the article on Leopold Hofmann, but in the more developed articles on Salieri and Pleyel more sensible solutions have been found. For now, I think the best course of action would be to emulate the entry on Salieri, by making a very short summary on the main page, and develop the list in a separate article. I think it would be far more useful if it was completely reshaped as a sober list over the entirety of his works, rather than mashing an incomplete list of the entirety of his oeuvre, a list over historical and contemporary scores and a list of modern recordings together. To the degree that these will be interesting for the non-specialist they should be included, but it should be done in a more sensible, consistent manner. Any thoughts on how this ought to be done? Sirion123 (talk) 14:52, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

I would move the entire selected works section to a new article called List of compositions by Johann Baptist Wanhal. There, the list can be expanded and made more thorough. If a very short list of well-known pieces stays on the parent article, that's fine, but a list as large as it currently is should be in a separate article.DavidRF (talk) 15:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. I fully agree, but wanted to check with a more experienced Wikipedian before doing anything rash. I'll see to it later tonight, and supply a link to a separate article, retaining a short comment on the number of compositions he wrote in the genres people are most likely to find interesting in the parent article. Sirion123 (talk) 15:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

For some reason this article was not linked to List of compositions by Johann Baptist Wanhal. I added the link. Admittedly the catalogue article is mostly a mess. Its number of symphonies contradict the numbers found everywhere else, has multiple "Op. 10"s, and does not mention Op. 23 and Op. 25 that can be easily found in IMSLP. But at least let's make the link happen now. Ahyangyi (talk) 12:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Johann Baptist Wanhal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120531064136/http://library.duke.edu/music/vanhal/ to http://library.duke.edu/music/vanhal/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:00, 31 December 2017 (UTC)