Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

EARLY Carrier stuff people might find interesting and relating to there lives

Mozart wrote "Twinkle, twinkle, little star". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.224.38.246 (talk • contribs)

Actually, no he didn't -- it's a French folk song, Ah! vous dirai-je, Maman, fitted with English lyrics. Mozart wrote a (lovely) set of piano variations on it. Antandrus (talk) 01:43, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Copy editing issue

Noetica, I'm sure you mean well in copy editing this article. However, in changing it to say that Beethoven "directed" Mozart's operas while in Bonn, you've introduced a factual error. Beethoven was quite young at the time and he was only a player in the orchestra, not its director. Aside from this, my general feeling is that the prose of the article was fine as it was, and that your changes reflect differences of taste, not improvements in quality. Isn't there some better way (e.g., by reading reference sources) that you could improve this article? Yours sincerely, Opus33 (talk) 00:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Good to hear from an esteemed old hand, Opus! Two points to deal with separately:

Beethoven and Mozart's operas in Bonn: I took the ambiguous original the wrong way. The text has this wording: "(he is thought to have played Mozart's operas in the court orchestra in Bonn)". The meaning is unclear. As a member of an orchestra one hardly "plays an opera". Given Beethoven's own precocity, the alternative reading looked likely. Since that is the specific basis of your objection in that section, I am now restoring what I see as valuable in my editing, suitably amended.

My copyediting of the whole article: You may not like the polishing for style, accuracy, clarity, and consistency that I have attempted to bring to the article. Myself, I think that such renovation was overdue. The style was growing clunky and verbose. Kleinzach seems to like what I have done; let's see what others think. That's all part of the rich WP tapestry.

Best wishes to you.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 01:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for an extraordinarily courteous reply, Noetica. I do continue to disagree with you on the substantive issues, but I appreciate your patience in responding so collegially to my somewhat crabby remarks. Regards, Opus33 (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

That's all fine, Opus. I had already finished a first pass through the article, but in my opinion more refinements are needed. I'll do some of those now; and of course anyone else can do the same.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 20:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

I added an infobox to this page; I then came across a comment in the discussion archive stating infoboxes are not preferred for classical composers? This seems odd to me. The infobox certainly gives a nice summary of biographical stats, and looks good at the top of the page. Anybody know why these aren't being used? FusionKnight (talk) 14:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

To elaborate, I wanted to find out how old Mozart was when he died. In order to do this without an infobox, I had to scan the intro, get out my calculator and subtract. Had I been further down in the article when I wanted to know, I might have had to scroll down to the death section, then up to the intro for the birth date, then get out the calculator. It seems silly to obfuscate basic biographical facts in favor of... what? FusionKnight (talk) 14:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Those are good points. You may wish to review this debate and then raise the matter at the Composer Project's talk page. As it stands, consensus is against including infoboxes - hence my revert. But, discussion is welcome. Eusebeus (talk) 14:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Simple info on Wolfgang Mozart

I beleive Mozart created/composed many beautiful pieces of music.At a young age he listend and made songs and melodys.His music was spread all over the world and people enjoyed listening to it.

Katie Hercock 11 years of age —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.174.213 (talk) 22:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Can one of you lock holders fix the poor grammar?

The sentence should read: "Mozart would sometimes switch his focus between operatic and instrumental music." I'm a little unclear as to what the real meaning of this statement is, did he write any libretto for his operaS, or did someone else? I admit the corrected sentence starts to reveal the awkwardness of the underlying thought. Come to think of it, a memory just came rushing back to me. I remember listening to a vinyl record many years ago. I believe it was a Mozart piece. Before the singer began, an announcer would proclaim "And now, we shall sing." They didn't know how to make the transition smoothly at that time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.140.180 (talk) 04:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Anonymous, it is an easy matter to edit the article. Just register an account so that you are no longer anonymous, and off you go. This article is locked to all except registered uses because it is often vandalised.

Now, let's look at the sentence you object to as it stands:

Mozart would sometimes switch his focus between operas and instrumental music.

Really, I can't see the problem with this. Obviously Mozart is a composer – a composer of music. There is no suggestion that he wrote librettos. I wonder if you find the same uncertainty is this sentence, also from the present article:

Despite the great success of Die Entführung aus dem Serail, Mozart did little operatic writing for the next four years, producing only two unfinished works and the one-act Der Schauspieldirektor.

Anyone following those links, or reading what follows two sentences later, would be left in no doubt that Mozart did the musical settings, of texts that were written by others.

Finally, none of this concerns grammar, precisely. Your concern is with what a sentence says, rather than with its grammar.

Why not get an account, and join in? :)

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 05:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Point taken - it's the semantics that are confusing. Opera is a category, and instrumental music is a category. I still feel grammatically it is pretty weak, because structurally the sentence should apply operatic and instrumental to the later word Music. As it stands, Mozart has a bunch of his operaS (not just one at a time of the Opera category) lying around, and some instrumental music. He switches between this portfolio of operas he is concurrently working on, and the field of wholly instrumental music? Or what? It's late now, I may revisit the issue. It's a good article, and it's just the one sentence that is cumbersome to me.

Mea (talk) 05:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Welcome aboard, Mea! See how we use colons to indent our posts, so that it's clear when a new contribution begins? I've added two at the start of each paragraph of yours, and I've got three at the start of each paragraph in this post.

Thanks for making your concern clearer. I should point out that opera can be a count noun ("He wrote many operas") or a mass noun ("He spent more time on opera"). Music, occurring within the phrase instrumental music in the sentence we are concerned with, is in its standard sense only a mass noun. Hence the structure of the sentence as you see it, which I take to be perfectly normal. If it causes you some difficulty, it may do the same for others; still, I find operatic music somewhat strained, for our sentence. Mozart's concern was with operas as whole structures, since it is the composer whom we take to have prime responsibility for the final product – at least as composed, abstract entities "on the page". We do not often speak of the operas of Metastasio or da Ponte; we speak of the operas of Mozart.

–_⊥^{¡ɐɔıʇǝo}Noetica!^T– 06:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Spelling of Amadè

There is an error in spelling: Wrong "Amadè" right "Amadé" i.e. the accent should be an acutus not a gravis. 87.166.111.145 as of 18:01, 8 February 2009

Hello, I agree completely that "Amadè" looks as it were an error. However, according to scholars, it really is what Mozart normally called himself. See in particular Otto Erich Deutsch's Mozart: A Documentary Biography (1965, 9). Maynard Solomon's Mozart biography mentions that Mozart sometimes used "Amadé" and "Amade" in addition to "Amadè", but I think the safest course (i.e., the most likely to be accurate) would be to follow Deutsch, whose scholarly reputation seems to be quite high.

For further information, see Mozart's name. Cheers, Opus33 (talk) 21:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. to User:MichaelBednarek: thanks very much for your skillful cleanup of Difficile lectu (Mozart); it needed it...

For what it's worth, the current article in the New Grove (Cliff Eisen) lists "Amadè" as Mozart's most common preference, with Amadé second. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 22:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

First, can we agree that "Amadè" (grave) is a misspelling? (Which doesn't by itself prove or disprove anything, given the general state of spelling in those days, and Mozart's in particular.) Second, the article Mozart's name does not itself provide conclusive proof: "Mozart's preference for 'Wolfgang Amadè' can be seen on the wedding contract […] where the composer's signature is 'Wolfgang Amade Mozart'." — seems a non-sequitur to me. Third, after page 9, Deutsch uses mostly "Amade" without accent. Fourth, I am rather doubtful of sources written in English on this matter; any German-language sources? A quick search seems to suggest indeed "Amade" without any accent. Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello Michael, Deutsch (1965) in one sense is a German-language source; it's the English translation of a work that Deutsch originally wrote in German. Deutsch is hardly a negligible figure; he gets cited over and over by other Mozart scholars. So I'd want to see some scholarly work that directly addresses the "accents-on-e" question (e.g. by actually counting the variants in Mozart's letters) before overriding Deutsch.

B.t.w. I didn't mean Mozart's name to count as evidence on this point--it's only a Wikipedia article!--merely as further background. Cheers, Opus33 (talk) 06:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Interesting that this issue pops up here as well. A Mozart Forum Thread was just talking about this. None of that thread is citable, though. It looks like the name is an odd hybrid between the French "Amédé" and the Italian "Amadeo". Normally, Italian doesn't use accents, but dropping the o in the Italian name forces the need for an accent on the final e to signify the accent is on that syllable (instead of the usual penultimate syllable). I'm not 100% sure which one it should be, though. Googling around for non-Mozart examples, I see both Amadè and Amadé. Sometimes for the same name or place, too. Interesting discussion.DavidRF (talk) 06:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I am aware that Deutsch's "Mozart: A Documentary Biography" (1966) is based on/translated from "Mozart: Die Dokumente seines Lebens" (1961); I would just have preferred a citation on "Amadè" from the German edition. Note that, as I wrote above, the English version of Deutsch uses mostly "Amade" without accent.

I didn't want to revisit this issue (and I still don't), but as DavidRF mentioned coincidences: our German Wikipedia colleagues just renamed "Franz von Suppé" to "Franz von Suppè" — which seems just as grating to me as "Amadè". See my note at Talk:Franz von Suppé. Michael Bednarek (talk) 14:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Nationality

Please include the fact that Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was German. He not only felt himself "German", he was born and raised in the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation. This fact is not disputable! Hyperboreer (talk) 17:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I choose not to dispute it myself because I think Mozart's nationality is his least interesting aspect. However, your opinion that it is not disputable is incorrect. Please see the archives of this discussion page, particularly number 6. --RobertG ♬ talk 17:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, Robert, but the fact is indisputable - all scientific records in Germany and Austria agree on this.(Österreich war ein deutscher Bundesstaat, gehört erst seit 1871 nicht mehr zum deutschen Staat. Mozart ist 1791 gestorben.) Austria was a German Federal State until 1871. Mozart died 1791, he is therefore German - and, you are so right, a brilliant composer and musical artist! By the way, here an excerpt from a letter (1782) from Mozart to his beloved father: "Germany, my beloved fatherland, whom, as you know, I am proud of." (1782 an seinen Vater:"Teutschland, mein geliebtes vatterland, worauf ich, wie Sie wissen, stolz bin.") Hyperboreer (talk) 18:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Bleah, I find this nationalist stuff to be really seriously distasteful. I hope someone is watching this editor, who is new.

In other news, the Cambridge Mozart Encyclopedia has a couple of very nice articles on "Austria" and "Germany", which explain what these terms meant in Mozart's day, as well as how Mozart felt about his own nationality. These articles are quite NPOV, as far as I can tell. I propose to channel them into a satellite article, assuming no one seriously objects. Cheers, Opus33 (talk) 01:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Historical facts and information are "nationalist stuff" and "distasteful"??? Is that the free spirit of academic brains or just anti-German filerbusting. It astonishes me somewhat, if it were an other country, things would be more relaxed, but when it is about Germany, the blood of some gets hot. Almost 70 years after WW II, when can we finally talk straight without the stalinistic, fascist speach prohibition of evil, darker times??? I'm still hoping and praying!!! Hyperboreer (talk)

Perhaps you have not been here long. Editors with a nationalist agenda visit many composer articles, and while they may account for only 1% of the article edits, they may account for an enormous percentage of the talk archive space, and waste a colossal amount of the volunteer time of the editors that watch the articles in question. We have had Chopin become French, Haydn become Slovenian, Tchaikovsky become Ukrainian (and Polish), Schoenberg become American, Beethoven become African (and Flemish), Ravel become Basque, Mendelssohn become ... non-Jewish, and Mozart become ... but why? Is not the music more important than nationalist bickering?

Remember that everything in Wikipedia must be reliably sourced. When arguments go on ad nauseum on talk pages, we can always reach for a reliable source, such as the huge articles on Mozart in the New Grove and quote what the scholars there wrote. Hope this helps, Antandrus (talk) 02:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, I agree, the music, the art are so very important, and so very beautiful, but we also have the duty to report historically correct, because young people learn and use these WP-pages as "sacral" ... and Mozart is German, that is a given fact, and I do not see the problem with this. I say this without emotion and "nationalist" tune! Hyperboreer (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added on 14:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC).

It seems to me that we already cover it exactly right. We have him categorized as a German composer (jawohl?), as an Austrian composer (certainly), as a Viennese composer (indisputably), as being from Salzburg (oh yes), and we take no direct position in the opening sentence, as we do on many other composer articles ("Kotan Háček (1680 - 1712) was a Slovogarian composer of the late Baroque era ...") Mozart was quite an international figure; indeed spectacularly so. It defines him. The trips to Italy and France; the influence from those places; really, looking at the lead, the categories, and the biography, to my eye we get it right on this one. All the best, Antandrus (talk) 18:47, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think it's good that we leave nationality out of the opening sentence, and also that we don't get sidetracked here into the least important aspect of Mozart's personality. It's absolutely indisputable that Mozart belonged to the species Homo sapiens sapiens but let's not dwell on this. Best to all! --Klein zach 23:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Please be adviced that user Hyperboreer is constantly editing all kind of Germany related articles in a highly questionable if not clearly right wing orientated way. His comments above on the constitutional relationship between Austria and Germany of the times of Mozart (if you can ever call the countries of those days Austria and Germany...) are simply wrong. In other articles he makes references to web pages that are indexed by various German domestic intelligence agencies. I strongly propose deletion of his user name. Feel free to point me to other pages to bring this to the community's attention. Henning Blatt (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)