Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pierre Boulez/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by David Fuchs via FACBot (talk) 2 January 2024 [1].

Pierre Boulez

[edit]
Nominator(s): Dmass (talk) 08:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre Boulez was one of the most influential - and controversial - composers of the second half of the 20th century. He had a parallel career as a conductor, working with many of the great orchestras. The article has been through GA and PR, and I hope it might join the growing number of FAs on classical music. Comments on prose, content, balance, length and anything else will be welcomed. Dmass (talk) 08:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

I reviewed the article extensively at GAN, was among the reviewers at PR, and have long been urging Dmass to bring it to FAC. At GAN I was concerned about the length of the text, but since then it has been judiciously trimmed and now has a word count on a par with, e.g., the FA on Benjamin Britten, than whom Boulez lived nearly three decades longer. Rereading the article once again for FAC I find it comprehensive, well proportioned, balanced, widely sourced and cited, commendably well illustrated (which can't have been easy), and a pleasure to read. I like Dmass's use of footnotes rather than in-line parentheses for English translations of French titles: this makes for a smoother read while making translations readily accessible. My fellow peer reviewers were Cg2p0B0u8m and SchroCat, and a pillar of our classical music articles is Aza24, and I hope they may like to look in here. Meanwhile, I add that I think the article meets all the FA criteria, and I am happy to support its elevation to FA. Tim riley talk 16:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Tim riley - and for your your invaluable suggestions at GAN and PR. Dmass (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ian

[edit]

As the proud (or, occasionally, masochistic?) owner of several of the man's works and recordings, I hope to find the time to recuse and review this. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 18:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I look forward to your comments (and discovering which of his works fall into the 'sadistic' category!). Dmass (talk) 12:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well let's just say that if I ever tire of married life and want a quick divorce all I'd need do is play Abbado's 1988 Notations I-IV at anything approaching normal volume -- compared to that my wife finds The Rite of Spring almost tranquil... ;-)
Now to business... I've reviewed and copyedited the lead and the biography section and overall I think it reads very well, and appears comprehensive but not overly detailed. As an example I believe I had heard that some considered one of his state-supported projects (IRCAM I think) really delivered very little bang for its buck and you did seem to touch on this. Anyway I'll take a breather now and you can let me know if you want to discuss any of my tweaks/trims/links... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this! I'll work through them over the weekend. Dmass (talk) 10:58, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your detailed work. I agree with most of your tweaks so far. There are a few I disagree with, though.
I think the line break in the header is better as it marks change of subject from conducting to institutional work.
As you wish, I won't sweat that one! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the 1925-1943 section, I'd like to keep 'in fact', the point being that Boulez described a sort of victory over his parents, but 'in fact' he remained quite dependent on his father for practical help (for a while at least).
Hmm, perhaps "In the event" or "As it happened"? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone for 'in the event' which catches the sense fine. Dmass (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will pick up later... Dmass (talk) 19:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the sentence about Leibowitz, I prefer the original, partly because 'he found' is used again later in the same paragraph.
Ah yes, I usually do check if I'm inserting a term that might be used nearby -- my apologies. I did think my tweak of the 12-tone technique part worked quite well, perhaps we can find (pun unintended) something else for Leibowitz's doctrinaire approach? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried your suggestion, but the pronouns get terribly tangled up, so I've come up with a half-way house for the first sentence which I hope is agreeable. Dmass (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone further than you and trimmed the sentence at the end of 1959-1971 more.
Even better, tks. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, I don't think it's accurate to say that PB was 'largely' responsible for the Philharmonie, but he pushed for it for a long time. I think 'in no small measure' is more accurate, if a bit pompous on my part. Anyone think of an alternative? Dmass (talk) 07:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I think "in no small measure" is a bit peacockish, and although I'm not certainly claiming perfection in my comprehension the fact that I didn't interpret it correctly might say something, so be good to find some other expression. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've substituted 'in part' for 'largely'. Dmass (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Resuming with the compositions section, I found very little to copyedit but have some queries:
  • "the present moment is all there is" -- Can we clarify who said this? I imagine Boulez himself but since the sentence starts with "According to the music critic Alex Ross" I think it's worth spelling out.
  • but the project did not come to fruition. -- Can we source this, as we do the unrealised nature of other works?
    • In fact the existing reference covers the point, so I've just shifted it to the end of the sentence.
  • few believed such an ambitious undertaking could be realised so late in the day -- I assume "so late in the day" refers to Boulez's age at the time but I think we should just spell it out if so.
    • Done.
      • Tks for those. I'll aim to go over the rest of the article but at this stage, noting also the image and source reviews, I'm leaning support -- been a pleasure to read/review. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:20, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Ian, I appreciate your time. All the best Dmass (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing in the compositions section I seem to have missed earlier, re. transformation of Notations into orchestral works: "a project which occupied him to the end of his life" could use a citation. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, I've added a citation. Dmass (talk) 08:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Resuming with the conducting section, etc...
  • I tweaked a paragraph in Approach, see what you think.
    • That's the third order those three quotations have been in over the last month! To be honest, I don't think it makes a great deal of difference; the point is still made that he wasn't universally admired. Dmass (talk) 12:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re. the Ring (Boulez's conducting was no less controversial, emphasising continuity, flexibility and transparency over mythic grandeur and weight.) -- it must also be one of the paciest, the recording occupying a mere 12 CDs as opposed to the 14 or 15 common at the time, I don't know if your source talks about speeds...
    • It doesn't - and nor do my other regular sources, so I did a quick Google and up popped a blogger, who had done the maths: 'The quickest Ring I have is Sawallisch’s at 13:07. Krauss clocks in at 13:23, Janowski at 13:25, Boulez at 13:45, Keilberth at 13:55, Barenboim at 14:09, and Schleppmeister Knappertsbusch at 14:38.' Of course, Krauss was in the early 1950s, so a quick Ring was not a new thing. According to the sources, it was the fact that Boulez insisted that the orchestra play quietly which really shocked them - even though Karajan in the 1960s had famously conducted a Ring in Salzburg which emphasised the chamber-music qualities in much of Wagner's orchestral writing.
  • The most notorious instance... -- since this is from Boulez's own writings, who describes it as the most notorious?
    • I'm afraid the answer's probably me! I've changed it to 'one of the most notorious', having found a rather wonderful Guardian article which pulls together 'some of his most notorious pronouncements', which I've added by way of a note.

That's it from me unless further changes occur as a result of other reviews... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
Thanks so much for your time on this. I'll pick my way through your comments, although I may have some queries along the way, as this is not my strong suit... Dmass (talk) 11:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Dmass (talk) 12:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dmass (talk) 08:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Pierre_Boulez_(1968).jpg: the licensing provided doesn't match the source
Could you clarify what you mean by this? I note that this is a cropped version of an image which also appears here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pierre_Boulez_1968.jpg Dmass (talk) 12:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The image has a copyright tag indicating it is licensed as CC BY-SA. The source link provided indicates the license is CC0. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have amended the record so that they match. Dmass (talk) 10:19, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Andrée_Vaurabourg.jpg: source link is dead, missing a US tag, and if the author is unknown how do we know they died over 70 years ago?
I don't think I can resolve those issues, so it looks like it will have to go. I'm thinking of replacing it with an image of Olivier Messiaen: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Messiaen_1937_4.jpg - would that one be acceptable? Dmass (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sticking my oar in: as the Bibliothèque nationale de France records the Andrée Vaurabourg image as "domaine public" can we not read across from French to American copyright law the 70-years-after-death rule? Quite prepared to be told I'm wrong. Tim riley talk 00:12, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the life+70 rule doesn't apply to the US for published works, so that image is also missing a US tag. For these and the other US status questions, I'd suggest referring to the Hirtle chart to determine appropriate tagging based on publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've replaced the Vaurabourg photo with a photo (taken by me in 2022) of the building in the Marais district in Paris which Boulez lived between 1945 and 1958. The street (rue Beautrellis) was completed in 1836. Dmass (talk) 17:22, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As with the next one, this should include an explicit tag for the building. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dmass (talk) 07:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Theatre_Marigny_-_Salle_Popesco.jpg: as France does not have freedom of panorama, this should include a tag for the building.
I'm puzzled by this: the link you've provided suggests that France does have limited freedom of panorama. The Théâtre Marigny was built in 1835, so presumably there's no issue with this. Could you advise what kind of tag I should include? Dmass (talk) 12:01, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because of the age of this building PD-France should apply. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean no further action is needed on this one? Dmass (talk) 10:31, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you agree that PD-France applies, we can just add that tag and be done with this one. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dmass (talk) 07:34, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ditto File:IRCAM_at_Beaubourg_2009.jpg, File:Paris-Philharmonie1.jpg
As for IRCAM this is obviously a modern building, but my reading of the guidance is that it is only ‘for-profit reproductions’ which amount to infringements, which this is not. Is that wrong? Dmass (talk) 12:01, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For our purposes yes - our non-free content policy defines any work that disallows commercial reuse as non-free. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've deleted this image as the problem seems insuperable. I've yet to find a candidate to replace it in this section, but I've found one for the previous section, which seems to balance nicely. Dmass (talk) 17:45, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
File:Roger_Woodward_and_Pierre_Boulez_rehearsing_with_the_BBC_Symphony_Orchestra_Bartok's_first_Piano_Concerto_in_1972.jpg: what is "NLA Collection"? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The papers of Roger Woodward in the National Library of Australia. Dmass (talk) 07:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Stephane_Mallarme.jpg: when and where was this first published?
The portrait by Nadar was published in 1900 according to the Bibliothèque nationale de France: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b531079562/f1.item. Dmass (talk) 11:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest adding that to the image description. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dmass (talk) 10:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ditto File:Paul_Klee,_1922,_Senecio,_oil_on_gauze,_40.3_×_37.4_cm,_Kunstmuseum_Basel.jpg
Klee died in 1940, more than 70 years ago, which I understand makes his works out of copyright in the USA. Could you advise which extra tag to add? Dmass (talk) 11:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was published in 1924, according to the Kunstmuseum Basel, which owns it - https://sammlungonline.kunstmuseumbasel.ch/eMP/eMuseumPlus?service=direct/1/ResultDetailView/result.inline.list.t1.collection_list.$TspTitleImageLink.link&sp=13&sp=Sartist&sp=SfilterDefinition&sp=0&sp=3&sp=1&sp=SdetailView&sp=52&sp=Sdetail&sp=0&sp=T&sp=0&sp=SdetailList&sp=0&sp=F&sp=Scollection&sp=l1207#litKlapptext - There doesn't seem to be anywhere to add that information to the image description, but the work is expressly categorised on the Basel website as being 'Bilddaten gemeinfrei - Kunstmuseum Basel' Dmass (talk) 11:02, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As for the source, the Mahler Foundation's website shows the date of the work (1917) and the dates of the artist (1890-1918): https://mahlerfoundation.org/mahler/contemporaries/arnold-schoenberg/. Should I just add that link to the file data under source? Also, could you advise which US tag to use? Dmass (talk) 12:01, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is 1917 a creation or a publication date? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
1917 was a creation date. I haven't been able to identify a publication date, so I have replaced the Schiele image with one which is approved for publication by the copyright holder. Dmass (talk) 10:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added three new images: of René Char, Bruno Maderna and Jean Genet. Would you mind taking a look at them? Thanks again.
File:Capitaine_Alexandre_1943.jpg needs a US tag
Done.
File:B_Maderna_1963.jpg has a dead source link and needs info on first publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted. Dmass (talk) 08:36, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nikki, can I just confirm images are fine now? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One question: where was File:Capitaine_Alexandre_1943.jpg first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It turns out that the information on Wikimedia is completely wrong. It's not a photograph by an anonymous person, it's by the well-known photographer Roger Viollet, who died in the mid-1960s. I've deleted it from the Boulez page. Dmass (talk) 08:27, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SC

[edit]

Source review

[edit]

Spot-check upon request and I am primarily looking at source reliability. I notice that years sometimes are in parentheses, sometimes without and sometimes they are lacking altogether. Likewise page numbers sometimes are hyphenated and sometimes "A and B". I can't find "Weber, Hildegard Opera Magazine."? https://archives.nyphil.org/index.php/artifact/89470457-2c68-47d5-8102-f2913401bc7e-0.1 and https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fww%2F9780199540884.013.U8205 should probably be behind a pipe, not sitting out there as a raw URL. Is it "Grawemeyer Award" or "Gravemeyer prize"? What makes theartsdesk.com a reliable source? I dunno if all the " Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation. The anchor is named " errors are a FAC issue, but one might want to add "ref=none" to them. Definitively not a FAC issue, but a number of authors have pages on Wikipedia that could be linked to. It seems like most of the sources are (save for some British, French and US newspapers) musicologists and other bigwigs in the field, keeping in mind that this isn't my specialty area. It seems like the source section is mostly consistently formatted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your time on this. I’ll definitely look through these points at the weekend (tied up with work away from home for the next few days). Dmass (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dealing firstly with years in citations, where only one work by an author is in the source list, no year is given (because it's in the source list); where there is more than one work, the year is given (always in brackets) to distinguish between the sources (the most obvious example being Boulez himself). I've checked all the references and I think it's now applied consistently. Dmass (talk) 11:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Dmass (talk) 11:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Page numbers in citations: where the pages are adjacent, they are hyphenated; where they are not, I've used 'and'. So for example, reference 45 reads 'Steinegger, 64–66; Hill and Simeone, 211 and 253.'Dmass (talk) 11:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re the Opera Magazine citation, I'm not sure what your concern is, as the link goes straight through to the article. Is it the format of the reference? Dmass (talk) 18:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As for the raw URL, I've removed the external link altogether as it doesn't add much.Dmass (talk) 19:00, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's actually the Grawemeyer Award for Music Composition, which is one of several Grawemeyer awards. I've amended accordingly. Dmass (talk) 19:01, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
artsdesk.com provides probably the most comprehensive online coverage of arts events in the UK at the moment. It's where a lot of professional critics found a home when newspapers cut their arts coverage several years ago. In my experience the quality is at least as high as in the national newspapers, and often significantly higher. Dmass (talk) 19:10, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid your last point (about the 'Harv warnings') has me stumped, as I don't know what this refers to. Is anyone else able to reply to/assist with this?
SC, you are a wiz on this sort of thing: can you help? Tim riley talk 19:46, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, will look. - SchroCat (talk) 11:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorted on all but a couple, which flag up errors if the field is used. (Dmass, it's likely you didn't see any errors at all - there's a script some editors (including me) add to show where they've messed up a reference. One of the downsides is that is shows a warning unless the sfn templates are being used. Long story short: you haven't made any errors, but I've fixed the visuals for those of us who have the script installed). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thanks so much! Dmass (talk) 12:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I've dealt with your points satisfactorily. Thank you again for your time, it's greatly appreciated. Dmass (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, seems like reliability-wise this passes. The harv ref issue isn't really a FAC thing, upon second thought. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Cassianto

[edit]

I read this today and thoroughly enjoyable it was too. I have no nitpicks and consider this to meet the FA criteria, fully. CassiantoTalk 16:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for taking the time to read it Cassianto and for your kind comments. Dmass (talk) 16:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Gerda

[edit]

I finally have a bit of extra time. I remember a few live performances conducted by Boulez. Lead last, as usual. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time, Gerda Arendt, I'll work through these later today. Dmass (talk) 08:23, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Childhood

  • link Catholic, perhaps?
    • Done
  • I suggest to say - instead of "Boris Godunov and Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg" - "Mussorgski's Boris Godunov and Wagner's Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg". It's not "Aida and Tosca", which more readers may associate with composers immediately.
    • Done
  • I'm not sure that "well-known" adds to the soprano.
    • Cut
  • "son of the pianist Vladimir" looks strange to me with just the given name, even if I understand the wish to avoid the repetition of the surname.
    • I can see that, amended to full name

I read now up to Compositions, and am too tired for details. A few general things: in the beginning, composers are mostly introduced by just surname, later by full name, such as John Cage. Cage and Stockhausen are - I believe - known by surname alone.

  • I see your point, but I think with this it's a question of judgment. I know in some contexts there's a rule that if they're dead, they are only referred to by surname, which is fine if it's Bach or Wagner, but for the general reader Cage and Stockhausen are not such well-known figures. This is a long way round of saying that I have thought about it each time, and consistency has sometimes given way to helpfulness (or an attempt at it, anyway).

Please check links: some things seem to be never linked, others more than once, at least his ensemble not on the first mentioning but the second.

  • Will do, although it looks like the Ensemble intercontemporain is linked both in the header and at its first mention in the main body.

I made a few changes - feel free to revert if you don't agree. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you. A couple of observations only.
    • I've removed the Yvette Grimaud link altogether as there's no English language page (thanks for spotting that the link was to the French page)
      • I'd restore the interlanguage link, - it's an invitation to create it in English (and I may actually do it - next year). When I had first contact with FAC, red links were a no-no, but at least the interlanguage links became acceptable. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've reverted to the English name for the Darmstadt course, while keeping the correct link you've given.

Total serialism

  • "That revolution" - a reader coming by the headers will not know what that refers to. We can't expect readers to absorb it all sequentially.

I read through the works section and liked it very much, - lovely quotes, development very clear.

  • Thank you for that!

I moved a pic (Genet) for the posture of the subject, and noticed that the "alt" parameter just refers to the caption. That seems no help for someone blind who would like to get some idea of what is pictured, in this case: what the person looks like. I had not checked others.

Another general point: some links are repeated in the works section, which is fine by me, but others not, - intentionally so? - I'll travel for the rest of the week, - will see what I can still do. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Butting in, there was a change to MOS in June to the effect that it was okay to relink once per section after the lead, not just once in the main body. So in this case -- and especially given the size of the sections -- linking the same thing under bio and under compositions is reasonable (though not obligatory -- as ever, links are there if we judge they will help the reader). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conducting

  • I linked some of the authors in that section, only to see that two of them had their links before. If you don't want a second link to the biographers, perhaps just write last name, to indicate that they appeared before?
  • After "Not everyone agreed about the greatness of that gift.", I expected to read disagreement, but Klemperer seems not one of them.
  • While you and I know that Jessye Norman is a soprano, it may come as a surprise to others.
    • tweaked
  • The sentence about her and collaborations sits a bit strangely between the voices about his conducting. It might be better in the "life" section?
    • No I think it belongs here: I'm referring to his collaboration with them as a conductor.

Opera

  • "His chosen repertoire was small and included no Italian opera." I'm not sure what that sentence adds to the following. It also didn't include Spanish opera, for example. I prefer the following positive sentence, about Wagner and 20th century only.
    • Actually he did conduct Spanish opera/music theatre (de Falla); my point is that it's pretty unusual for a conductor interested in opera not to touch the Italian repertoire at all, which is the largest and (as you pointed out earlier) probably the best-known.
  • Image caption: I'd prefer to name the singer that you see, Gwyneth Jones, to the conductor's, and Götterdämmerung to a repetition of Ring.
    • I think better as it is, as it links with the reference in the text to the Ring and to this particular production. Not all readers will know that Götterdämmerung is part of the Ring. And if we name Jones, shouldn't we name Hubner as Hagen?
  • Bastille: the term "director" usually means the one for the action on stage, - I don't know a solution.
    • Good spot, in fact he was appointed president. I've re-worked it.
  • "In the event" - which follows - seems not to mean that event. Is it a phrase I don't know?
    • It's just another way of saying 'in fact'. I think it's fine.Dmass (talk) 09:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I wonder how often I misunderstand things because I read English too literally ;) - all taken. I hope to get to reading further today. I doubt a bit that any reader who is not aware of Götterdämmerung being part of the Ring will get this far into the article. I used the image to express my state of mind (a woman who can't believe what she has to see), so thank you for showing it! At present the expression would rather be like Sonia Prina's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:40, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I got to the header Recording, now off to the (Italian) opera. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recording

Writing ...

That's it for today, read to the end. More when back home. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:58, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead In general, I like the lead, the following is for only to be considered; several items a related to weight because some seems too much, some too little.

  • - I am not sure that his father's profession is note-worthy, same for the two lesser-known teachers.
    • I disagree, it serves the purpose of establishing that PB was from a middle-class family; the mention of his other teachers corrects the misapprehension (which I think is quite common) that Messiaen was his only teacher.
  • - I believe we have too many orchestra names.
    • Agreed, it's a bit 'listy'. I've cut the LSO and the EIC (and expanded on the latter below, as you suggest).
  • + In their list, I'd single out the Ensemble i. he founded.
    • I've taken a different approach and been more explicit about the EIC later in the lead.
  • + I'd like more about repertoire, such as his restriction to Wagner and 20th-century opera, which sets him apart from conductors who may have conducted a similar set of orchestras.
    • I think the penultimate paragraph is quite explicit about his repertoire.
  • + I'd use the more precise link to Jahrhundertring (piped) instead of sending readers to Wagner and the Ring, expecting that most readers getting that far into his intro will kind of know who Wagner was, and that he created the Ring (and if not, they are just one more click away.
    • Done
  • + "His recorded legacy is extensive." - again, some more examples of music he cared about would delight me.
    • Again, I think that's already in the penultimate paragraph.
  • + I'd place the organisations he founded into some kind of chronology, with an explanation, instead of an unqualified list of mostly French names.
    • Agreed, I've re-worked it in an attempt to make it more informative.
  • This lead has not one sentence about him as a person, and while he was silent about private life (and we should probably do the same), there is this rich "Character" section, to meet him as a person even when only reading the lead. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:29, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • The last sentence of the second paragraph is very much about his personality.

Thank you again, Gerda, for your time on this, it's much appreciated. Dmass (talk) 10:33, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am pleased, especially with the expansion of the organisations! About character: I believe that the sentence you mean is still about his professional life and action (uncompromising, polemic). What I liked to read (in the body) was the rapport with Stockhausen, dining with the Stravinskys, rug concerts, and that he took interest in individual orchestra players' private news. I also think a sentence such as "about his private life he remained tightly guarded" would serve the lead well.
  • On a more basic note: you may want to check where linking to the same subject several times is wanted and where perhaps accidental (Joan Peyser 3*). The Basel academy is still linked on the second occasion.
  • One more basic thing is the use of {{lang}} for foreign terms, with all that French. It helps readers who rely on screenreaders. The template causes automatic italics; when they are not wanted use {{langr}} instead. It was discussed here to improve a FAC article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:15, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    My preference is not to add anything more to the lead about Boulez's character. I think it's better dealt with in the body of the article, where it's possible to be more nuanced.
    I went through the article a week or so ago, checking for over-linking. I must have missed Joan Peyser's three links; I've removed one of them.
    I wasn't familiar with the use of the language template for foreign terms. I quite see the importance of it. I'm still working through the guidance, trying to figure out what should and should not be tagged. Unless it's essential for FAC, I'd rather deal with this gradually. Dmass (talk) 09:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    All accepted, thank you, including for being open to matters of accessibility.
    Support.
    A routine question in recent FACs for composers was how the author felt about an infobox. I remember that I asked you before, and you said rather not. However, some things changed since, - consider the position of the community for Mozart and Wagner. The FACs were Artemy Vedel, Osbert Parsley and Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your support, Gerda. As for an infobox, I'm still of the same opinion: I can see that inboxes can be useful in many contexts, but I don't think it would add value to this particular page. Dmass (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't see how a (concise and well curated) infobox would add value, but you didn't see the value of template lang either, until now. Perhaps compare Mozart, and the viewpoints of others on it, and if you have little time, just the arguments of Voceditenore, beginning "Infoboxes are an integral part of editing and more importantly of the reader experience. They allow us to cater both to the reader who is looking only for the basic facts concerning the person quickly and easily presented and to those who want a lengthy and more detailed artcle". I don't want to clutter this FAC with the topic, - we could talk somewhere else. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aza24

[edit]

Sorry for the delay, I'll leave some comments in the coming days – Aza24 (talk) 01:48, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Aza24, are you still planning on doing a review for this? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, looking now. Aza24 (talk) 01:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The family prospered" is rather vague – maybe "The family prospered financially" or something?
    • I think it's clear that they prospered financially from the reference to their moving to a bigger house - not sure it needs to be spelt out any further...
  • "when the Vichy government fell," – a clarifier of World War being the context might be nice. The statement feels a bit out of no where otherwise
    • I've added a clarifier.
  • premier prix should be linked to First Prize (music diploma), right?
    • Right.
  • "although for practical reasons the last category fell away in subsequent seasons" – I'm not exactly sure what this is referring to. Difficulty of obtaining such scores, difficulty in performing/learning properly, low popularity, etc.
    • Done.
  • The paragraph "Key events in..." seems not directly related to Boulez specifically. And considering the article is just boarding on being too long, it may be worth moving it into a note or trimming entirely.
    • Boulez programmed (and sometimes commissioned) these works, as well as conducting nearly all of them; I think they give a brief sense of the Domaine's achievements.
  • A brief sentence on what exactly the Rituel in memoriam Bruno Maderna was would be helpful (instrumentation, format etc.). Otherwise the line merely acknowledges its existence/importance and doesn't offer much actual information
    • Added.
  • I would link the full title of IRCAM, not the abbreviation. Readers might miss the link otherwise
    • Agreed.
  • "the creation of new works" – "the commissioning", maybe? Makes it sound like the group was writing new music
    • I've simplified it.
  • In general, I think there is more you can do with images
      • I wish I could. I've had a pretty high turnover of images which have been ruled out for copyright reasons. I will certainly keep looking.
    • An image or something to break up the "1925–1943: Childhood and school days" text would be really nice, but I see there are few obvious options. Perhaps there is a quote about Boulez's childhood which can be used in a quotebox? Not a pertinent matter
    • An image like File:Experimenteel concert in Concertgebouw onder leiding van dirigent Pierre Boulez, Bestanddeelnr 917-3248.jpg if very high quality and certainly worth using
      • There is already an image on the page from this (I agree, very high quality) series, taken in the Concertgebouw in 1963. I think it would be odd to have another, especially as it's more an image of the orchestra (Boulez would barely be identifiable once it's reduced to size).
    • The 1977 could also do with an image (to break up the walls of text) what about this one?
      • Sorry to be negative but I think this is rather a poor image; also it wouldn't work in the 1977 section as Sur Incises was written in the late 90s.
  • Got through the biography, will read through the music section soon. From a quick glance and from what I remember of earlier reads a few months ago, the Character and personal life may be still too large (for instance, the "keen walker" paragraph feels like trivia and the final Magus Ross quote comes out of nowhere), and the Legacy too short (Taruskin wrote about it a bit iirc). Also, I was surprised to see Babbit not mentioned, but then I don't know where he would be mentioned.Aza24 (talk) 02:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • On the specific points you mention here: I don't think the reference to walking is trivia; it was Boulez's main leisure activity throughout his life and and one of the reasons he chose to live in Baden Baden; I'm sorry you're not keen on the the Ross quote, I thought it was a really apt summary of the material in the preceding paragraphs.
    • As for Babbitt, I agree it's odd but I've gone back to the biographies and they don't seem to have had a great deal to do with each other: they met several times and Boulez conducted two of his pieces in New York in the early 70s.

Many thanks for your time and for your comments. Dmass (talk) 10:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dmass, have you finished addressing Aza24's comments? If so, could you ping them? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought I had but, Aza24, do let me know if I've missed anything. Thanks, Dmass (talk) 16:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it looks good overall. However, I still think the legacy section could use some work. There's hardly any information on the legacy of his compositions specificially. In addition, the Recording seems far too detailed, but I suppose that's not really a bad problem to have.
Aza24, it could be considered "going into unnecessary detail". Gog the Mild (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some cuts to the Recording section (and elsewhere) which I hope brings things into better balance. Dmass (talk) 12:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do see what you mean about the lack of something about his influence as a composer. Unfortunately, it's not straightforward. I could attempt a summary myself (along the lines: there were dozens of imitators of his strict serial music in the 1960s, almost none of whose music is now played; there are some important contemporary composers who would acknowledge his influence, such as George Benjamin; but there are probably more who reacted strongly against him, such as the American minimalists) but, of course, my own summary is of no use. At the moment I'm struggling to find a source (or two) which would capture the position concisely; there's a danger of it turning into a mini-essay, which would ramp up the word count again. I will certainly keep my eye out for something though. Dmass (talk) 12:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

[edit]
  • "Cité de la musique". Should that be 'Cité de la Musique'?
  • Do you get the sense that you've touched a nerve, Gog the Mild?
    • ...and having made my flippant comment, I actually read the discussion Tim riley linked to, which is really interesting - well it is if you're interested in French capitalisation, which I appreciate is niche... Dmass (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Pierre_Boulez/archive1&oldid=1193276711"