Talk:Patience (opera)
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. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale for the G&S Project. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
Contents |
[edit] Original comments
I added the voice categories under "roles", but I don't know how to do the html, or whatever this is, so if someone wants to conform it to the other G&S opera pages' style, be my guest. Ssilvers, 20 April 2006
FYI, Gilbert and Sullivan themselves referred to their works as "comic operas" or "operas," never as "operettas." I have therefore restored that term. Marc Shepherd 04:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Weasel words in the introduction, "many have argued that the central character, Bunthorne, was intended to satirize Oscar Wilde," should be corrected.
[edit] Though men of rank may useless seem
Anyone remember off -hand where this goes? I can't find my Bradley. Adam Cuerden 12:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- It goes between "If you want a receipt" and "In a doleful train." Marc Shepherd 13:13, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I see that Adam is adding cut songs to the lists of musical numbers. I wonder whether we are confusing people, especially where Sullivan's setting of the song doesn't survive, or where the cut material has not been published.
I am starting to think that the list of musical numbers should describe the settled state of the opera, and the Versions section is the place to discuss unpublished material.
In other words, the list of musical numbers should describe what Gilbert and Sullivan chose to put before the public, not drafts of things they chose to suppress. This argument becomes especially compelling where the item in question never even made it into a performance.
The Duke's song falls squarely in this category, and on top of it, Sullivan's vocal line doesn't survive. Some of the recent additions to Pirates strike me similarly. There's no edition you can buy that contains those additions. The discussion is more appropriately placed elsewhere. Marc Shepherd 14:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree (Though I'd argue that the Ruddigore, Iolanthe, and Yeomen cut songs do not fall in this category: They are regularly reinstated, and relatively easy to get) As for the Patience, Pirates and Pinafore ones, I'd leave them in the song list only until we add a Versions section.
There are four levels of cut song: 1. Lost completely: [De Belville trio, first version of Act I of Pirates] - these should definately be nothing more than a historical footnote and not be put in the music list (exception: Utopia's cut song for Zara, which occupies a numbering slot, and therefore brief mention of it clarifies a gap) 2. Exists, but is hard to get almost never performed: there are two levels of this: The original "Is life a boon", which is never, ever performed since the revised version is almost unilaterally dubbed better and similar, and the Pirates Act II finale cut material, which is reinstated by Carl de Rosa and a few rare others, but is otherwise hard to find. The latter was my justification for mentioning the Pirates Act II variants.
3. Exists, but in a somewhat incomplete state: "Reflect, my child", "Though men of rank". These are performed, are reasonably available, but are still rare.
4. Easily readded and are: The two Yeomen solos, Fold your flapping wings.
Certainly, leave out 1. 2 and 3 would be better put in a versions section, but may be worth mentioning in the song list whilst the versions section is being prepared (Though, as a suggestion, maybe only mention them in footnote). I'd always list class 4, since they regularly appear.
Pirates, by the way, has the additional problem of the Papp version having several unofficial additions, including one part in the Act II finale. (The "At last we are provided" reprise of Major General's song, Sorry her lot, and the matter trio, as I recall. These are a whole other can of worms.)
Are we at least agreed on my arguement for the three songs in class 4? Might be wise to make a policy on this.Adam Cuerden 14:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Drat, forgot a fifth category: Alternate songs ("Happy are we in our loving fivolity"), ("Henceforth all the crimes"/"For thirty-five years"). I'd be inclined to do these on a case-by-case basis: "Happy are we" could well be reduced to a footnote, but if, as Sam says, F35Y is regularly produced, we should include it directly in the list. Adam Cuerden 15:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- How about this: If it's published in a standard piano/vocal score, AND it's often done in performance, put it in the list (You could put in Henceforth all the Crimes and drop the footnote re: the appendix). Also, I agree that Jealous Torments and ALB are probably OK to list, since one or the other is done so frequently now, as long as it is clear that they were cut by G&S and are still often omitted. FYFW I would still just put in the version discussion, as it's really pretty rare. It had a brief period of popularity, but I think the consensus of directors over the last 10 or 15 years is that it shouldn't generally be done in perfomance. --Ssilvers 16:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Sam's compromise is pretty reasonable. I could go either way on Jealous Torments and ALB (they're not in any standard score, but have become fairly common in performance).
-
-
-
- I have never seen a production of The Sorcerer that restored the 1877 version in full. Although occasional amateur productions have restored "Happy are we" into the 1884 text, there's no established consensus on where it fits, or if it fits. (Savoynet used it as curtain call music, to give but one example.)
-
-
-
- The Papp changes are simply a rewrite specific to one production, albeit a very successful one. The Pirates article has a whole section on the Papp production, which goes into some of these changes. "At length we are provided" is authentic from the original American production, but it's not published in any score. The Versions section should discuss it.
-
-
-
- No guarantees, but I'm hoping to put in some work on "Versions" for several of the operas over the weekend. Marc Shepherd 16:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
-
Works for me. And footnotes for proto-Versions sections? Adam Cuerden 18:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Images
I hate to just list this, but I don't have time to do it myself:
Go here. Put in a search for "Patience". A great number of out-of-copyright, beautiful images are available (check bibliographical details on the individual pages for information, and I'd suggest including any details from the LOC catalogue in the image information summary when uploading). Any or all of these would be beautiful illustrations to this. Adam Cuerden talk 20:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Must do this tomorrow. Ugh. Hate the current images. Adam Cuerden talk 19:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Saphir in 1965
Not Patricia Leonard, I think. It looks as though Miss Leonard has slipped sideways from 1975. Alas the old programmes on my shelves do not include a Patience for 1965. Pauline Wales for the 1965 Lady Saphir, I think, but I have no solid evidence to that effect. - Tim riley 18:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oops! It turned out to be just a formatting problem. -- Ssilvers 18:26, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hippie clothing
The D'Oyly Carte Opera Company never staged a production using hippie costumes, although they did a few special "last night" performances in hippie costume. Previously in the article, we already discuss amateur hippie productions. As far as I know, there was never a major professional production of any kind using hippie costumes. -- Ssilvers 03:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
