Talk:Florodora

Assessment

This is definitely not a stub. There is a lot of content, and a significant amount of research has been done on this article. -- Ssilvers 13:50, 20 June 2

I agree with you, but, just so you know, assessment-wise, things can be stub-class without actually being stub articles. — Music Maker 00:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revival

The last sentence of the second paragraph does not make sense. It says "It was revived in January 2006 in its first professional London production and for many years thereafter at the Finborough Theatre, London." This would imply that the original 1899 production was not professional. Also, as 2006 was only last year, it is not accurate to (currently) say that it is the last for many years PaulJones 09:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think I fixed it OK now. The production had a limited run, and so it is past tense. -- Ssilvers 17:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Supplementary Numbers

What is meant by "Supplementary numbers" in the song list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.41.21 (talk) 04:04, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Supplementary Numbers" is a misleading term frequently used in musical comedy vocal scores. Musical Comedies of the Edwardian period changed much more frequently in the time period in which Florodora was written than other times in history. In the classical sense, there never was a "signature score" of a version considered finished by the primary composer.

Very often, to accommodate a particular artist, the libretto of the show would be altered as well and new songs written by the primary composer, or some other song writer whose works were interpolated into the show. Frequently these interpolations were objected to by the primary composer, but since he sold the control of the show to the producer, he had little recourse. In the case of Florodora, most of the interpolations by Paul Rubens were written for the original. But as time went on, Rubens and Leslie Stuart both composed many new songs for Florodora, mainly for act 2. The list of numbers for act 2 is artificially short - many of the "Supplementary Numbers" would appear in act 2 at various times in various productions.

The history of the "F&D 6285" plates - the only published standard vocal score of Florodora - are probably lost to the mists of time. Many, but not all, of these new songs and interpolations into Florodora appear at the end of the vocal score, as a collection of songs and are marked the "Supplementary Numbers". Some original songs do not - for example "Land of my Home" - and some written for later revivals - for example "Jack and Jill" probably were included too late for the music publisher to see financial any interest in engraving in a new set of plates for the vocal score. Sometimes the artists in the cast may have owned exclusive rights to sing the song and took the song with them to sing in music halls after they left the cast.

In mounting a revival of Florodora, for which I was very recently a stage director, one must find many libretto sources, and in some cases decide where the best songs can be placed into act 2. It is within the spirit of the Musical Comedy and its a delight to have so many numbers to pick for one's own unique version. --Mkenig (talk) 05:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Florodora. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716133638/http://stdavidsplayers.com/RarelyProducedShows.aspx to http://stdavidsplayers.com/RarelyProducedShows.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:14, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tall or petite?

They consisted of a sextette of tall, gorgeous damsels... Pretty and petite, the girls were also the object of a great deal of popular adoration...

They couldn’t be both. Valetude (talk) 00:52, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. We stated their exact height and weight, so the adjective "petite" is unnecessary, if not unhelpful. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:17, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, I meant they can't be tall and petite at the same time. Valetude (talk) 11:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I knew what you meant. I fixed your issue by removing the adjective "petite", which was unnecessary, since we had given the exact height and weight. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:01, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]