Talk:Bach family

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I'm searching for a HISTORY of the J.S. Bach family. %How many sons(?) did he father? (I'm actually seeking a history of his 21st son (of 20) PDQ BACH. Thanks to Peter Schikele. ^ Charlieheretolearn 21:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you realized that P. D. Q. Bach was an invention of Schikele, for comic purposes. He wouldn't have a place in an account of the real family. David Brooks 20:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone think the article is a bit hard to read? I can't think of a good way to rewrite the text, but wouldn't at least a template look nice here (and on related pages) which would list famous composers of the Bach family (listing Johann Sebastian Bach, several of his sons who gained fame as composers and a single composer grandson would be enough I reckon?). I don't know much about creating and editing templates, and although I'm willing to learn, I'm not sure whether people would want a Bach family template. Jashiin 16:07, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Ich lass Dich nicht[edit]

Shouldn't the translation of "Ich lasse Dich nicht" be "I won't leave you" (or lit. "I don't leave you")? I don't know the text to this motet, but just noticed that "I wrestle and pray" is not a very good translation of the motet's German name. 11:17, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

"Lasse" in this context is closer to "release" (it is a funeral hymn). The opening words in German are Ich lasse dich nicht, du Segnest mich denn - an idiomatic English translation would be something like "I will not let you go until I have your blessing" - although it is possible it is sometimes sung in English to words starting "I wrestle and pray"?? I won't fix this as the whole article is probably in breach of copyright anyway (see section below). How on earth did it survive all these years without this being picked up on!!!!!! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 06:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Suspiciously close to plagiarism - if not rewritten will have to be deleted![edit]

I think someone suspected something like this when they added those "citation" tags - but the whole thing is far too reminiscent of Percy Scholes. There are a number of idiosyncratic phrases, sentences, and even paragraphs from The Listener's Guide to Music and The Oxford Companion to Music scattered through it - and other passages that I have been unable to actually find in either work have a suspiciously Scholes-like flavour. At the very least Scholes needs to be cited here - actually someone needs to go through it and "write it up in their own words" a little more convincingly!! As it is, most high school music teachers would, I suspect, give the whole effort an "F" for plagiarism. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 06:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

It would be very helpful if you could identify specific instances. :) I do not have access to those books, but I was able to verify that at least one entire paragraph was copied from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, which is now cited and acknowledged in accordance with Wikipedia:Plagiarism. (I am here in response to your note at the copyright problems board, but will not be watching this article; if you need further help, please ping me at my talk page!) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Wow. That's sad. This was not plagiarism at all in its oldest edit; somebody removed the attribution and turned it into plagiarism. :/ --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I've identified the editor who did this and left them a note. I assume it was an inadvertent deletion or they didn't understand the purpose of the template. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
A relief to have an explanation of this - I think Mr. Scholes was either guilty of plagarism himself (which I don't believe for a moment) or he actually wrote the article on the Bach family for E.B. 1911!!! He was already 34 at the time so by no means impossible, and from internal evidence I should say pretty certain. All the same I fear we need a modern article - outside the elegant but rather blinkered Scholes framework - entertaining a writer as he no doubt was. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't Johann Sebastian Bach The Younger be in the family tree?[edit]

Shouldn't Johann Sebastian Bach The Younger be in the family tree?--Jax 0677 (talk) 04:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

He's in the list; I suspect there are a few more which are listed but are not in the graphical family tree. The Dutch Wikipedia has a different style of family tree which doesn't have him either as there's no Dutch Wikipedia article for him. These family trees are a bit tricky to edit; unless someone with expertise in them comes along, I suggest to leave it alone. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:08, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

awkward sentence[edit]

"Sebastian Bach thus inherited the artistic tradition of a united family whose circumstances had deprived them of the distractions of the century of musical fermentation which in the rest of Europe had destroyed polyphonic music."

does this sentence seem a little bit clunky to anyone else? I'm having trouble understanding it, I think the author is trying to squeeze too many concepts into one phrase. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

P.D.Q. Bach?[edit]

Mentioning P.D.Q. Bach in this article is like mentioning an Elvis impersonator in an article about Elvis Presley. It reeks of promoting an act who is irrelevant to the topic of the article. I intend to delete thar mention in the near future, since there is no valid objection.

(Another thing is that after mentioning numerous relatives, the author starts mentioning "Sebastian Bach", by which he seems to be referring to J.S. Bach. Was he known as "Sebastian" rather than "Johann" during his lifetime?) 77Mike77 (talk) 03:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

His impersonators are actually mentioned in Presley's article. I don't see how a single entry under "See also" for a related figure should be considered inappropriate and irrelevant.
Also: the family tree was completely redone on 29 November 2016 by User:Brigante mandrogno; I have no idea whether that revamp was an improvement. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:59, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Mentioning impersonators contributes to the silliness of wikipedia articles. But if that is the way it is, then why are the Swingle Singers not mentioned? Their "swing" version of Bach's music are much better known than this PDQ fellow. 77Mike77 (talk) 22:12, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Their name is not Bach. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:43, 27 March 2017 (UTC)