Jump to content

Talk:Kurt Weill

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Kurt Weill/Comments)

Composer project review

[edit]

I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This article is B-class, but it has significant issues that would benefit from some attention. The full review is on the comments page; comments and questions can be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 01:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just have a further point on the in-line citations - they are nearly all to a work in German, or to an obit only accessible by subscription. For an article to be useful to an English reader, it should be possible to supply accessible, English references.--Smerus (talk) 08:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't normally vet the references, unless I something appears odd about them. I noticed that the NYT obit was significantly referenced, and is listed as a "fee required" item. However, quite a few public libraries (those I use included) offer access to the NYT archive as part of their services; I was able to access the Weill obit page without cost by going through my library's website.
But your point about language is well-taken -- presumably there is no shortage of English-language material about Weill. Magic♪piano 14:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lotte Lenya, 2X wife: her omission from this article

[edit]

Why has Lotte Lenya been essentially omitted from this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.29.79.206 (talk) 18:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Kurt Weill/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
==Composers Project Assessment of Kurt Weill: 2008-12-20==

This is an assessment of article Kurt Weill by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano.

If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down.

Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status.

===Origins/family background/studies=== Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described?

  • Good

===Early career=== Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?

  • Good

===Mature career=== Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed?

  • Good

===List(s) of works=== Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article.

  • Good, but see summary.

===Critical appreciation=== Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)?

  • Weak on style; limited on reception.

===Illustrations and sound clips=== Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.)

  • More images needed; no sound.

===References, sources and bibliography=== Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references?

  • Article is referenced; some inline citations.

===Structure and compliance with WP:MOS=== Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.)

  • Lead is short; inconsistent cite placement; needs copyedit.

===Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review===

  • Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE)
  • Article lead needs work (WP:LEAD)
  • Article text formatting needs work (e.g. quotation methods, punctuation, inconsistent styles) (citation location)
  • Article footer material needs organization (WP:LAYOUT) (Bibliography header is incorrect)
  • Article needs copyediting

===Summary=== This is mostly a relatively straightforwardly-written biography. Weill's childhood is adequately covered, as are his studies. His professional work, and when he composed what is covered to an almost excessive level. In the early days, we get many works premiered, but no indication of their reception.

The section "Paris, London, and New York" is in desparate need of copyedit, for prose and for formatting. It is twice mentioned that Weill becomes a US citizen; this is indicative that the chronology in the section is confused. This sections also suffers from WP:OVERLINK; not all instances of Threepenny Opera need to be linked. (I also note that it is inconsistently referred to; sometimes "Three Penny Opera", "Threepenny Opera", "Dreigroschenoper"; please be consistent.) The list of works is presumed to be complete. However, it is annoying that not even a selection of his stage works is listed; we must go to the other page for that.

There is no discussion of Weill's musical style -- I have no idea from the article (beyond that he wrote music for the stage that was fairly popular) what it's like. There is also relatively little critical or popular appreciation. (For example, how was Street Scene received? It's described as an "attempt" at something -- did it work?)

Since Weill was long outlived by Lenya, one wonders how much of the Alma problem is present in public information about Weill; a discussion of the life of his music and legacy after his death might be instructive.

There are structural issues with the article. The lead is short; it should be 3-4 paragraphs, and summarize the article. There are numerous formatting errors, like the bolded New York address. Dates are inconsistently presented. There is a section headed Bibliography; this heading is conventionally used for written works by the subject. Most articles I see use "Notes" or "Footnotes" for the inline citation details, and "References" or "Sources" for listing the works consulted. While there are a reasonable number of inline citations, there are probably not enough for a formal review. The placement of citations is inconsistent -- either all before or all after punctuation, please.

The article should also have more images, and some sound clips if possible.

Last edited at 01:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 21:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kurt Weill. 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:

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) 01:38, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kurt Weill. 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:

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) 18:40, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Steynonline.com

[edit]

I'm pressing for the removal of this personal website from Wikipedia pages other than those that directly relate to its author and founder Mark Steyn. No doubt Steyn's writing and activism have relevance to a variety of topics when published by a reliable source, but its use elsewhere is questionable for a number of reasons: (1) Excessive personal promotion (2) Promotion of fringe ideas (3) Disparaging commentary of people who the author is in longstanding disagreement with.

Case in point: Mark Steyn is a self-described "climate skeptic" who has argued repeatedly that the world is not warming. He continues to support and publicize ideas at odds with the scientific community. He is presently engaged in legal dispute with climate scientist Michael Mann. Steynonline.com is designed in such a way to display promotion for his books on all internal pages, so too his attacks on climate scientists via a feed of his @MarkSteynOnline Twitter account.

I welcome feedback on this issue though suspect it might be simpler to visit the reliable sources noticeboard and present the issue there. — Niche-gamer 13:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The link in question, ≪"Mack the Knife" – Sinatra Song of the Century #95 by Mark Steyn, December 8, 2015≫, is wholly uncontroversial. It's a valuable essay on Weill and "Mackie the Knife". Steyn's knowledge on musical theatre ought not to be disregarded on account of his controversial views. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:20, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The link is controversial for the reasons explained above, I feel. Outside of his published material, Mark Steyn's personal website is plastered with personal adverts (some promoting fringe theories) and it should be subject to the same guidelines as anywhere else. Is there no other way this material can be sourced? — Niche-gamer 17:10, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The real issue is: you can't remove a Wikipedia source reference from an article. It's there for historical, research, and copyright reasons. Much of the material that went into writing the WP Weill page is taken from that source, and all sources must be referenced on WP. If you find data on WP that's incorrect, then that's a different story: you can correct it. But you have to specify your source for your correction.
But discussions of whether you dislike a guy personally, or don't like that he posts on his own website theories you label as fringe (nothing wrong with that, that's the internet for ya), or that he self-advertises on his own website (who doesn't?), are irrelevant to what Wikipedia is all about: a reference library, not a soapbox or debate center. I don't know who Mark Steyn is, never heard of him, and I don't care; his article on Kurt Weill is extensive, informatory, an enjoyable read, and appears to contain accurate information, that is he seems to know what he's talking about and has done his research. As, I said, if you find inaccuracies on WP, no matter what source they came from, feel free to correct, as long as you can back up your corrections by noting your sources.
Chuckstreet (talk) 08:37, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Chuckstreet. You appear to be mistaken in this specific regard. Wikipedia has a clear set of guidelines and rules for references. You can learn more about this by reading Wikipedia:Reliable sources. For the most part Wikipedia articles "should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." Self-published sources are permitted in limited circumstances, particularly when the source is authoritative on a topic or subject, but there are strict rules that must be applied, such as when a source is promotional in nature. It's my genuine belief that steynonline.com fails these tests. I feel bad about pressing this matter with regard to this article, that is why I am hoping we can find another way to reference the affected material. — Niche-gamer 14:51, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Steyn has written extensively on film and musical theatre. His article on Weill and "Mack the Knife" doesn't suffer from any of the deficiencies you mention. There is no reason to exclude it as a source because of the author's stance in other matters. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And that might be fine if it wasn't for the inescapable observation that his website is unduly self-serving. The source is the problem. Steynonline.com features personal adverts on every page. Steyn has stated that his most recent books on the topic of climate change are intended in part to help him raise awareness and funds for his legal campaign against climate scientist Michael Mann. His Twitter feed, which he uses to attack scientists and undermine the view that the planet is warming, appears on every page of his personal website, including the written material we are discussing today. There are guidelines to follow when using self-published sources. One possible compromise is to record the page in question, minus the adverts and live Twitter feed, using a page archiver, and link directly to that archive instead. That way the material remains accessible and all else will be disabled. — Niche-gamer 20:46, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No. Shutup. Your polemic diatribes are out of place here on Wikipedia. Stop complaining about other websites. Your complaints are not welcome here. You are annoying. Nothing is going to change for you here. You've been told the rules, but you don't listen to what people are telling you. The rules are not going to be changed just for you. No attacks against non-Wikipedia websites! No soapboxing! I'm sorry I ever directed you to the Weill talk page, but I thought you wanted to talk about removing references (agsinst the rules) or changing incorrect data (perfectly okay). Instead you only want to attack and complain. Polemics and soapboxing are not allowed anywhere on Wikipedia. You obviously have nothing constructive to contribute, and are only interested in spewing your pet peeves without listening to anyone. Shutup and go away now. Don't post anymore here.
Chuckstreet (talk) 01:05, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Your contribution is somewhat emotional and rude. — Niche-gamer 11:27, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Niche-gamer: You haven't provided any argument against the text of the cited article, so its validity remains. // Many external sources we link to, including magazines and newspapers, show advertisements, some objectionable. Many authors we cite have controversial views – in fact, many subjects covered on Wikipedia do. Deplatforming is no way to conduct serious coverage of, in this case, entirely unrelated subjects. WP:COATRACK works both ways. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:06, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Our rules on self-published sources ask us to consider not solely the subject matter but also broader facets of a self-published source. Third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy are not subject to the same stringent rules. I'm not 100% certain what side Steynonline.com falls on but I'm happy to accept the considered view of the RS Noticeboard if we can't work toward a compromise. Undue self-promotion and Mark Steyn's exceptionally poor reputation for fact checking could sway the decision against using his self-published thoughts on any Wikipedia page other than those germane to the author. — Niche-gamer 11:27, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish in main paragraph/description

[edit]

It's funny that I noticed how another editor made note of Weill's religion while making an edit similar to the one I made moments ago. That edit was later undone due primarily to the notion that Jewish was an ethnicity. But technically, Jewish is not an ethnicity, since a gentile can become Jewish by converting to Judaism. For obvious reasons, converting to Judaism does not mean you change your ethnicity. For instance, an Irish person of 100% Irish descent can't become ethnically Russian by moving to Russia and even by changing his name and adopting and observing Russian culture. So ethnicity must include the race you were born into. 208.138.53.57 (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're building a strawman argument here. It's not stated anywhere in this article that Kurt Weill's jewishness was "ethnic". As has been stated before here, the reason the article refers to Weill as a jew is because he was German by nationality and lived as an artist in Germany after Hitler came to power. Weill's jewishness is therefore a noteworthy historical point. It is not factually incorrect in any way. Therefore, your edit to remove the word "Jewish" from the lead has been undone like the previous user.

As for the example you use to supposedly bolster your argument of jewishness not being an ethnicity, an Irish person moving to Russia, that is an "apples and oranges" fallaciousness. Russian and Irish are nationalities not ethnic groups.

To define the term and prove that jews are in fact an ethnicity, I offer the following. Jews have certain physical characteristics that are defined as racial. Specifically, they are by scientific definition a subset of a race, i.e. an ethnicity. Jewish is thus both an ethicity AND a religion.

Your bold statement that "Jewish is not an ethnicity" could also be construed as anti-semitic, or at least coming from a somewhat bigoted viewpoint, as well as a lame attempt to hide well-known facts, since every country in the world, as well as the United Nations and many world organisations officially list Jewish people as an ethnic group. Most jews consider themselves as an ethnic group. To claim they aren't is a slight against them, what they believe in, and what they see themselves as. An Anonymous Jew 17:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100F:B104:CAAB:E46C:9DAC:D940:483A (talk)

See WP:MOS#ETHNICITY. Acroterion (talk) 03:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think User:Acroterion meant to link to MOS:ETHNICITY, a guideline that recommends omitting a person's ethnicity, religion, or sexuality from an article's lead. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:42, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. MOS:ETHNICITY indicates "Jewish" should not be in this lead. Jayjg (talk) 20:17, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, you're misquoting MOS:ETHNICITY. Quote the whole sentence:
"Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability."
This is exactly what "An Anonymous Jew" was pointing out. Weill's jewishness was notable in that his compositions written in Germany, particularly those penned by Brecht, including his most famous Threepenny Opera, were distinctly Jewish, and he was eventually persecuted for it under Hitler's regime and had to flee Germany and continue his work in the United States. As Weill's jewish ethnicity is notable, it SHOULD be in the lead, where it's been for quite a number of years until somebody with an agenda wrongly removed it. 97.45.193.50 (talk) 01:02, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm looking forward to seeing sources that describe any of Weill's music after 1913 and excluding The Eternal Road, but especially for The Threepenny Opera, as "distinctly Jewish". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter. Knowing that he was Jewish is crucial to understanding how the Nazis coming to power affected his career and his life. Whether his music was "distinctly Jewish" or not is beside the point.—Chowbok ☠ 06:14, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And "knowing" that requires reading as far as the second paragraph if we adhere to the usual interpretation on Wikipedia of MOS:ETHNICITY. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 06:26, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Bednarek: For what it's worth, besides The Eternal Road, he wrote occasional music for the founding of Israel, and did a setting of the Kiddush. His only trip abroad after settling in the U.S. was to Israel (although he did briefly visit several places in Europe on the way back). These seem unlikely actions for someone who was estranged from Jewish identity, though there is less evidence of any attachment to that identity between his leaving his parents' home and the rise of the Nazis. - Jmabel | Talk 05:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


@Michael Bednarek: More on this, as I've been working my way through Kurt Weill: an illustrated life, Jürgen Schebera (Yale, 1995, translated by Caroline Murphy).

  • p. 11: 1915, at age 15, writes Ofrahs Lieder, a setting of five Hebrew-language poems by by the 12th-century Sephardic Jew Jehuda Halevi. Once thought lost, the piece was rediscovered in 1983: a copy was in the effects of his sister Ruth, who died that year. Probably his most important work before leaving Dessau for Berlin. And he was already well on his way to a career while still in Dessau: see the piece I wrote at http://weillproject.com/blog/2021-04-03-weill-in-dessau.htm.
  • p. 20: We was choir director of a syna
  • p. 27: 1920 he starts on Sulamith, a choral fantasy based on the Biblical “Song of Songs”. It was eventually performed, but only part survives.
  • p. 33 (or thereabouts, didn't note it, sorry) First Symphony started from religious premises, though they were pretty much lost by the time it was a completed piece.
  • p. 49 His major work inn Busoni's master class was Recordare: Klage lieder Jeremaiae V. Kapitel (Recordare: Lamentations of Jeremiah, Chapter 5) "a large a capella choral cycle for four-part mixed chorus and two-part boys choir based on Old Testament texts". Considered unperformable at the time, it finally premiered in 1971 at the Holland Festival.

So that's quite a bit down to 1924, not 1913: it would appear that at least a quarter of his output in that decade has Jewish themes. Given that, along with the ethnically-based attacks on him and his work in later years in Germany, it seems to me that it probably merits mention in the lede. Do you still disagree, given what I've noted here? - Jmabel | Talk 05:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you pinged me; I never objected to "Jewish" in the lead, which had been there for a long time. It was User:Jayjg who removed it on 26 February 2020. I would not object, especially given your research, which no doubt will find its way into the article. I only questioned that Die Dreigroschenoper could be described as "distinctly Jewish". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the way, found another: 9 March 1943 at Madison Square Garden, pageant play with Ben Hecht, We Will Never Die, written in the face of the Holocaust. Starred Edward G. Robinson, Paul Muni. As with Eternal Road, drew on Jewish folk music and alternated large choral scenes with smaller scenes. So basically, plenty of Jewish themes up to 1924, and then coming back to do a major specifically Jewish piece about once a decade. That seems pretty decisive. - Jmabel | Talk 18:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • At this point I'm beating a dead horse, but there's even more (and more than I had any idea). All of this is from p. 321-322 of the Schebera bio of Weill:
    • a Kiddush for cantor, chorus, and organ for Park Avenue Synagogue March 1946.
    • Pageant A Flag is Born, book & lyrics by Ben Hecht, benefit for Jews in Europe. Starred Paul Muni, Celia Adler,Marlon Brando (who was a student of Celia Alder's sister Stella Adler around this time, that from me, not from Schebera). Premiered 5 Sept 1946 at the Alvin Theatre, ran several weeks.
    • Nov 1948 [did more research: that should be 1947, the occasion was Chaim Weizmann's 73rd birthday - Jmabel | Talk 01:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)]: an orchestration of the Hatikvah. - Jmabel | Talk 23:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • And it turns out that both We Will Never Die and A Flag is Born (both with Ben Hecht) were fundraisers for the faction around the Revisionist Zionist Hillel Kook (a.k.a. Peter Bergson). - Jmabel | Talk 01:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've now written a blog post on the topic. If anyone wants specific references for any particulars, let me know. - Jmabel | Talk 19:19, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kiddush

[edit]

Commissioned by Cantor David Putterman of New York’s Park Avenue Synagogue, 1946.

https://www.milkenarchive.org/music/volumes/view/swing-his-praises/work/kiddush-weill/

Drsruli (talk) 05:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a German composer"

[edit]

As of 2021-15-02 our article begins "Kurt Julian Weill (March 2, 1900 – April 3, 1950) was a German composer…" That phrase "a German composer" seems problematic to me: Weill in 1947 explicitly disavowed that characterization. In a 1947 letter to Life magazine, reprinted in Henry Marx (Ed.), Weill-Lenya Goethe House, (New York, 1976) and cited by Douglas Jarman, Kurt Weill: An illustrated Biography, Indiana University Press (Bloomington, 1982), p.140, Weill wrote, "Although I was born in Germany I don not consider myself a 'German composer'. … I am an American citizen and during my dozen years in this country have composed exclusively for the American stage … I would appreciate your straightening out your readers on this matter." Jarman doesn't say what Life may have done, but his sense of his own nationality could not be more clearly stated. I am editing this to say "a German (later American) composer," and I suppose I should cite the above. Not sure how best to do this multi-layered citation, so someone may want to clean up my footnote. - Jmabel | Talk 01:02, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why not German-American? It's not describing his music (which is what he was complaining about), it's describing his nation of origin and his eventual nationality. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 05:19, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two other influences on Weill

[edit]

I'm not sure where to put this in the current article structure, but Douglas Jarman, Kurt Weill: An illustrated Biography, Indiana University Press (Bloomington, 1982; ISBN 025314650X), mentions two other significant influences on Weill's mature work. Although he largely drifts away from post-Wagnerian German Expressionism, he retains Mahler's clashing timbres (Jarman, p. 90) and, unusually for a German, he showed strong influences from Russian classical music, especially Mussorgsky. Like the latter, Weill threads his way between atonalism and the diatonic scales, often finding a compromise in the less common modes (Jarman, p. 121 et. seq.). - Jmabel | Talk 05:02, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kurt_Weill&oldid=1243707783"