This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!
Christoph Willibald Gluck is within the scope of the Composers WikiProject, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!
I would characterize Orfeo ed Euridice as Gluck's only well-known work. Given that, I question whether he should be portrayed as "one of the most important opera composers of the classical era", unless there's something about his operas that influenced later composers. Does anyone disagree? -- Ortonmc 06:32, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I agree that Orfeo is the only Gluck opera that's performed anymore, but I think most people who know about opera would also know about Iphengenia, and would recognize at least the titles of Alceste and Armide. I think he's fairly characterized as influential, despite not having many well-known operas, as he was one of the forerunners of the movement to have the music have at least SOME dramatic function: i.e. he was a reformer of musical excess which detracted from narrative flow. -- Someone else 06:49, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I certainly think he was influential, very influential, and very important. It's true that his operas aren't performed very often, but then very few operas from the Classical era (Classical with a captial C, 1750-1800) are performed at all - there's only really Mozart's stuff that gets out with any regularity (a shame for many reasons, but don't get me started on that). --Camembert
Is the "Willibald" an important part of his name? Wouldn't Christoph Gluck (with an umlaut) be a more common article title? RickK 06:35, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I agree, except I don't think he gets an umlaut. And he needs a redirect from Gluck as well, since that's mostly the way he's referred to. I will do that. -- Someone else 06:49, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Agreed; I've never heard "Willibald" cited before now. Poking around the web, I found several variations of his name, including "von Gluck" and "Gluck, Ritter von" (which sounds like some sort of knighthood). But none of them had an umlaut. -- Ortonmc 06:59, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Yes, Ritter is a knighthood, so it wouldn't be part of his Wikipedia article title in any case. He probably started life as Gluck and got the 'von' when he became a Ritter, though I don't know who knighted him or when. These days, he's mostly just "Gluck" ;) -- Someone else 07:04, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I've reinserted his Willibald. I don't think I've ever heard his name given without it - even Google agrees with me ("Christoph Gluck" = 639 hits; "Christoph Willibald Gluck" = 25,800 hits!). --Camembert
Well, no matter, he now has more than enough redirects to be found no matter WHAT! <G> -- Someone else 00:27, 15 Sep 2003 (UTC)
"The marriage brought Gluck financial security"
This is a mistaken claim based on a flawed article by Gerhard Croll. The wealth of Gluck's bride was rather modest.--188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
In view of the strong consensus against using popular music infoboxes for major composers I am moving the Gluck infobox here (complete with flags, 'occupation' pianist etc.) for comments. I am leaving the picture in place. Thank you. --Kleinzach 01:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
LOL. That's a particularly bad one! Let's get rid of it permanently. --Folantin 08:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I've reviewed this article as part of the Composers project review of its B-class articles. This is a decent bio; its works list is incomplete, and (partly per above discussion) the importance of his reforms seems to me to be a little understated. My full review is on the comments page; questions and comments should be left here or on my talk page. Magic♪piano 22:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
"Gluck was born the first of six surviving children"
Since it is still unknown when and where Gluck's parents got married, this claim is pure speculation.--Suessmayr (talk) 17:09, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps this is based on the division of Gluck's father's estate among his surviving children (Gluck's father died in 1743), then this information would not seem to depend on exactly when the parents were married. If I get a chance, I'll try to check up on it. --Robert.Allen (talk) 07:32, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
"In 1923, Gluck's remains were transferred to a tomb in the Vienna Zentralfriedhof."
This is false. Gluck's remains were disinterred in 1890.--Suessmayr (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
You need to provide a source for the 1890 date. In the meantime, I see no date is given by Brown & Rushton, so I am revising the article without a specific date. --Robert.Allen (talk) 08:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)