Talk:Scott Joplin

Recordings

This list could be expanded massively by an hour or two in my vinyl collection. When The Sting , with incomplete snatches of Joplin's good stuff led to the Joplin Revival of the 70's, several good recordings were released.

One was a Biograph Release of Rolls Played on a Bechstein upright, with a committee to agree on tempos, as these tended to vary on the rolls as well as between instruments. When listening to rolls there is the barely-perceptible sound of the tempo rising as the pin rolled to the bottom. In my neighborhood pizza parlor there was a well-maintained upright player and many Joplin rolls, some recorded by Joplin himself. I found it interesting how often he played lovely "grace notes" that were NOT included in his scores, and which he often reminded artists NOT to play.

Nonesuch released two LPs of Joshua Rifkin playing the best arrow-straight, (non-stylized), recordings of Joplin's piano I ever heard. I saw Rifkin in concert in La Jolla California, and he was as good or better at interpreting Joplin live as anyone ever recorded.

The release that brought me to appreciate Joplin was Gunter Schuler, and the New England Conservatory Ragtime Ensemble recording of "The Red Back Book." These were orchestral arrangements by Joplin. KPBS in San Diego played, "Sugar Cane", and "The Easy Winners", and for the first time in my life I went directly to Tower Records and bought the LP. Schuler later released, "Palm Leaf Rag", an album of his own orchestral arrangements, (played by the NECRE), of Joplin Piano Music. User:W8IMP 0524, 05 January 2007 (UTC)

Scott vs Joplin in the first section

I changed mentions of "Scott" in the first paragraph after the lede to "Joplin" to keep it consistent with the rest of the article. Stepheng3 (talk) has requested that I revert the change - not that I wish to go against the opinions of editors who watch this page but I think that keeping a consistency throughout benefits the article and what existed before did jar. I can see merit in having "Scott" in the paragraph mentioning the parents and the rest of the Joplin family, but I thought it would be obvious who we were talking about given the context. I am more than willing to change back should others disagree with me on this. Major Bloodnok (talk) 22:15, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

New Lead

A suggested improvement to the Lead:

Scott Joplin (between July 1867 and January 1868 – April 1, 1917) was an American composer and pianist. He achieved fame for his unique ragtime compositions, and was dubbed the "King of Ragtime." During his brief career, Joplin wrote 44 original ragtime pieces, one ragtime ballet, and two operas. One of his first pieces, the Maple Leaf Rag, became ragtime's first and most influential hit, and has been recognised as the archetypal rag.

He was born into a musical African American family of laborers in eastern Texas, and developed his musical knowledge with the help of local teachers. He travelled around the Southern States of America as an itinerant musician, and went to Chicago just as Ragtime became a national craze after the World Fair of 1897.

His composition the Maple Leaf Rag brought him fame and a steady income for life with Joplin getting once cent per sale. During his lifetime Joplin did not reach this level of success again and frequently had financial problems, which contributed to the loss of his first Opera, A Guest of Honor. He continued to write Ragtime compositions and moved to New York in 1907. He attempted to go beyond the limitations of the musical form which made him famous, without much success. His second opera, Treemonisha, was not recieved well at the single semi-staged performance in 1911. He died of tertiary Syphilis in 1917.

Joplin's music was rediscovered and returned to popularity in the early 1970s with the release of a million-selling album of Joplin's rags recorded by Joshua Rifkin, followed by the Academy award–winning movie The Sting, which featured several of his compositions, such as The Entertainer. The Opera Treemonisha was finally professionally performed to wide acclaim in 1972. In 1976 Joplin was posthumously awarded the Pulitzer Prize.

What does the community think? I didn't think the Lead as it stands fully discusses the biographical element, and in some places (like the mentioning of his improvisational ability) is not supported by all the sources.Major Bloodnok (talk) 22:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I have replaced the lede with a slightly amended version of the above. What I felt were the problematic paragraphs I'll put here just in case we can use the quotations and references elsewhere in the article.

He was "blessed with an amazing ability to improvise at the piano," writes opera historian Elise Kirk, and was able to enlarge his talent "with the music he heard around him," which was rich with the sounds of gospel hymns and spirituals, dance music, plantation songs, syncopated rhythms, blues, and choruses.<ref name=Kirk/>{{rp|190}} After he studied music with several local teachers, his talent was noticed by a[[Germans|German]] [[immigrant]] music teacher, Julius Weiss, who chose to give the 11-year-old boy lessons free of charge. Joplin was taught music theory, keyboard technique, and an appreciation of various European music styles, such as folk and opera. As an adult, Joplin also studied at the [[George R. Smith College]], a [[historically black college]] (HBCU), in [[Sedalia, Missouri]]. "He composed music unlike any ever before written," according to Joplin biographer Edward Berlin.<ref>Jefferson, Margo. ''The New York Times'', July 20, 1994.[http://www.nytimes.com/1994/07/20/books/books-of-the-times-setting-the-rhythm-for-a-new-era.html "Books of the Times; Setting the Rhythm for a New Era."] Retrieved on November 8, 2009.</ref> Eventually, "the piano-playing public clamored for his music; newspapers and magazines proclaimed his genius; musicians examined his scores with open admiration."<ref name=Berlin/>{{rp|3}} Ragtime historian Susan Curtis noted that "when Joplin syncopated his way into the hearts of millions of Americans at the turn of the century, he helped revolutionize American music and culture."<ref name=operaam>{{cite web|url=http://web.archive.org/web/20050218222938/http://www.operaam.org/encore/tree.htm|title=Opera America|accessdate=2009-03-14}}</ref>

While I was in the mood I finally had a go at tidying up the revival section, removing various superfluous sub-headings, and trimming slightly.Major Bloodnok (talk) 10:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

To do list & missing page numbers

Added to do list for discussion and aid while editing.Major Bloodnok (talk) 20:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying to remove the tag wherever possible, and I've come across some refs which don't have page numbers; all the citations leading to Kirk, such as this one although there is one page ref among them, this by Crawfurd,this by Davis, and this citation of the long quote by Curtis. If anyone has access to the original sources, could they add the page numbers? It would be the sort of thing noticed if (when) we ever go for FA level with this article. There may be more I haven't noticed! Major Bloodnok (talk) 14:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Per page numbering format, I changed a few for consistency and what I think is the typical format. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 18:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Page cites,  Done, but all formatting not changed. Is there consensus to change rest? --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 18:22, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the page refs. In answer to your query about the formatting, I've been working with WP:CITESHORT in mind, with page numbers in the footnote rather than in the Bibliography section or within the text itself. I'm not wedded to it, but I do prefer it to other options. If there was a consensus to change to another style, then of course I'd be happy to accept it. I realise there are a couple of page refs in the bibiography that I hadn't noticed - for consistency I think they should be moved in to the references section (I think it allows for more flexibility in in referencing pages). As it says in the citation page, it doesn't matter what style we use, as long as it's consistent on the page.

I've found a couple of Google books URLs which I'll add to the bibliography section when I have a moment. Major Bloodnok (talk) 19:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

While tidying up some of the references and finding URLs for Google book search, I've come across some useful stuff in the Max Morath article about Joplin's musical form which we could add to the "works" section. Kirk has some useful stuff too about the music of Treemonisha which we could flesh out a bit more I think. I've some misgivings about how the "works", and "legacy" sections are structured; there may be some mileage in combining them in some way, but I think a re-structure of these sections will have to wait until they are expanded a bit more. Major Bloodnok (talk) 22:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense. BTW, you might want to shorten that last lead addition a bit (1897 craze,) since it shifts the focus of the subject to ragtime, and away from Joplin. I'd cut it off at "which played." You might also find this section in Irving Berlin amusing. I don't think ragtime was too big a hit in Germany back then. ;-)--Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 22:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I do see what you mean, but I think that its important to try and put Joplin into context of the music scene at the time, and therefore a mention of the origins of ragtime is necessary. Afterall it's important to show that he wasn't responsible for starting ragtime off, even though Maple Leaf was a highly influential piece. You are right to say that its important not to loose focus on the subject, but I don't think it does at the moment. Thanks for pointing out the info about Berlin too! Major Bloodnok (talk) 22:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Speculation - no-one in the house

There appears to be disagreement over the mechanics of how Joplin was playing the piano while his mother was working. Does anyone have access to the source? What does it say with regards to this? Unless it is in the source, it is speculation and shouldn't be in here! I'll try and check the sources I have. Major Bloodnok (talk) 06:36, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

If it helps, Berlin cites Texakarna lawyer saying that Joplin was given permission (Berlin p6), while Blesh in his essay "Black American Classicist" says that Joplin played "surreptitiously" without mentioning his sources. My money is on Berlin as the more reliable source (as explained in his Preface). I think we can remove the offending sentence. Major Bloodnok (talk) 07:24, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Name

I found it hard to follow who was who in his childhood because it would have sentences talking about Scott's family members and then the next sentence would start with the name "Joplin" only. I'm unsure whether this is referring to the family member that was just spoken of (which, grammatically, it is) or if it is referring to Scott Joplin himself. A first name would help here. 205.208.213.99 (talk)