Talk:A Sensation Novel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan, an attempt to complete and improve the Gilbert and Sullivan related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale for the G&S Project.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

I'm a little puzzled by the end of the synopsis. According to the article the play was published in 1871. Yet Gripper is said to declare himself to be Sherlock Holmes, a fictional character whose first published story appeared in 1887. How can this be ? -- Derek Ross | Talk 05:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I assume that the synopsis was written by reference to the most recent published version of A Sensation Novel in Jane W. Stedman's Gilbert Before Sullivan (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967). In that version, Gripper does indeed turn out to be Sherlock Holmes in disguise.

The libretto of A Sensation Novel was published in 1871, in the late 1890s, and again in 1912. Stedman follows the 1912 text. Her reasons for that decision aren't given. In a brief note on textual variations, she does not mention any difference in the ending, though clearly there must have been.

Had I been the editor of Gilbert Before Sullivan, I would have chosen a text known to have had Gilbert's involvement, and I certainly wouldn't have chosen a text published after the author's death. But that's what Stedman did. Marc Shepherd 09:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I wrote the synopsis with regard to the libretto that's on the Gilbert and Sullivan archive page, which is probably Stedman's. (It's not specified there.) The note is a good addition - I thought when I wrote it that that seemed a little off, but I couldn't put my finger on it. There we go. ^_^ SeaworthyViolin 01:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. -- Derek Ross | Talk 00:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vocal ranges

Since the score is lost, does it make sense to assign vocal ranges to the characters? In any new score, a particular character could be written as a lyric baritone or tenor, for instance. --Ssilvers 15:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed them. While I think one could readily ascertain the vocal ranges that Reed originally used, it's just speculation since there's no score. Marc Shepherd 15:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)