Featured articleFrédéric Chopin is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 17, 2014.
Did You KnowOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 5, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
February 23, 2014Good article nomineeListed
July 17, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
August 17, 2014Featured article candidatePromoted
July 10, 2021Featured article reviewKept
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 1, 2014.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Frédéric Chopin (pictured) left his homeland of Poland in 1831 and never returned?
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 1, 2010, and February 22, 2017.
Current status: Featured article


Should the article's name be changed to Fryderyk Chopin? edit

Frédéric is the French spelling of Frederick. Since Chopin is referred to as solely Polish in the article instead of being Franco-Polish, I think it is more appropriate to rename the article to Fryderyk Chopin. Lebaophuoc2005 (talk) 19:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

But as he lived the most productive part of his life in France and is most well-known by the French version of his name, the article title should stay as it is. - kosboot (talk) 19:45, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
So why not say that he is “French-Polish” and not just “Polish”? Since his father was French, it makes perfect sense (especially since the Napoleonic Code at Chopin's birth stipulated that a child born to a French parent was French as well). I don't understand why some people are blocking this modification which should have been made a long time ago. 2A02:8428:A14:6D01:B683:CDCF:2BF4:92D4 (talk) 03:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
It's simple - Chopin was born and raised in Poland and felt a Pole, his native language was polish. Writing "French-Polish" would be an abuse. 176.100.195.245 (talk) 09:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
But this is an english wikipedia. So let's be consistent. Either use an english name Frederick, or use his baptism / documented (as you prefer) name Fryderyk. 176.100.195.245 (talk) 08:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
The English language field of Chopin study doesn't currently have a standard for which spelling to use, so some scholars use the Polish, some use the French, and some use neither. For example, 2 modern partial biographies used the French spelling (Annik LaFarge's Chasing Chopin (2020), and Paul Kildea's Chopin's Piano (2018). Jeffrey Kallberg is a major name in the field, and he has been calling him just "Chopin" since the 1980s. The trend seems to be leaning toward using the Polish spelling, however. The most influential modern biography is Alan Walker's Fryderyk Chopin: A Life and Times (2018), the most recent English translation of Chopin's correspondence is David Frick's Chopin's Polish Letters (2016), and a current major English-language collection of essays is the 2017 Chopin and His World edited by Jonathan D. Bellman and Halina Goldberg -- all of which call him Fryderyk. None use the English, and I don't think Wikipedia will change the page based solely on trends in the field toward a Polish spelling. 12angrybees (talk) 00:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Very obvious case of WP:COMMONNAME here. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 06:26, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
So why Frédéric and not Frederic, since it's English language wiki? 45.93.75.81 (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Actually, most people know him as Frederic. Also Fryderyk doesn’t sound familiar. 2600:8802:3A0B:3000:B128:B046:A97C:CE74 (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Translation of Chopin -> Woyciechowski letter very poor. edit

The letter quoted from Chopin to Tytus Woyciechowski is translated poorly. The scholar (Alan Walker) who translated it very clearly transposed his personal view about the implication of the letter onto the literal text itself, a practice he has been extensively criticised for in many languages. There are glaring errors in the text that become evident when contrasted to the original polish. For example:

In the second sentence, the word "całuj" is rendered as embrace. "całuj" is a polish word meaning "kiss". It is never translated as embrace. The phrase used in the letter (see last paragraph, 4th last line) is "nie całuj mnie", meaning "don't kiss me". Here is a webpage with nine examples of that exact phrase, translated from polish to english, with 'embrace' appearing 0/9 times. Wiktionary itself correctly lists this word as second-person singular imperative of całować, which is then listed as a verb meaning "to kiss." The point is surely made.

This folly is repeated with the phrase "nie pocałowałbyś," (third last line) which translates from polish into english as "you wouldn't kiss". Again, it is rendered as embrace. Again, any casual Wikipedian without the desire to look up original polish is led astray.

Once more this incorrect translation rears its head. Chopin, rather poetically says "Dziś Ci się śnić będzie, że mnie całujesz", meaning, "today you will dream that you are kissing me." 'całujesz' is just a conjugation of 'całuj', which has been tackled. This basic error has really become inexcusable at this point, and quite apart from anything, it has deadened all of the poetry originally present in the text.

I think it's pretty clear what has happened here. Alan Walker respects Chopin greatly, and believes that when he wrote these letters he must have been (in Alan's own words) "twisted in the mind" and in a state of "psychological confusion". Thus, he has toned down some of the language, and in doing so, he has made basic errors of fact which I have illustrated. Fine - but there are other translations, and it is ridiculous not to use them over one that is, in a literal sense, misinformation, taken from a source which repeatedly questions Chopin's mental state in a spurious manner. Please let's discuss alternatives. Tqger (talk) 14:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia editors can't use their own translations because that is original research (see WP:NOR). If you can find better published translations, list them here. - kosboot (talk) 00:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm aware of that. Page 102 of this book, Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011, provides an accurate (if clunky) translation, which is a step up. It was compiled/translated in 1931 by Ethel Voynich, an interesting character in herself. Tqger (talk) 00:58, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
thanks for doing this! Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Tqger! Frick‘s translation is very precise (in this passage):

I will go and wash. Don‘t kiss me now, because I haven‘t yet washed. You? Even if I were to rub myself with Byzantine oils, you still wouldn‘t kiss me, unless I compelled you to do so with magnetism. There is some sort of force in nature. Today you will dream that you‘re kissing me. I have to pay you back for the nasty dream you brought me last night.

— Frédéric Chopin to Tytus Woyciechowski (4.9.1830)[1][2]
And the picture of Woyciechowski is missing!
 
Tytus Woyciechowski
Chip-chip-2020 (talk) 23:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ Chopin, Frédéric, 1810-1849,. Chopin's Polish letters. Frick, David A., Narodowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina. Warsaw. pp. 174–175. ISBN 978-83-64823-19-0. OCLC 956448514.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  2. ^ https://chopin.nifc.pl/en/chopin/list/675_to-tytus-woyciechowski-in-poturzyn

Birth Date edit

The church claims that he was born on February 22nd while his family claims that he was born on March 1st, why cant this be mentioned in the Article or in the Infobox? @Antandrus Olek Novy (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Previous consensus was to use the 1 March date in the lede, as that's what's in most of the reliable sources we looked at then (like the current New Grove article). I think it's fine as is, since it's well-explained in the detailed bio, but if consensus changes I'm fine with that too. Anyone else want to comment? Some of the other wikis (e.g. Polish and German) include both dates in the lede; others (e.g. French) use only 1 March. Antandrus (talk) 17:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Can a note at least be added? Olek Novy (talk) 18:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
A note like "1 Mar[n 4]" where the note explains the discrepancy between the parish register and the other date? That's fine with me. See if anyone else wants to weigh in. Antandrus (talk) 18:12, 22 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
There are already a lot of notes in the lead; perhaps this information would be better suited for the body. Do we even know if many RS use the date? Aza24 (talk) 06:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chopin's surname in Polish. edit

Described in the article is Chopin's Polish name - Fryderyk Franciszek Chopin. His surname is less commonly but also officially named "Szopen", as said in https://guides.library.illinois.edu/c.php?g=347588&p=2344300#Chopin&Co.. "Szopen", as Chopin's Polish surname, is also correct but less common. But it is not mentioned in the article. I think it should be added. PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, sorry, it is mentioned in note 3. Archive this if you want. PolskiSlaskiegokowa! (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply