Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Hector Berlioz/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hector Berlioz

[edit]
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

.

French composers are now fairly well served in Wikipedia: we have FAs or GAs on Alkan, Bizet, Boulez, Debussy, Fauré, Josquin, Massenet, Messager, Messiaen, Offenbach, Poulenc, Ravel and Saint-Saëns. It seems right that one of France's greatest composers should join them, and I've extensively overhauled the existing article to incorporate current scholarship and a wide range of sources, and focus on the core narrative. Comments and suggestions about raising the article to FA standard will be greatly appreciated. – Tim riley talk 09:58, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Smerus comments

[edit]

Tim, this reads really well, congratulations. I am all over the place at the moment and don't have time to give it the scrutiny it really deserves, not I think that that would be antagonistic in any way. I just make the following observation (for the present). You write that "the generation of French composers ahead of him, Cherubini, Méhul, Gossec and Berlioz's teacher Le Sueur all wrote for huge forces on occasion." They did, and one of the main impetuses for this was the French Revolution, which had a major impact on the French musical genres (separating them dramatically from those elsewhere in Europe), as regards orchestration, harmonic contrasts, public engagement and musical rhetoric, to which trends Berlioz was a true successor - indeed virtually its only successor in the mid-19th century. Yrs in haste as always these days, --Smerus (talk) 20:26, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Smerus: Thank you, dear Sir. Revolutionary connexion noted and now duly mentioned in the text. I hope your perpetuum mobile is enjoyable, and I look forward to resuming our collaboration once you have slowed down to a gallop. Tim riley talk 21:15, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil

[edit]

This is supremely written. Have only dipped in an out tonight, but hope to come back with a few comments shortly. Ceoil (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:56, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

[edit]

I have started reading just now and will definitely leave some comments in the week.Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:56, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lead - first line - as this is already cluttered with these awful French transliterations, would it be better to move the n1 to the beginning of Early Years? Otherwise the reader has three hurdles to surmount before they even find out what it's all about? Otherwise very nice three paragraphs to sum him up.
  • 1803-21
  • 1821-24
  • 1824-30
  • 1830-32
  • 1832-40
    • penultimate paragraph - perhaps a little more about the revolutionary aspects of R&J. I don't think there had been anything like it ever before.
      • I've added a bit more about Wagner's reaction. I don't know that the piece struck contemporaries as all that revolutionary as the French hadn't really signed up to the Haydn formula for classical symphonies. Tim riley talk 07:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1850s
  • 1860-69
    • Could Marie's age be mentioned, just for a bit of context?
    • 2nd para has two truncateds
    • 5th para, it might be interesting to mention the composers he met; Balakirev and...
      • Done, sort of, though it isn't clear which of his Russian admirers he actually met. Tim riley talk 07:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • In the New Grove Russian Masters 1 (Papermac, 1986) Glinka met Berlioz in Rome in 1832 (p6) and again in Paris in 1844 (p21), Tchaikovsky met Berlioz in January 1868 (p157); David Brown notes that the orginal idea for a symphony on Manfred was proposed by Stasov to Balakirev, who "feeling it was not congenial to him, proposed it to the ailing Berlioz in 1868" - he goes on to show the (posthumous) influence of Berlioz on Tchaikovsky's Manfred symphony (p203). This is all by the by, and it doesn't really answer my question of who Berlioz met in Moscow shortly before his death.Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 19:38, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if these are a bit picky and awkward. This must have been quite difficult because B was so independent of teachers, contemporaries. I will read it all again. I know I will have some comments about the later sections. I can only assume that the two double-barrelled gents went to a very poorly-stocked record shop. (If this source is kept I think word order should SW, E and ST, D. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 21:49, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree about the word order of second authors' names. The one I have used is the most usual, to the best of my knowledge. I find The Record Guide an invaluable insight into the classical music scene of the mid-20th-century, and its reputation was considerable. I'll toddle down to the British Library after breakfast and inspect the contemporary American record guide that they have on their shelves, to see if ES-W and DS-T missed any available recordings. (A lot of pre-war issues were no longer available in the 1950s, which was a transitional period so far as the gramophone was concerned.) Thank you very much for these detailed and helpful suggestions, and if any more occur to you I shall be v. pleased. Tim riley talk 07:54, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Later: I've checked the contemporaneous American and international catalogues, and they are much of a muchness. I've added a note accordingly. Tim riley talk 11:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - you have been more indulgent with my comments than I expected. But to follow-up on the Record Guide, I have done a little Own Research via the Philip Sturat discogrphies and otehr reliable places and found that between 1946 and 1955, the Symphonie fantastique Op.14 had studio recordings from the Concertgebouw Orchestra, van Beinum (Decca 1946), Orchestre national de la Radiodiffusion française and Munch (French Columbia 1949), Philadelphia Orchestra, Ormandy (Columbia 1950), San francisco SO, Monteux (RCA 1950), Concertgebouw Orchestra, van Beinum again (Decca 1951), London SO, Hermann Scherchen (Westminster 1953), Boston SO, Munch (RCA, 1954), Philharmonia, von Karajan (Columbia 1954), Berliner Philharmonic, Markevitch ‎(Deutsche Grammophon , 1954), Orchestre national de la Radiodiffusion française, Cluytens (Columbia 1955). I didn't look for Russia or Eastern European... Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think the current text of the article is wholly in step with your researches. I've trimmed the first bit of the recordings section, leaving it that only seven major works were on disc in the mid 1950s, which Schwann, WERM and the Record Guide collectively confirm. Tim riley talk 20:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt

[edit]
Just to start,
  • "Berlioz was destined to follow his father into medicine," I would say "expected" rather than "destined".
  • "She inspired his first major success, the Symphonie fantastique, in which an idealised depiction of her recurs throughout." I think Bernard would point out here that the first time it is played, it is not a recurrence.
  • "Trying to master harmony, he read Rameau's Traité de l'harmonie, which proved incomprehensible to a novice, but Charles-Simon Catel's simpler treatise on harmony made the subject clearer to him.[16] " given the number of mentions of harmony, especially if we count the French, I might change the "treatise on harmony" to "treatise on the subject". --Wehwalt (talk) 11:00, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A hat trick! All three, excellent, points attended to. Tim riley talk 15:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Out for naught, that is. A few more.
  • "In addition to finding the July Revolution going on all around him, he wrote the Symphonie fantastique, became engaged to be married, and finally won the Prix de Rome.[38] He was detached from political matters and was not a supporter of either side in the 1830 revolution in Paris, " at least some and possibly all of the words that follow "side" seem to be unneeded due to recent mention, unless you think the reader as indifferent to the revolution as was Berlioz.
  • "Among the musicians present were Liszt, Frédéric Chopin, and Niccolò Paganini; writers included Alexandre Dumas, Théophile Gautier, Heinrich Heine, Victor Hugo and George Sand.[52]" is the comma proper after Chopin?
  • I was surprised to learn that after all the years of obsession, Berlioz and Smithson had not even met. That is not something made clear by "pursued her, without success, for several years". If the admiration was from afar (Had they no stage doors in those days? Had they no flowers?), that should be clarified.
  • "Berlioz said that the failure of the piece meant that the doors of the Opéra were closed to him for the rest of his career.[66]" no great harm if you clued the reader in as to whether this was so, or not.
  • Possibly you could say that for the most part, the doors remained closed, and then in the 1840s section call the Weber commission his last for the Opéra.
Done through 1830s.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:11, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1851 he was at the Great Exhibition in London, as a member of an international committee judging musical instruments." The comma seems unneeded.
  • "In June 1862 Berlioz's wife, Marie, died suddenly aged 48." Similar complaint re commas.
  • I'll defend the first two commas contra mundum: without them Berlioz is an implied bigamist or polygamist. It's the familiar restrictive -v- non-restrictive construction: "pilots who are reckless do not live long" and "pilots, who are reckless, do not live long" – the first a truism, the second a gratuitous slur. The third comma has now been retired. Tim riley talk 08:08, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the 20th century critical opinion even among those well-disposed to Berlioz, varied about the work." Ditto.
  • Yes, better. 08:08, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • My attention is drawn, and then some, to the purple prose in the quote box in "Changing reputation". Must so dramatic a shade be used?
  • Regarding Berlioz becoming popular by the way of LP sales, was there radio play that impelled people to buy the LPs? People don't seem as likely to buy LPs "on spec" as it were, if they have not heard the composer, I would think.
  • I imagine the classical music stations played the new LPs as they came out, thereby spreading the word, but I have no source to confirm it. Barzun and Cairns both single out the LP - for good international reasons, I imagine. The BBC recorded and broadcast a complete Trojans under Beecham in the 1940s, but I don't suppose the musical public of the Americas, the Commonwealth or continental Europe heard it. Tim riley talk 08:08, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "By the 1950s the critical climate was changing, but nevertheless in 1954 the fifth edition of Grove carried this verdict from Léon Vallas:" perhaps "though" for "but nevertheless"
All seems very well done. I look forward to the FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:14, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for these points. Incidentally, my "All Berlioz's major works" (with no "of") was intentional. Fowler is rather sniffy about "all of", evidently a 19th-century coinage, undesirable except with pronouns (all of us, all of whom etc). Fowler adds that the usage has made headway in the US since the 1880s, but in Britain "all the ministers" and "in all the book" are still regarded as preferable. Still, I have no vigorous objection to the extra "of", and am happy to leave it in place in the interests of Anglo-American amity. But I digress. I am most grateful for your comments, and will make sure to ping you when I get to FAC. Tim riley talk 08:08, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opera descriptions in Lead

[edit]

Why so much about opera in the Lead section, where you name all three operas twice (1st and last paragraphs) and also go into the details about why each was unsuccessful? Since he was not particularly famous as an opera composer, I would expect that each opera be named only once in the intro and that more detailed information about each opera would appear only in the body of the article below, rather than the Lead. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:03, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As usual with HB he refuses to fit into any categories, and he was no Rossini or Verdi when it came to popular operas, but it seems to me that the three operas - one of which is now widely regarded as one of the highest peaks of the operatic repertoire - need to be given a quick description in the lead. Tim riley talk 19:19, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Lead fails to state which of his operas is regarded as one of the peaks of the operatic repertoire. It still seems to me that to state the names of all three operas *twice* in the Lead does not comply with the spirit of WP:LEAD. The Lead needs to give an overview of Berlioz's entire life and career, and should briefly preview all of the most important items. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:01, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Let's see if any other reviewers express a view on this point. Tim riley talk 06:13, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comments by Genericusername57 (talk) 07:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

[edit]

Hi, I enjoyed reading this article. I can't comment on the subject matter, but with regard to the prose I have a number of very minor suggestions and quibbles. (Please feel free to disregard).

  • lead: 4th paragraph:
  • ...conducting, in which he made an international reputation. I suggest 'gained' or 'earned'.
  • ...highly regarded in Germany, Britain and Russia as both a composer and a conductor. Did the regard stem from the fact that he wore both hats, or were his composing and conducting two independent reasons for regard? If the latter, I suggest both as a composer and as a conductor.
  • Life and career: 1821-1824: Medical student: 2nd paragraph:
  • He went to other works at the Opéra and the Opéra-Comique and three weeks after his arrival he saw Gluck's Iphigénie en Tauride, which thrilled him. The 'and' seems to me to be tacking two ideas together that would be better off separated. Is it known where Berlioz saw the Gluck work?
  • 3rd paragraph:
  • ...other operas written in the French style by foreign composers... This is a bit ambiguous: I'm taking it to mean that, of Méhul, Boieldieu, Spontini, and Gluck, everyone composed in the French style, but only Spontini was a foreigner. If that's not the case, consider editing to clarify.

1824-1830: Conservatoire student: 2nd paragraph:

  • and [Berlioz] began a lifelong passion for Shakespeare. I don't think this is standard usage: passions begin, people don't begin them. The 'conceived a passion' of the following line seems more idiomatic. Edit: Would you consider replacing the first instance of 'passion for' with 'admiration of'? Genericusername57 (talk) 10:12, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3rd paragraph:
  • Berlioz's first concert of his music was given in May 1828,... Why the double possessive (the concert both of Berlioz and of his music)?
  • 4th paragraph:
  • In 1828, to enable him to read Shakespeare in the original, Berlioz... Should that be 'himself'? I suggest simply 'in order to'.
  • At around the same time he encountered two more creative inspirations in addition to Shakespeare: he heard... The 'more...in addition' wording is clunky: I suggest ...he encountered two additional creative inspirations: he heard...

1830-1832: Prix de Rome: 4th paragraph:

  • Italy was nonetheless an important influence on his development. I suggest instead 'had an influence'.

1832-1840: Paris: 1st paragraph: the ordering here seems odd to me. Did Berlioz and Smithson meet at the concert?

  • 7th paragraph: This time Paganini was present; I suggest that you add 'in the audience'.
  • Note 13: One currency comparison site shows an estimated modern equivalent of the sum as about €170,000. This seems clunky to me. Are you reluctant to say that the site itself estimates? How about According to one currency comparison site, an estimated modern equivalent of the sum is about €170,000.?

1840s: Struggling composer: paragraphs 3-6: This section struck me as overly reliant on semicolons and colons for flow.

1850s: International success: 1st paragraph:

  • "sacred trilogy": Why the quotation marks? Did Berlioz call it that? Does Rushton?
  • Yes (though in French, of course).

1860-1869: Final years: 4th paragraph:

  • After the death of his second wife, Berlioz had two romantic interludes. The word 'interludes' seems out of place to me, but I am not sure what to suggest in its place: neither 'episodes' nor 'entanglements' seems adequate.

That's all I can do for now—I'll try to comment on the other sections later this week.

  • General remark: I'm not at all a purist about comma placement, but I noticed that this article had many instances of commas before 'and' in simple two-item lists: e.g., Harriet's health deteriorated, and she took to drinking heavily.; His feelings were reciprocated, and the couple planned to be married. If you think they contribute to the rhythm or the sense, I think it would be fine to leave them in.

Cheers, Genericusername57 (talk) 07:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Some most helpful suggestions there, and I've acted on those with which I concur (the majority). Tim riley talk 20:04, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One more quick comment:

  • The assertion at the end of the lead, including his Treatise on Instrumentation (1844), which was influential throughout the 19th century and into the 20th, isn't, so far as I can tell, bolstered or elaborated upon in this article or in the spin-off 'Berlioz as critic' one. Would it be worthwhile to add something more about how his music criticism/theories, as distinct from his music, had an effect on later composers/were evaluated by scholars?

Cheers, Genericusername57 (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A few more comments on the Works section:

  • He explained his practice in an 1837 article: accenting weak beats at the expense of the strong, alternating triple and duple groups of notes and the unexpected use of rhythmic themes independent of the main melody. To me it seems odd that the list goes gerund-gerund-verbal noun. I suppose the difficulty is with 'unexpectedly using'. I'm not sure of a solution: perhaps something like 'weak beats accented at the expense of the strong, triple groups of notes alternating with duple, and the unexpected use of rhythmic themes independent of the main melody.'? I'd prefer to preserve the gerunds if possible, though, to keep a sense of Berlioz as doer. Edit: would you have any objection to 'using unexpected rhythmic themes'? Genericusername57 (talk) 02:16, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Others, including Macdonald, have questioned Berlioz's fondness for divided cellos and basses in dense, low chords, although he emphasises that such contentious points are rare compared with "the felicities and masterstrokes" abounding in the scores. The grammar doesn't make it immediately clear that the 'he' is Macdonald.
  • Among the characteristic touches in Berlioz's orchestration singled out by Macdonald are the wind "chattering on repeated notes" for brilliance, or being used to add "sombre colour" to Romeo's arrival at the Capulets' vault, or the "Choeur d'ombres" in Lélio. Pardon my total ignorance of music and French: does that second 'or' pick up from 'being used to add "sombre colour" to' or 'singled out by Macdonald are'? If the former, I suggest you remove the comma before it, or consider changing it to 'and'; if the latter, that you rework the sentence as a whole.
  • General remark: I was not sure whether some of the punctuation for the quoted material in this section belonged within the quotation marks.

Symphonies:

  • Schumann wrote of the work that despite its apparent formlessness, "there is an inherent symmetrical order... I think that you need a comma between 'that' and 'despite', paired with the one after 'formlessness'.
  • In the 20th century critical opinion, even among those well-disposed to Berlioz, varied about the work. I agree that it was correct to add a comma. I suggest the sentence would be further improved by reordering: '...critical opinion varied about the work, even among those...'
  • The "Dramatic Symphony" with chorus, Roméo et Juliette (1839) is still further from the traditional symphonic model. I think you're missing a comma here as well to offset the appositive, between '(1839)' and 'is'.
  • To accusations of lack of unity in this and other Berlioz works Emmanuel Chabrier replied in a single emphatic word. I suggest that you say explicitly whether that word was an affirmation or a negation.
  • the first movement is in sonata form, although there are only two other movements, and Berlioz did not adhere to the traditional relationship between the various keys of the piece. Should that be 'but'?

Operas:

  • Berlioz's three completed operas contrast strongly with each other. I'm a stickler for 'one another'.
  • You are up against Fowler in that case: "this differentation is neither of present utility nor based on historical usage", but like split infinitives and double pluperfects it's a harmless enough superstition. I have a similar one of my own: "first ... secondly", and I am happy to indulge the "each other/one another" one here. Tim riley talk 07:53, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The action focuses on the sparring between the two leading characters, but contains gentler music, notably what Cairns... Are you sure you mean to say that the action contains music? You might also consider changing 'but' to 'but also'.

Choral:

  • Dating from the Revolution, there was a tradition of open-air performance in France, necessitating larger ensembles than ... I suggest In France, there was a tradition of open-air performance dating from....
  • the Dies irae is one such I suggest that you supply 'moment'.
  • What Macdonald calls Berlioz's monumental manner is more prominent in the Te Deum, composed in 1849 and first heard in 1855, when it was included in the large-scale events given in connection with the Exposition Universelle. Did it constitute a large-scale event, or was it merely included within one? If the former, I suggest that you either trim to 'first heard in 1855, when it was given...' and rely on the following sentence to give an idea of its scale, or else say 'numbered among the large-scale...'

Melodies:

  • described by the Berlioz scholar Tom S. Wotton, as like "a miniature symphonic poem". I think that comma should be removed.

Cheers, Genericusername57 (talk) 19:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a final batch of minor comments: Reputation and Berlioz scholarship: Writers:

  • In the early 1950s the best-known Berlioz scholar was Jacques Barzun, a protégé of Wotton, and, like him, strongly hostile to many of Boschot's conclusions. The article doesn't otherwise detail Boschot's conclusions.
  • more recently he has been credited by the critic Nicholas Temperley with a substantial share of the credit for improving the climate of musical opinion towards Berlioz. Perhaps '... Temperley has granted him a substantial share...'?
  • Macdonald was appointed in 1967 as the inaugural general editor of the New Berlioz Edition, and is one of the editors of Berlioz's Correspondance générale, and author of a 1978 study of Berlioz's orchestral music, and of the Grove article on the composer. This sentence seems to run away with itself. I suggest perhaps one sentence for his editing work, another for his authoring?

Changing reputation:

  • widely-accepted views: Personally, I don't hyphenate between adverbs ending in -ly and the adjectives or participles they modify. Hyphenating compound modifiers is useful to prevent ambiguity (warm-red wine->colour vs. warm red wine->temperature, e.g), but I don't expect that anyone would misinterpret this as 'views which are both widely and accepted'.
  • In 1950 Barzun made the point that_although Berlioz was praised by his artistic peers_including Schumann, Wagner, Franck and Mussorgsky, the public had heard little of his music until recordings became widely available. I think that one of the underlined slots needs a comma, to pair with that after Mussorgsky. (Or else that comma should be removed.)
  • It was at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden; the work was sung in English with some minor cuts, but its importance was internationally recognised, and led to the world premiere staging of the work uncut and in French, at Covent Garden in 1969, marking the centenary of the composer's death. I'm not sure whether you intended 'its importance' to be the implied subject of 'led'.
  • What Cairns calls "the mere repetition of cliché" about Berlioz, which persisted well into the second half of the 20th century_has become rare. Missing comma between century and has.
  • but he was writing in advance of Davis's "Berlioz Odyssey" I suggest that you reword this part: is the 'but he was writing' contained within the paraphrase of Northcott? If so, 'wrote that...he was writing' is a bit tortuous.

Recordings:

  • The discography of the British Hector Berlioz website lists 96 recordings, from Gabriel Pierné and the Concerts Colonne in 1928 to those conducted by This list changes in mid stream from '<person> and <person>' to 'that of <person> and that of <person>'.

Cheers, Genericusername57 (talk) 05:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am immensely grateful for the trouble you have taken in going so meticulously through the text. Thank you so much! I shall enjoy working my way through your final two batches of comments over the next day or two. If I can ever return the service at PR or other review, please don't hesitate to ping me and call in the debt. Tim riley talk 13:18, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've now worked through these, and acted on most of them. I've added one comment, above, in the Operas section. That apart, I can only repeat my thanks for such a scrupulous and comprehensive review of the text. Tim riley talk 07:53, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from KJP1

[edit]

As ever with your composers, I'm quite "unhampered by any excess of technical knowledge". And it's beautifully written. But a few observations from a musical idiot, for your consideration.

Lead
  • "as both a composer and a conductor. To supplement his modest earnings as a composer and conductor" - to avoid repetition, could you safely drop the second c&c?
1803–1821: Early years
  • "credited as the first European to introduce and describe the practice of acupuncture" - what's he introducing it to - Europe? Use/utilise/undertake/experiment with?
  • "it "saved me from the tyranny of keyboard habits, so dangerous to thought, and from the lure of conventional harmonies."" - does the full stop belong outside the quote? Also in the very last sentences of the Operas and Changing reputation sections.
1830–1832: Prix de Rome
  • "attracted disapproval from the judges because it "betrayed dangerous tendencies"" - I'm assuming, given his non-political stance described above, that these were dangerous musical tendencies, rather than, for example, radical (political) tendencies? Can the source make its meaning any clearer?
  • While we're on Grove, I see that calls him (Louis-)Hector as you do in the opening of the lead. But he's known as Hector, as per the article title. Do we know why he never used the Louis? Ah - have now got to Note 1, although this just records, rather than explains, it. Perhaps it isn't known?
1832–1840: Paris
  • "which seriously limited both her professional and her social life" - "lives"? Sorry - shouldn't comment on the grammar - I'm always wrong.
  • "was so well received that Berlioz and his huge forces gave two further performances in rapid succession" - I'm assuming these "forces" are the "voices, chorus and orchestra" but, as a non-musician, it left me scratching my head. Can it be clarified at this first encounter? One gets a clearer idea as to meaning in the later Choral section, and then in Note 14.
Works
  • "In his works, as in his life, Berlioz was a lone wolf" - I appreciate you're quoting Rushton, but I was puzzled by his meaning. Two wives, and other romantic interludes, deep attachment to his son...what's lupine about that?
Melodies
  • Despite that, Warrack considers up to a dozen songs from the 33 Mélodies well worth exploring. "Among them are some masterpieces". Is the final quote intended as a standalone sentence? If it is, should the full stop sit inside the quotes?
Prose
  • "they undoubtedly took up time that would have preferred to spend writing music" - "they undoubtedly took up time that he would have preferred to spend writing music"?
Changing reputation

That's it from me. Ignore at will. A near-perfect piece. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 09:25, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for these. All attended to, except where noted above. Tim riley talk 20:03, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SC

[edit]

Marker down for comments to come. - SchroCat (talk) 21:19, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done to the end of "Conservatoire student" with but one comment:
    • I was at first perplexed by the semi colon followed by and with "at the Conservatoire;[n 7] and he read" - then I realised it was a two piece list. Still, it does look a little odd. Is there any way to make it a tad more elegant?
More to come. As I know nothing about Berlioz, this review is based on prose only. - SchroCat (talk) 14:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dmass

[edit]

Another great article, Tim, which reads beautifully and is very informative. Although Benvenuto Cellini was the first opera I ever listened to (borrowed randomly from the library; still a great favourite), I bring no great knowledge of the subject, so my comments will be of the nit-picky kind only. Hope some are useful.

Lead

  • Last para: should the colon before ‘some of which has been preserved in book form’ be a comma?

Early years

  • Second para, first sentence: perhaps just ‘respected’ to avoid two compound adjs in the same sentence?

Medical student

  • First para: maybe just ‘passed’ rather than ‘successfully sat’?
  • Second para first sentence is a bit clogged. Is this an improvement: ‘The horrors of the medical college were mitigated thanks to a comfortable allowance from his father, which enabled him to take full advantage of the cultural, and particularly musical, life of Paris.’ Also, can an allowance be comfortable (or is a person comfortable on an allowance)? I'd suggest ‘generous’ but that may not be accurate. Modest? Ample?
  • Third para: ‘needed augmenting with…’ is a bit clunky. Perhaps ‘needed to be augmented by…’? Or even: ‘By the end of 1822 he realised he would need formal tuition if he was to make progress in learning composition’.

Conservatoire Student

  • Second para: should it be capitalised as ‘La Mort d'Orphée’ – seems to be the convention you’ve used elsewhere?
    • An innocent Englishman can become seriously unhinged trying to work out the French practice in capitalising titles, but I have attempted to follow what seems to be the most prevalent form, in which after the opening capital all the words in a title except for proper nouns are in lower case. The main Berlioz sources are a fat lot of use on this point: Rushton would have us give "troyens" a lower case t, Holoman capitalises "Damnation" but not "fantastique", Macdonald capitalises neither, Barzun capitalises both, and Cairns gives all the titles in English. I have, by the way, followed him so far as Harold in Italy is concerned. In fifty years of knowing the piece I have never heard anyone say "Arrold on Italee" – Tim riley talk 08:49, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps ‘Théâtre de l'Odéon’ – sounds less like a cinema?
  • You’ve got two ‘passion’s in your bit about Shakespeare/Harriet. Could substitute ‘lifelong fascination with the works of Shakespeare’ (or ‘fell in love with Harriet’).
    • The two "passion"s are deliberate. Sometimes I think repetition makes a point more clearly than elegant variation. There are two "truncated"s on the trot later, for the same reason. – Tim riley talk 08:49, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fourth para: Gérard needs his accent.
  • I would say ‘daunting’ or ‘formidable’ – but not both.
  • I'd prefer ‘reworked and expanded much later’.

More later. As always, feel free to disregard. Thoroughly enjoying it! Dmass (talk) 17:59, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for these. All acted on except for the two mentioned above. I look forward to further comments when you have leisure and inclination. – Tim riley talk 08:49, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing review

[edit]

Thank you to all who have contributed to this review, which has been thorough and helpful to a degree I have rarely encountered. I am enormously grateful. I think the article is now ready for FAC, to which I shall now take it, and hope to see your thoughts there. Tim riley talk 20:48, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Hector_Berlioz/archive1&oldid=866677591"