Talk:F. C. Burnand/Archive 1

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Archive 1

Jealousy of WSG

The text reads: "Burnand used his position as the editor of Punch to publish antagonistic reviews of the works of Gilbert and refused to give the Savoy Operas reviews in the magazine." but the first and second halves of that sentence seem mutually exclusive. He either gave them bad reviews or no reviews - but not both. Tim riley (talk) 17:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I had the same thought, but on looking closer, it seems that the source is saying that he published antagonistic reviews of gilbert PLAYS, but he did not publish any reviews at all of the G&S operas. I would like to ask Stedman if that is what she meant, but she's dead and pretty smelly by now. Any suggestions on how to clarify it without making a bigger deal of it than it already is? -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Additions

I have expanded and partly rearranged the article. Comments and amendments cordially invited. In particular, have I put too much emphasis on Burnand's envy of Gilbert? One strives to be even-handed, but a fresh pair or two of eyes would be welcome. Tim riley talk 18:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Hidden questions

  • Target of parody of Black-eyed Susan: no idea. This was as it was when I started to interfere. Quite happy to see it trimmed.
    • Can you look into your sources to try to figure out whether he is parodying the Gay song or the later nautical melodrama? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Ah HAH! It is Jerrold, as I suspected. See this. Also, note that Burnand's 2nd wife appears in it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Who's Who says 800 nights, but now you ask me to look I see Who's Who in the Theatre says 400. Take your choice. Burnand may have been exaggerating in his very characteristic and rumbustious Who's Who entry. Tim riley talk 20:26, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Certainly 400 is more plausible. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Layout

The Gilbert quote is rather too short to need to be set out like that, and putting it into the text in regular quotes would help with your original concern that the bio is giving Gilbert too much prominence. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but it breaks up the slab of prose, and spares the reader's eye, surely? Tangentially, this quite famous quote reminds me to add an even more famous one by Burnand himself: to someone who said "Punch is not as good as it was", he replied, "It never was". Must get that in. Tim riley talk 20:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, I can only say that I do not prefer the series of four stubby little paragraphs that this creates. Just my opinion. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on F. C. Burnand. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)