Wikipedia

Talk:List of prominent operas/Archive 3

< Talk:List of prominent operas
(Redirected from Talk:List of important operas/Archive3)
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Kleinzach in topic Purge Round 2
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Research by GuillaumeTell and Rmhermen

Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

While I applaud GuillaumeTell and Rmhermen for their painstaking research (and Opera and Operabase are excellent sources of information), it really confirms what we knew already.

This article attempts to do two completely different things at the same time: list famous operas and the so-called standard repertory. While there are (obviously) famous operas, the existence of a single, agreed (and therefore) standard repertory is doubtful, except in the sense of a lowest common denominator.

For example, we could ask one contributor each in Berlin, Paris, London, Vienna, Milan, St Petersburg, New York and wherever else to write a list and then eliminate all titles that were not universally present. No doubt we could agree that Carmen was on the list, but perhaps an easier way forward would be to remove the introduction (about the standard operatic repertory) altogether? What do other people think? - Kleinzach 18:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be more useful to come up with a better definition, rather than removing all definition. Otherwise the list will become as long as the List of operas, and lose any meaning it might possibly have. Of course, I don't have a good definition to give, but I think GuillaumeTell and others are working towards a good solution. Mak (talk) 18:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately three more weeks have passed and no-one has come up with a better definition, let alone a solution. Where does that leave us? Continuing with the periodic business of taking a couple of names off and sticking a couple of new ones on? My suggestion is to make this a list of famous operas deleting the introduction (about the standard operatic repertory) but I'd be delighted to listen to any new ideas. Doctors GuillaumeTell and Rmhermen have diagnosed the illness. What is the cure? - Kleinzach 10:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
This page seems problematic. Fame and canonical status are inevitably relative to the country, and even the house (or manager), and it's not clear than extracting a lowest common denominator results in interesting or useful information. Also, they aren't binary (Aida vs. Peter Grimes). And there's no clear criterion for inclusion in this list ("n performances at major houses in the last m years", "more than n google hits", "listed in such-and-such opera book", etc.). I'm particularly uncomfortable with the practice of listing inclusion in opera articles (e.g., Eugene Onegin "It is part of the standard operatic repertoire.") for just those reasons: it doesn't respect differences across locations, and it suggests a false binary status. Much better would be a sentence or two in the "Performance History" section (Aida would have a very different sentence than Peter Grimes).
So I'm proposing (1) removing references to this article from opera articles, and (2) deleting this article. I feel more strongly about (1). Fireplace 12:25, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I support suggestion (1), removing references to this article from opera articles, as a first step. - Kleinzach 13:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Both suggestions 1 and 2 seem both reasonable and correct to me. To attempt to define standard operatic repertory is futile anyway, as it varies from opera house to opera house, let alone from country to country, but to do so on something like Wikipedia is futile lunacy. However, I would suggest that we preserve the list of historically significant operas, as to me that seems both useful and informative, and could be an interesting little spin - off from the main Opera article. Best to all, Moreschi 18:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Removing references to this article from opera articles

Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Three members support removing links to this page from opera articles. This could be accomplished by going through the list of links (located below the search box). Are any members opposed to this? - Kleinzach 21:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Three days have passed and no objections, so the dogs of deletion have been let loose. I've done maybe a third, and I'll have another go tomorrow. I've also deleted some entries from the list on the basis that the entries themselves for these operas explicitly stated that they were not part of standard rep. A total shambles. I also came across a couple of spoiler warnings, which I speedily deleted. Cheers, Moreschi 21:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Keep up the good work! My current (well, tomorrow's) activity involves frying one or two other fish and nailing (yet again) a canard or two. I'll help out if necessary when I'm done. --GuillaumeTell 00:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
All done (I think). I may have missed one or two, but I think that's the lot. If an opera was indisputably part of standard rep (Giulio Cesare, Idomeneo, most of the Verdis), then I left in the reference to standard rep but removed the wikilink. If it was borderline (and there were a few on this list that I'd never even heard of before) then I removed the sentence linking the entry to this list altogether. Congratulations to Fireplace: his new boxes containing vocal ranges and original casts look very good, and I came across quite a few of these as well. As a next step, I would support a vote for this articles's deletion, but preserving the list of historically significant operas. Moreschi 12:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I've just deleted another 25 (including Don Carlos, Carmen, Porgy and Bess, Cendrillon, Anna Bolena), plus the entire works of César Cui. An awful lot of them, especially the ones by Cui and Rimsky-Korsakov, said that the opera is NOT part of the standard repertory! I got these by clicking on the "What links here link" in the Toolbox, bottom left of the article. There are still over 50 links there, including at least two to (Russian) composers, but some of these are to user pages. One, by the way, is to an article-for-deletion entitled "Operas by original title and English title". It's now been deleted but seemed only to have two items in the list. Interestingly, just about none of the votes cast were signed by users whose names I recognise from around here. Anyway, these extra links want zapping, but I feel that I've done my bit. --GuillaumeTell 18:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh lord, what a mess. I missed that search tool: I went through the entries of all the operas included in this list. I reasoned that surely no one would be so thick as to say that their opera was in standard rep and then not bother adding an entry in this page. Evidently not. The extra links shall shortly be zapped. Best wishes and apologies to all. Moreschi 18:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The next step?

Latest comment: 17 years ago17 comments5 people in discussion

Now we have acted on Fireplace's excellent suggestion of removing the links to this page, what's next? I think the main ideas were:

1. Outright deletion of this page
2. Removing the 'Standard operatic repertory' intro (This list comprises the standard operatic repertory . . . . ), merging both the 'Standard operatic repertory' and 'Historically significant operas' into a single list of (innocuous?) famous operas.
3. Making it into a annotated list, with the selection justified solely by the annotation.

In general, I am not in favour of deleting exclusive lists such as this one, the List of major opera composers, or the List of important opera companies. They serve a different purpose to the big inclusive lists like The opera corpus or Opera houses. Kleinzach 09:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd favour an annotated list called List of Important Operas. --GuillaumeTell 09:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
My vote would be for outright deletion (as I said above) but preserving the list of historically important operas. To my mind, the other 2 suggestions will run into the same problems as the current version has. If we are going to preserve the list, however, I feel that it needs to be drastically purged, as currently it's way too long. Moreschi 13:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I support GuillaumeTell's suggestion, though I'm not convinced the name change is necessary - but it wouldn't do any harm. I agree with Moreschi about the need for a purge, though I'm not in favour of hiving off the 'Historically Significant' list. It's so limited. I don't think it can stand on its own. - Kleinzach 14:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
How, exactly, would an "annotated list" work? I don't quite understand the term. Moreschi 16:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
There would be two or three sentences explaining very briefly what the opera is and why it is significant. Kleinzach 17:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
O.K, I understand now, but what would the criteria be for "important" (Mr Tell) or "significant" (Herr Kleinzach)? Surely both of these are just as vague as "famous" (current)? Best to all, Moreschi 08:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
The brief annotation would itself be the justification (and therefore the criteria) for listing. This would be an improvement on the current list because anybody adding a work will have to explain why it is there. Of course there will still be disagreements but these should be reduced. (If this idea is accepted I volunteer to do the four Mozart operas!) - Kleinzach 08:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Alright, that seems reasonable to me. Rename as List of Important operas, and I volunteer to do the purge that is desperately needed. Moreschi 10:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

My thinking is that about one third should go, but this may be controversial. I suggest you provide a list of proposed items to purge here under a new heading Purge. Is that OK? - Kleinzach 11:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Now I come to properly think about it, however, perhaps a rename isn't such a great idea. I can think of quite a few very famous operas that might not be included as they were not "important" to opera's development and did not especially infuence other composers.Moreschi 11:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

We need a neutral adjective to indicate that it is a select list. Are there any other suggestions apart from famous and important? - Kleinzach 11:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Er, influential? It's still based on a POV but at least it's a little more clear what the basis is. Mak (talk) 14:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not wedded to important, but it does have the advantage of including important-because-pioneering, important-because-influential, important-because-popular, important-because-frequently-performed, important-because-you name-another-reason. My problem with other suggestions is that I really wouldn't want to confine the list to the historically significant (first TV opera? Oh, how interesting!) and I wouldn't want to lose operas like Il Trovatore or Les Huguenots or A Life for the Tsar or .... --GuillaumeTell 00:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree - after some thought and noting GuillaumeTell's argument - that 'important' is best. So that is two votes. Any other suggestions? - Kleinzach 08:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Any more comments? If not, may I change the name to List of important operas? - Kleinzach 12:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Go for it. Fireplace 13:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Criteria-based Vs annotated list

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've no strong opinions here... another possibility is a list with a concrete listing criteria. Examples would be: at least n performances in the last m years (operabase), at least n upcoming performances, or inclusion in 2-out-of-3 of Grove, Oxford, and Kobbes (or whatever). Fireplace 03:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I doubt whether a 'concrete listing criteria' would be practical. If based on recent performances it would have to be kept up to date. On the other hand, if someone wrote a new list of works performed in 2005 in major houses (perhaps defined by the important opera companies list) that would be interesting and worthwhile.
If the list was based on inclusion in books like Grove, Oxford etc. it would be huge. (Grove has about 1,800 works!). So all in all I still prefer the idea of a self-referential annotated list based on what we have now (but pruned). - Kleinzach 08:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Purge

Latest comment: 17 years ago53 comments5 people in discussion

Here is a list of items that I believe need to be purged. Being a Londoner, the list will have a Londoner's POV but will still, I believe, be fairly accurate. This list has become ludicrously gargantuan. I probably could have put more on my "little list", but decided to refrain. Feel free to throw brickbats. However, some of these should only be deleted if the definition does not change. Handel's Agrippina might be viewed as "important" as it was one of Handel's last works in Italy and probably the reason he was invited to London, but it certainly isn't "famous". If we are going to change to "important", we are certainly looking at a much longer list. This might not, on reflection , be such a good thing.

  • Bellini - I puritani
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Bellini - Norma
  • Berlioz - Les Troyens. May be Berlioz's best but still must go.
  • Keep. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. - As the most ridiculously massive opera ever, possibly exluding Wagner. Mak (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Bizet - Les pecheurs de perles. Oh yeah, wot's that , mate, the other one other than Carmen? Perhaps getting there but still no.
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Boito - Mefistofele
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Borodin - Prince Igor
  • Britten - Albert Herring
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Charpentier - Louise
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Cilea - Adriana Lecouvrer
  • Friedrich von Flowtow - Martha
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Handel - Agrippina. A great opera but a rarity. Probably only there because the ENO are doing it this season.
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Leoncavallo - Pagliacci
  • Mascagni - Cavelleria Rusticana. What? Who?
  • Massenet - Werther
  • Meyerbeer - L'Africaine
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Ponchielli - La gioconda
  • Thomas - Mignon
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Verdi - Ernani
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Carl Maria von Weber - Der Freischutz
  • Keep. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Pretty standard in music history/theory classes, good example of style. Mak (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Moreschi 08:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


These, to my mind, are absolutely required to go, providing our definition does not change. However, here is a further list of "maybes" for everyone to chew over.

  • Delibes - Lakme
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Donizetti - Maria Stuarda
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Humperdink - Hansel und Gretel
  • Keep. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. - Popular opera in US, good for kid's intro to opera. Mak (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Nicolai - The Merry Wives of Windsor
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 23:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Prokofiev - War and Peace
  • Offenbach - Les contes d'Hoffmann

And now perhaps a couple to add in:

  • Britten - The Turn of the Screw
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Handel - Orlando.
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Nah. Having written the article, I don't get the impression it's a very important or oft performed opera. It's a pastiche. Mak (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Handel - Rodelinda.
  • Delete. - Kleinzach 10:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep; the Met has put this on for two seasons in a row now and it's been very popular. Fireplace 14:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Best to all, Moreschi 09:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

My purge/don't purge votes are above - based on the assumption that we go with the wording List of important operas or similar. Maybe other people can add their votes under mine? - Kleinzach 10:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm happy with List of important operas as long as it remains watched and discussed, I think it can be useful. I only added my opinion to ones I care about, the others could stay or go as far as I'm concerned. Mak (talk) 17:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I have completed the first round of purges - I hope to everybody's satisfaction. - Kleinzach 23:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh. This all seems a bit sudden - is thirty-six hours enough time for people to comment? I was intending to add my twopence-worth.
Also, shouldn't the process have been done the other way round - i.e., instead of discussing which items to purge, discuss which items to keep, and provide a rationale for each? --GuillaumeTell 00:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Title change

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

As you can see I have now made the change to important operas as there was near-unanimous agreement on this. I have also removed the 'Standard repertory' introduction, which I think was implicit in the title change. I hope that is OK. If not please say so! (I have tried to fix the zillions of redirects etc. Please change any links that you may still find.) Thanks. - Kleinzach 18:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Are we going to annotate the list? Presumably. Having changed the name, annotation (and speedy annontation) is certainly needed. Moreschi 12:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Purge Round 2

Latest comment: 17 years ago48 comments4 people in discussion

I'd like to nominate another group for deletion:

Bellini: La sonnambula

  • Delete Moreschi 11:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I'd have left I Puritani in. --GuillaumeTell 16:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Britten: A Midsummer Night's Dream

  • Keep. Pretty popular in Britain. Moreschi 11:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Mak (talk) 16:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Annotation: the most recently-written opera with a foothold in the standard repertory --GuillaumeTell 16:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Donizetti: The Daughter of the Regiment

Gluck: Alceste

  • Delete Moreschi 11:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep The first Reform Opera, and thus Important. --GuillaumeTell 16:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Gluck: Iphigénie en Tauride

  • Delete Moreschi 11:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Gounod: Roméo et Juliette

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Handel: Alcina

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Handel: Ariodante

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Handel: Serse (Xerxes)

Mozart: Idomeneo

Mozart: La clemenza di Tito

Prokofiev: The Love for Three Oranges

Prokofiev: The Fiery Angel

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Puccini: Il tabarro

  • Delete Moreschi 11:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Puccini: Suor Angelica

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Puccini: Gianni Schicchi

Rimsky-Korsakov: The Golden Cockerel

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Rossini: L'Italiana in Algeri

  • Purged. - Kleinzach 19:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Verdi: Simon Boccanegra

Please register an aye or a nay! - Kleinzach 23:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_prominent_operas/Archive_3&oldid=1038763439"