Talk:The Grand Duke

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.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-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 have just edited this article to change the third paragraph, which didn't come close to a neutral point of view. The comments on its quality were stated as if they were facts rather than widely-held (in as much as any opinion on this somewhat obscure operetta is that) but far from universal opinions. It is also a matter of opinion what constitutes a principal-quality voice, and a production's cost is unique to that production, depending on its set, publicity, cast's salaries (if it is professional) etc.; no company is obliged to spend any particular amount on The Grand Duke or any other show. Ou tis 18:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

You make some good points, but I think you threw out the baby with the bath water. I think that by removing detail about what people like and don't like about the opera, and putting in general statements like "too long" or "inferior" to the earlier works, you have removed clarity. Take a look at what I just added, and see if you can work with it. G&S wrote 13 operas in a similar "topsy-turvy", gently satiric style (I am not including Thespis). It is not that easy, in a brief introduction, to each to give the unique flavor of each show, which I have tried to do. So just saying, "some people think this one is the best" or worst, or whatever, doesn't prove sufficiently descriptive. If you can add something clearer or more descriptive, so that a reader unfamiliar with the opera can understand the issue, that would be useful. --Ssilvers 16:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I think your present version is rather good. Frankly I realised mine was inadequate but I added it anyway, as the previous version wouldn't do, hoping someone would improve it. Thank you for doing so. Ou tis 23:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. These G&S-related pages are definitely a WIP, so it certainly helps to have fresh eyes and perspectives take a look. Ideally, each should have a brief intro that gives a little flavor of what is interesting, unique or particularly amusing about each. I hope that the reader can get a sense of the unique "personality" of each opera before deciding whether or not to read the whole plot synopsis. Best regards, --Ssilvers 04:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] #28

Now, surely this is misallocated - after all, doesn't the Notary and Rudolph show up at the end of it to stop them leaving? Ah, well. I'm revising all the music lists eventually, but Grand Duke I know least, so... Still! if I mention this here, I won't forget it. Adam Cuerden 14:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I've replaced "Chorus" with "Ensemble" Marc Shepherd 14:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment section

I took the following out of the main article, and am "parking" it here:

Many find that the libretto of The Grand Duke, like that of Utopia Limited, is unfocused, leaving too many plot discrepancies, and believe that its libretto needs pruning or even rewriting. It also requires a larger principal cast than most of the earlier G&S operas. Consequently, it is produced less often than most of the earlier G&S operas (and usually with cuts). Nevertheless, some consider this opera underrated and feel that the story contains characters and situations that are as funny, the settings as fanciful, and music as cheery and flavourful as in any of the earlier G&S works.

I think all of the G&S articles should have a critical assessment section backed up by citable sources. The parapgraph above as it stands now is probably a fair summary of the various things people have said about The Grand Duke, but in its current uncited state, it's all weasel words. Marc Shepherd 21:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I let the Times reviewer speak for us. If one follows the link provided, the review pretty much covers what is being said in the paragraph that you removed, don't you think? --Ssilvers 23:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, a great solution. Marc Shepherd 00:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)