Talk:Concerto delle donne

An issue

This sentence:

Giacomo Vincenti, a music publisher, praised the women as "virtuose giovani" (young virtuosas), echoing the sentiments of contemporaneous diarists and commentators.[1]

Referenced to "Harris", and incorrect. You will find that in The Cambridge Companion to the Concerto, p. 178, Giacomo Vincenti called the young women of the Ospedale della Pieta the "virtuose giovani"...this in 1598, but it makes sense, because the Ospedale was a school and the pupils indeed young. The Concerto delle donne was made of women, who though they were young, were no longer girls.

I haven't pulled it out because it is possible that there is a decent source elsewhere that contradicts The Cambridge Companion. But if someone could assign the full citation to this Harris, I would be grateful.

added 8 September 2015

Comment

Wow. Amazing article, incredible depth of referencing. There were one or two minor grammar things, which I cleaned up, so that now I have no hesitation about passing it through. It's better than some FAs which I've come across. Congratulations!

One extra thing that I think would be good to include; the group's music is marked by a "high tessitura" and "a large range"; it would be nice if we could have some specifics concerning the range (top notes? bottom notes?), and also the tessitura, to make it more accessible to laymen in this particular field.

Cheers, Moreschi 11:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Excellent article. (Sorry not to have got to it earlier.) Way outside my field so I don't feel competent to make any specific comments, but i am impressed at how thoroughly Makemi has referenced it all. - Kleinzach 19:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

my bad

sorry bout that, I was creating a new article and deleted this one, by mistake. sorry —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drewwiki (talk • contribs) 06:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Cesare d' Este

I think it's inaccurate to say that after Alfonso's death "the court was dissolved".

When Alfonso II d'Este died , his cousin "Cesare received the Duchy. The legitimity of the succession was recognized by the Emperor Rudolph II, but not by Pope Clement VII: thus, as Ferrara was nominally a Papal fief, the city was returned to the Papal States, despite the attempts of the young duke, who sued for help to the major powers of the time, but obtaining no help.

The capital was therefore moved to Modena where he entered on January 30, 1598." (see Cesare d'Este). With some hickups along the way, the Este ruled Modena until 1859.

Stammer 07:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

---

And how would you say that in ten words or less? Before I had "devolved to the papacy" because that's what one of my sources says, but devolved seems to mean the opposite (I admit I don't know much about politics of the time). Although some members of the court moved to Modena, it's my understanding that it was far from the entire court, the pope took much of the Este's property and artworks, and the public works begun by the Este were discontinued by the pope, leaving the city practically destitute (this might be coming from some POV sources). In terms of Ferrara and the real power of the Este, it is my understanding that the court was dissolved. But if you have a better wording for that portion of the article, it would definitely be appreciated. I just don't want to put in the entire history, because the article is a bit dense as it is (not that it's up to me... WP:OWN and whatnot). Try something! It might work! Mak (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually the Este collection of Renaissance artworks was moved to Modena, where part of it still constitutes the bulk of the Pinacoteca Estense. Some of the best pieces were later sold and ended up in Dresden. Anyways, I suggest something like "Despite having married three times in the hopes of producing an heir, Alfonso II died in 1597 without legitimate issue. His cousin Cesare inherited the Duchy, but control of the city, which was a Papal fief, reverted to Pope Clement VIII in 1598, through a combination of "firm diplomacy and unscrupulous pressure".[28] The Este court had to abandon Ferrara in disarray and the concerto delle donne was disbanded." Stammer 07:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I also read that "The integration of music, rhetoric, and drama in Mantuan spectacles — an integration that came to fruition only in compositions of the seconda practica, where the dramatic moment governed the sound of the music as well as the words — resulted from the unique confluence of people whom Vincenzo Gonzaga drew to his court in the wake of the devolution of Ferrara" [1], which suggests that some of the talent migrated to Mantua. Stammer 11:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

My changes have been reverted. I will again try later, when the place is not so crowded. Stammer 11:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I've hopefully properly integrated what you changed. The Haskell says that the pope and co. took most of the artworks, but that most of the library and extensive archives went to Modena. Vincenzo Gonzaga was definitely interested in music, and music in the style of the concerto delle donne, and he had his own version of it for some time. I don't know about specific musicians going to Mantua from Ferrara after Alfonso's death, although it's quite likely that many did, because of the close relationship of the courts. I don't think, however, that any of the main people involved in the concerto delle donne did, because by the time the duke died many of them were nearing the end of their performing careers anyway (I should double check, but that's my recollection, anyway.) Thanks, Mak (talk) 16:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback and, by the way, congratulations for your article. Actually fourteen of the best works from the Este collection, which was housed in the Castello Estense in Ferrara before it was moved to Modena by Cesare, were sold in 1746 and are now in Dresden. The Este had to relinquish power in Ferrara, but they mantained their properties there. The reason why they could keep Modena and Reggio was that those, unlike Ferrara, were Imperial fiefs. This is pretty irrelevant as far as your article is concerned, but I am stating it for accuracy's sake. Stammer 17:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, here is how a handy online reference ([2]) puts it: "In fact, from that moment on, the castle remained completely stripped of all its furnishings and pictorial, sculptural and in general decorative works of art that had previously filled so many rooms, the apartments, the private studies, the smaller studies and the galleries of the princely residence. Almost all the works of art would be moved to the Ducal Palace of Modena where they made up the main nucleus of a further collection of art belonging to the Este family they never abandoned, while many other were dispersed during the plight and turned up a little later mostly as part of important Roman collections." Stammer 17:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

"..renowned for their technical and artistic virtuosity."

According to the virtuoso article, virtuosity is by definition technical mastery. So, the adjective technical is superfluous. IT doesn't have anything to do with how artistic someone is (considering that's subjective). "...renowned for their virtuosity" should be sufficient (IMO). Justinmeister 00:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

References

There is no Newcomb (1986). Either someone needs to find out what it is and add it, or these citations should be removed (if it does not exist) or replaced. In addition, I am concerned that virtually all of the citations provided come from a single book and a single website. For a solid article, these references should be diversified, and not all taken from the same sources. The Jade Knight 02:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

See Anthony Newcomb. ¦ Reisio 02:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

The Newcomb 1986 reference is the second-to-last: it's an article within a larger publication. Regarding your second point, in Renaissance musicology, very often most of the work is done by a single scholar, and published in a handful of places. That's not even the case here--the article lists plenty of sources. Newcomb (1986) happens to be a particularly rich one. Antandrus (talk) 15:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I think Antandrus means that Newcomb 1980 is a particularly rich resource. That's because it is, to my knowledge, the only book on the subject. It is used as the practically sole resource on the Concerto delle donne in most of the other works I've read on them, and so it made more sense to me to cite specific facts to the more original source than to secondary sources. This is, in fact, a rather specific topic for an article, and virtually the first modern study was done by Newcomb, and as far as I can tell little follow-up leg-work has been done, meaning that he is the logical source for matters of fact. I read a number of peer reviews of Newcomb 1980, and they are full of praise for and admiration of Newcomb's scholarship, and if you look at other reviews in the same journals, you will see that these are not soft-ball reviewers.

As for "A single website", the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians is a well established music encyclopedia which has been around for over 100 years. It is a standard reference work, and calls on the most respected experts in their respective specialties. The articles are by different authors, as you can easily see, and the authors are unlikely to bend to editorial control to play up the Concerto delle donne, or I don't know what. I fail to see these separate articles as a "single resource" in any sort of qualitative way, except when it comes to recognizing the authority of Newcomb's work. I believe the most important statements about the group are supported by other sources, including Karin Pendle, Mary Springfels, Thomasin LaMay, Tess Knighton, and Judith Tick, all respected professionals.

Believe it or not, I went to the best music library in NYC many times to work on this, got the Newcomb through interlibrary loan, spoke with reference librarians, waited for books to come from offsite storage, and made use of various online databases including JSTOR. If you want to give me a source I missed which has anything to say on the subject, I welcome you to give me the ISBN or call number.

Unless you have something to say which shows any actual understanding of the field or the resources available, or anything other than citation counting, I'd appreciate it if you'd save your commenting energies on articles which are undergoing FA review or candidacy, rather than articles which are currently being featured and are already under attack by vandals and the clueless. Thanks, Mak (talk) 17:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I meant 1980, thanks: that's the book. 1986 was the article :)

And yes, calling the New Grove a "single website" is quite misleading. It's an entire 30-plus volume encyclopedia, one of the most colossal reference works ever written in a single subject area, the entire text of which is available on the internet in a nice searchable format (for a $30US/month fee). I'd understand if a non-specialist hasn't heard of it, but for those of us who are musicologists, it's an essential research tool. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not musicologist, so I'll take your word for how things are done in music, but in History, it's generally considered unaccepted to draw so heavily from any single source, even technical encyclopedias (some of which are quite massive), unless the article is on the source in question. I came to this article from a Historiographical perspective; thus my response. The Jade Knight 00:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Radio 3 programme

These ladies will be discussed as part of the BBC Radio 3 programme 'The Choir from 19:30 BST on Sunday 22nd April 2007. For those outside the UK, there is an internet stream of radio 3, and the programme should be available on-demand for up to a week after the original broadcast at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio3_aod.shtml?radio3/thechoir I doubt it will come up with anything worth adding to the article, but you never know. David Underdown 15:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020

As part of WP:URFA/2020, I'll be working on this article. It's fairly close to modern FAC standard but I think I'll go through some MOS things; tweaking the lead a bit (to include more info about who the specific singers are) and organizing references better. Aza24 (talk) 02:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Aza24 how is it going? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping Sandy—Gosh I'm jealous every time I see your signature design... I need to make one for myself one of these days!—I'd forgotten about this. Still a bit of work to do, but not too much I don't think. I'll get back to you in a few days (hopefully). The article probably needs to be altered to make it clearer that there were multiple Concerto delle donnes, though I'm not 100% sure on that yet. Aza24 (talk) 09:10, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I hope you appreciate how I coordinated my signature with the Virginia Bluebells on the archive box on my talk page :). No hurry here ... was just going down the list. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@Aza24: I saw that you removed your satisfactory notation for this article at WP:URFA/2020. Do you still have concerns over this article? Are you still working on it, or would you like to notice this for possible FAR? Z1720 (talk) 02:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

I was looking at it earlier and realizing how generous my satisfactory declaration was. I have very little motivation to see it further; it is a mess in its sole focus on only one of the few groups and the music and influence sections seem ripe with OR. Feel free to nominate it for FAR, I would rather not. Aza24 (talk) 02:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

• There are 4 cn tags and one for original research. In addition around two thirds of the cites are from one source, I think that makes the article over reliant on one point of view. Logging as noticed. Desertarun (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)