Talk:In questa reggia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Objections[edit]

1) Nearly every single sentence is POV. Examples:

    • In many ways, it is a statement of the battle of the sexes that have lasted throughout the millenia of the human race. POV
    • It is not a femminist statement; it is statement of pure hatred and the enternal notion of a fine woman's denial of a man to her body. POV
    • Turandot demonstrates that she is everything that women want to be, but cannot be if they wish to have chidren and family. POV
    • Only a statement of such ancient hatred could possibly define the inescapable nature of the relationship of man and woman. POV
    • The Aria itself has as much structure as the imposing Palace it is sung in. POV
    • Turandot, in her profound beauty, advances like War and Death and Civilization. No Valkyre, no enemy commander and his army, no devil ever struck such fear and terrified fascination in the hearts of men. POV

2) It makes very strong assertations without citations, leaving the uncited statements as Original Research. Examples:

    • Turandot is known as a "voice buster" because the role is so demanding on the singer. This statement requires a published citation for both the term "voice buster" and the allegation made, either online or print from either an opera historian, an opera singer, or an opera critic. A google search for Turandot+"Voice Buster" reveals nothing.
    • Some of the greatest sopranos of the 20th Century have avoided it, probably because of its career-ending potential. This extremely broad statement would require a citation from an opera historian to support. There are many citations for the role of Turandot as being extremely difficult, but no citations indicating that anyone has ever intentionally avoided the role because it would destroy their voice and end their career, or that anyone's career has been ended singing the role of Turandot. Without a citation, this is Original Research.
    • A fine example of that would be Joan Sutherland, who created a landmark recording of Turandot, but never performed it on stage, which would require doing so night after night. This statement is not supported by the cited Wikipedia article on Sutherland - no explanation for why she did not give a live performance is given in her Wikipedia article, nor does any biography of her state that she intentionally avoided *any* role. Again, a citation is needed, and without it, this is original research.

3) It contains a Copyright Violation. The entire text of the English translation was apparently taken from [here], with typos, translation errors and gramatical errors intact, and reformatted slightly. Example: 

Pure nel tempo che ciascun ricorda,      At that time, - 't is know to all, -
fu sgomento e terrore e rombo d´armi!    war brought horror and the clash of arms.

Observe how the mistranslation from [here] of "'t is known to all" is retained, with dashes - the correct translation would be "that everyone remembers" or "that everyone knows." Note also the mistranslation of "sgomento" as "horror" - it is actually "dismay." Lastly, note the mistranslation of 'rombo' as 'clash' - the word means "rumble." A more correct translation is as follows: 

Pure nel tempo che ciascun ricorda,      And yet in the time that everyone remembers,
fu sgomento e terrore e rombo d’armi.    there was dismay and terror and the rumble of arms.

The opera itself is not copyrighted. Translations of the opera *are* copyrighted under the Berne Convention. While it is entirely possible that the website in question copied their translation from someone else, it is clear that this translation is copyrighted.
Xaa 15:56, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A very good set of questions[edit]

Most of that stuff is an analysis. It is all straight off the top of my head. I have listened to this thing for 20 years and, at times, asked myself what Puccini was trying to say. It is a wild attempt to reconstruct the creative process of the Maestro. Why did he write this thing? We can pare it down to the facts now, but unless you listen to the damn thing over and over again, a LOT of stuff will just go right over the listen's head. Are we allowed to try to help them, or do we just stand there, laughing at them as they struggle, often unsuccessfully to understand? Why do they fail? Because you have to let Turandot become a major way that you analyze ALL conflict. Art becomes the analytical template. A story of love and hate. You start to use Turandot to study the Civil War and divorce and custody disputes and Wikipedia Discussions and stuff with. You look for what it nobel and also for when people were just being dumb turds. The analysis maybe should go to a separate page? Seems like a lot of unnecessary pages to me.

Similar on the Blade Runner question: Is it shoot 'em up or is it "Tears in Rain". Of course it is both, but how much can we analyze the whole "Tears in Rain" thing? It may be that in some cases, the creative process was so secret that we will never know for sure. Can we guess? Amorrow 17:21, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Most of that stuff is analysis. It is all straight off the top of my head. See here. Wikipedia doesn't want your original research, or mine, or anyone else's. Also, the article is still a copyright violation, because of the translation (see above). Seeing as how you have responded to this page, I think we can safely say your request for 'notification' has been satisfied. =) Xaa 17:40, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Overhaul[edit]

I gave this entry a general copyedit, added the text for the song (which I believe is in the public domain), and added an image. There were some errors within the entry itself, including the statement that the aria is the opening aria for the opera and that it is Turandot's only aria. The aria actually takes place in Act Two, and, though it is probably the most famous aria for the role of Turandot, it is not the only aria (Del primo pianto is another). As for the merge vote, perhaps we could keep the page as it is? If Nessun Dorma can have its own page, surely this one can stay? It's such a great song. -Maaya 04:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is an aria that deserves its own article. Also, it is easy to forget that "Del Primo Pianto" counts as an aria, but techincally, that it correct. Anyway, I have added by own sentance to the article. Yes, it is a little redundant, but for historically notable arias, we should strive to note not only what is said (in the words) but what is sung. Of course, it has to be properly experienced to be fully appreciated, but a few annotations about the music is appropriate. -- Pinktulip 07:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Also?[edit]

This section contained only the ubiquitous Nessun Dorma, which didn't really need the cross-link! I added 'non piangere,Liu', which already had an article, and the two Liu arias listed in the aria-database (which at least gives some measure of external objectivity); these were redlinks, so someone's taken them out again. I reckon a measure of consistency is needed (and Liu should be better represented) - either all five arias are cross-linked in each article (whether yet existing or not), or we flatten (*) this section, and leave the football fans to find their own Nessun Dorma. :-) Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 10:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Actually if the readers want to get the list of arias in Turandot, they should go to Turandot itself. I removed the links because those arias are not available (probably forever will not be available) I usually created 1 or 2 famous arias per opera. This page is about this aria only but if the other arias are available, it is ok. Or not, I do not see the purpose of them to be in here at all because for further reading, the readers should go to Turandot. Thanks - Jay (talk) 10:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're reinforcing my main point - the section really shouldn't be there at all (* 'flatten = 'delete' in my English!). As to why the two Liu arias don't exist yet - well that can only be taken as a short-sighted pity - her role in the opera, as a 'normal' human being, has to be there to balance the scary Ms. T! Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 10:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Principessa di Morte[edit]

I've noted the fact that the ending of 'In Questa Reggia' reappears in 'Principessa di morte' - but I gather that duet is the start of the Alfano/Busoni reconstruction. Do we know whether Puccini had sketched out this re-appearance? Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 10:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only Alfano (not Busoni!). Anyway, no, Puccini didn't sketched it. --Al Pereira(talk) 10:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:In_questa_reggia&oldid=1212749366"