Talk:Giacomo Puccini

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects.
Click [show] for further details

This article falls within the scope of the Opera WikiProject, a collaboration to develop Wikipedia articles on operas and opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project talk page is a place to discuss issues, identify areas of neglect and exchange ideas. New members are very welcome!

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.

Comments: ^{edit · history · watch · purge}

B-class, bordering on Start

poor structure
copyright problems with pictures. Both poster and second portrait claimed to be PD because the author died more than 70 years ago. But as the authors (the artist who designed the poster, or the photographer) are not mentioned, it is impossible to verify
in-line citations need to be added
Possible POV Errabee 12:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

[edit] Art an illness quote

I recently found a quote attributed to Puccini : "Art is a kind of illness". I am curious as to what might have prompted such a statement?

Puccini suffered from a kind of frenetic creative impulse. Similiar to a drug adict, long before the finishing of an opera he suffered a strong anxsiousness about what to do next, as if without creating, he was not existing.--FaZ72 22:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Many artists have this. Puccini? He didn't write so many operas, and stopped working for long periods. But when he was composing, yes, this is true: it was a kind of fever. -- Al pereira 17:25, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Turandot: the Final

Why this particular matter is talked here? The existence of different endings is an interesting info regarding the Turandot article, but they haven't actually to do with Puccini's biography. I suggest to delete these info or to move some of them to Turandot --Al pereira 03:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, i will address the isue when i have time. The point was that the last part of the article, as it was before was confusing. So you think that even the short mention to Berios final should be left out?

No, a short mention can be left. Thanks. --Al pereira 02:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

A note from someone else: this article is not in accord with the Turandot article, factually, and contains too much opinion (that Alfano's ending is "poor" - that's a value judgment on the part of the author, not something that can be factually supported - all that can be said is that Maguire felt that way, if she did). I'm not going to mess with it, but someone should consider ironing out the differences between the two articles. The Turandot article has a different account of Toscanini's words, and more support for its version, as well.

I didn’t write that Alfano's version is pour, but that he's attempts to interpret the sketches were pour, which is an objective fact. Anyway I have moved the information (in a hopefully more clear way) in the Turandot topic.

Toscanini's words in the current article are from an academic source: ‘Turandot and Its Posthumous Prima’ by William Ashbrook (in Opera Quarterly 2/1984, 126-131) who cites directly ‘Carteggi pucciniani’ of Euginio Gara (Milan: Ricordi, 1958: p563) with the following footnote:

'Thus does Gara remember Toscanini's words, which he was present to hear for he adds the detail that the conductor's voice "was hoarser than usual." What he said was: "The opera ends here because at this point the Maestro died."’ ('Qui finisce l'opera, perché a questo punti il maestro è morto' in the text on page 127)

i found this citation on http://www.puccini.it/scientifica/epistolaren.htm that may help to explain futher:

'Biographies in particular indulge in the anecdotal, and the many collections of letters, beginning with the Epistolario edited by Giuseppe Adami (1928, rpt. 1982) and the Carteggi pucciniani edited by Eugenio Gara (1958), do not follow philological criteria for critical editions and offer conflicting information in their annotations, not to mention numerous errors. '

I suggest to use my sources, since they are of 1958, 16 years before the citation on the Turandot article.--FaZ72 08:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tears of Toscanini

I have rewriten the sentence of Toscanini at Turandot's premiere, from a personal translation of the known italian source. I have removed the tears, since in none of the different reports i read they are mentioned, so i consider it likely a myth. I am reading a lot, since i am writing an essay about different finals of the opera in this days.

[edit] Vandalism?

At the bottom of the article it states "As many know, Giacomo is believed to have been reborn in Concord, MA as Alexander Nordeen. Alexander proves this through his excellent ramshacking qualities and ability to lead. He is a great prospect." I can only presume this is some tosser goofing around.

Why, yes, yes it was. Looks like it's been removed now; you can also see how to do this yourself. Cheers, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 12:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia policy

It is wikipedia policy to name things by the name which they are most commonly named. Someone has (correctly) insisted that the "Messa di Gloria" is (technically) named "Messa", but while this is technically correct, everyone in the music biz knows it as "Messa di Gloria". It might be someone's "fault", but tough titties. That's what's it's known as, by 99.99% of musicians, and pedantically insisting that it's *NOT* known as such is against wikipedia policy. Revolver 02:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[1]. If popular CDs, programme notes, and academic works refer to it as "di Gloria", I think that makes it the most popular name. Sorry, I know it's "wrong". Revolver 02:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I gave a detailed rational, citing wikipedia policy, and you revert without any comment. I'm taking to RfC. Ridiculous. Revolver 03:14, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

If somebody writes the article about Puccini's Messa, you can make a redirect from Messa di Gloria, but the first aim of the article Giacomo Puccini is to give correct info about Giacomo Puccini and his works, and to rectify the wrong ones. Obviously, the article can include a note about the wrong but more popular title of "Messa di Gloria". Thanks. --Al pereira 03:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

My comment is here, just be patient... --Al pereira 03:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Fine, my point is, if (and most likely when, I could do it in 2 seconds), an actual article is made on the Messa di Gloria, then such a decision on the actual title will have to be made. Contrary to your opinion, giving the most common name first and making it VERY clear that the name is a historical accident which is technically incorrect is not "giving wrong information". And Wikipedia policy is clear that the title of such a future article should be Messa di Gloria, not Messa. It's plain English. By your reasoning, it would be incorrect to name the article on dogs "dog" instead of "Canis lupus familiaris", because the latter is the 100% precise name. Unless you deny that "di Gloria" is the most commonly used name? And you can support this? Revolver 03:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I see you're Italian. Maybe this is a language thing, and maybe Messa di Gloria is not common in Italian. If that's the case, your POV is easier to understand. But still, realise this is English, not Italian wikipedia. Revolver 03:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(common_names)#Examples. Revolver 03:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

A "Dog" is indeed a "Canis lupus familiaris", but a "Messa di gloria" is a particolar type of "Messa", not all the "messe" are "di gloria", like not all the "messe" are "di requiem". Calling "Messa di Gloria" Puccini's "Messa" is like calling "poodle" a dog of a different "race". --Al pereira 03:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The wrong title comes just from Italy. --Al pereira 03:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what you're trying to say. The "wrong title" is common in the US, so it doesn't come "just from Italy". Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this disagreement. Revolver 04:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

"just" = "only", is the meaning I read above. Revolver 04:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

It was Italian publisher Ricordi who printed a piano-vocal score as "Messa di Gloria", together with a full score correctly entitled "Messa". --Al pereira 10:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

"It is today's most popular opera."- I have changed it back to "It is arguably today's most popular opera" because there are no hard facts about popularity of operas- it is sheerly based on general consent, so I think 'arguably' would have to be there.--Doublea 21:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adaptations

I don't know if it'd be considered blasphemous, but it might be important to note some of the adaptations of Puccini's works in modern culture. Off the top of my head, there's the musical Rent, and that Kevin Spacey movie...The Life and Times of David Gale or something.

[edit] Subjective details

The section of this article labelled 'style' troubles me a little. While I don't think orchestration per se can ever be said to 'characterize' anything, the article doesn't currently even suggest how 'the orchestra at the end of Madama Butterfly reflects the tragedy of Cio-Cio-San's love'. And as for 'one can feel the sun rising'... I think it's pretty clear that any such feeling is the result of the context, and nothing to do with some innate expressive quality in P.'s 'style'. I'm going to make some changes to try and make this a little more scientific. Ajcounter 17:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't know where to start. It seems to me that the entire first paragraph of this section needs to be deleted. Has P.'s style been avoided by musicologists? Is this because of its complexity? Who precisely considers him to be one of the greatest orchestrators in opera? What is 'heavily integrated' orchestration? There's basically not a single comment here which is encyclopedic... However, deleting that much material is a massive edit which I'm not prepared to make without some discussion. Anyone any suggestions for a middle course? Ajcounter 17:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank goodness someone's actually taking notice of this page. I suggest just a rewrite of the section (which didn't exist until a few months ago). Of course, some of the things mentioned in the current form (Ex. Wagnerian influence in orchestration, liefmotifs, melodic style, etc.) should be retained. Doublea 04:35, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I've just edited the "Style" section; it's not been gutted, but I've cut quite a lot. I've done this more as a musician than a Puccini-fan, so if anyone wants to check the history and progressively reintegrate more cogent versions of the specific refs to the works which I've removed due to their un-scientific character, please feel free! Ajcounter 22:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] His death marked the end of opera as a popular art form

Although some of the referenced sources hint at this, I think this dramatic claim needs a specific citation and a detailed explanation. Is it true? What does it mean? Why did it happen? -- Meyer 09:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

It's true, from my subjective experience, that the standard opera repetoire ends with the death of Puccini. (There are a few exceptions, e.g. some of Britten's operas, but the point remains largely true). Since then, modern classical music has embraced dissidence and atonality, which have never won the hearts of ordinary opera and concert goers. As classical music has moved away from melody, the market for new classical music has constantly decreased in size, its place taken by pop. Can anyone suggest an operatic aria, or any piece of classical music, that are large number of non-specialists could hum which was compsed after "Nessun dorma" (which was some time in the 1920s)? Puccini was also the last of the old style opera composers in that he was a central cultural figure and icon for his country, in a way that no classical composer can be nowadays.

Any piece of classical music? Copland's Rodeo immediately comes to mind. Heck, the American Beef Board used "Hoe-Down" in their ads for years. In much the same way The William Tell Overture is linked to the Lone Ranger, you hum two bars of that to the average American and they'll say "Beef, it's what's for dinner.". Granted, it's based on older folk music, but I think more people these days know the Copland composition over the source material. "Fanfare for the Common Man" is also pretty widely known. Both of these works are nearly two decades newer than Turandot. RandyKaelber (talk) 08:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The first pages of the Ashcroft/Powers book (Puccini's Turandot:The End of the Great Tradition) (see main article references), begin by quoting the final page of The Golden Century of Italian Opera by William Weaver as saying ' The opera ends here.. Toscanini might have been speaking not just of P's last work but of Italian opera in general'. etc. etc (They then go on to explain & qualify that opinion, but the damage is done :-))

Bob aka Linuxlad (talk) 20:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] State of the article

I believe this article needs a serious re-write, less for substance than for style and usage. There are many poorly-constructed sentences and typos, and the feel is that of an article translated from Italian (I imagine) into English. When I can I will tidy it up but feel free to beat me to it! --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 14:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

You are right; it certainly needs work. I'll work on it too. Vivaverdi 16:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Puccini in movies

I think it might be interesting to add a section on the use of Puccini's music in movies. One list can be found at this adress.

Let's Go To Prison (2006) by Bob Odenkirk - Turandot: Nessun dorma

Rocky Balboa (2006) by Sylvester Stallone - Gianni schicchi: O mio babbino caro

Chasing Liberty (2004) by Andy Cadiff - Turandot: Nessun dorma

Under the Tuscan Sun (2003) - Madama Butterfly: Humming Chorus

The life of David Gale (2003) by Alan Parker - Turandot: Tu che di gel sei centa

Bend It Like Beckham (2003) - Music ("Nessun Dorma")

40 Days and 40 Nights (2002) - Tosca: Recondita Armonia

Death to Smoochy (2002) - Tosca: Vissi D'Arte"

Very Annie Mary (2002) - Turandot: Nessun Dorma - Gianni Schicchi: O mio babbino caro

The Kid Stays in the Picture (2002) - Tosca: Vissi d'arte

Captain Corelli's Mandolin (2001) - Gianni Schicchi: O mio Babbino Caro

Pavilion of Women (2001) - Madama Butterfly: Un Bel Di Vedremo

Recess: School's Out (2001) - Turandot: Nessun Dorma

etc... etc...

For the moment I am going to add it as an external link.

[edit] Infobox

Giacomo Puccini

Background information
Birth name	Giacomo Antonio Domenico Michele Secondo Maria Puccini
Born	December 22, 1858 Lucca, Italy
Died	November 29, 1924 Brussels, Belgium
Genre(s)	Romantic
Occupation(s)	Composer

In view of the strong consensus which has emerged aganst using popular music infoboxes for composers I am moving the box here while retaining the photo on the article page. Any comments. BTW I don't think many people would regard Puccini as a Romantic Composer. - Kleinzach 05:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately this box has just been put back on the article without any explanantion or comment here. I am reverting and suggest we discuss it here. --Kleinzach 11:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be discussed. Until a new infobox for composers is created this one will have to do.
NewYork1956 11:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

In view of the Three-revert rule, the prohibition against edit wars and the fact that NewYork1956 has just reverted for the fourth time, I am not going to make any changes to the article until other people have expressed opinions. NewYork1956 refuses to discuss the infobox, however I'd like to suggest to other editors that (1) the Italian flag is anachronistic re Puccini's birth as it preceded the Risorgimento, and (2) Puccini was not a Romantic composer (actually 'Romantic' is not a genre anyway). The genre he developed is called verismo. The reason why all members of the Opera Project and the Composers Project are unanimously against using these infoboxes is that they were designed for pop music. They are simplistic and misleading when used for major composers . --Kleinzach 23:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Then change it yourself, don't remove the whole box. You seem to be the only person with a problem with the way it is currently set up on this article and until a new infobox for composers is created this one is just fine.

NewYork1956 02:43, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a note, from Italy: neither romantic nor "verista". Actually, one cannot call "verista" neither Mascagni or Leoncavallo, since the most part of Mascagni operas are not at all "veriste" and the very Leoncavallo wrote many operettas! Nowadays, a link between Puccini and opera verista can be (partly) seen only as regards Tosca and Il tabarro. Maybe an opera can be said "romantic" or "verista" but, like you write, it would be very "simplistic and misleading" to put a composer in one of these categories. Surely not Puccini. So, first at all, I suggest to delete that info. --Al Pereira (talk) 02:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

The infobox should be removed per the centralised discussion. It only encourages users to add simplistic or outright inaccurate information. --Folantin 08:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

As there is no support for retaining the infobox I am removing it. I hope this will be respected and there will be no further revertions. Thank you. --Kleinzach 00:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree in removing it, as noted in the centralized discussion on the Composers project. Infoboxes for composers oversimplify, and jam people into "genres" that range from the misleading to the meaningless. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 00:44, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree too --Al Pereira (talk) 01:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

i find the attitudes regarding the infoboxes and composer quite odd. keeping in mind that not everyone who visits these pages are as familiar with the classical genre as some of the editors and patrollers of the composer articles. what infoboxes do is impart information quickly to those who may not be inclined or have the time to plunge into the depths of music theory to find something interesting. these composers are not deities and gods...just men with a truck-load of talent. let's not forget that wikipaedia is not for the learned...for those seeking information, and all this stilting and deifying serves only to is exclude the very people we should be woeing. --emerson7 | Talk 02:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Please feel free to join the discussion on the Composers Project. We are using infoboxes for certain types of information/navigation, so we are not against them per se. What we are strongly opposed to is wrong information. IMO something that is badly designed will never produce a good result. If we were writing a children's encyclopedia, there might be a virtue in (intelligent) simplification, but we are not. Also I don't see why music articles should be pitched at a lowest-common-denominator level if scientific articles are not. In order to make the articles as accessible as possible, we need to concentrate on the clarity of the text (which is always open to constructive criticism) not misinformation via these little boxes. --Kleinzach 03:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

We have now had a cooling off perod of two days. Four editors have asked for the infobox to be removed and only two want to keep it, so I am now removing it from the article page. I hope the majority view will be respected. That's the way WP works - we are democratic, we vote. --Kleinzach 02:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

there has been no concensus declared...the controvery rages on here ...and all posts previously posted here were referred there. ...and even if wp was a democracy, six hardly qualifies as a quorum --emerson7 | Talk 03:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I see you have again replaced the infobox. What is your definition of a consensus? That everyone agrees with you? Since when did we need a quorum? Are the editors here not entitled to make decisions about this article? --Kleinzach 04:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

What Kleinzach said. Also see WP:OWN. --Folantin 07:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Please, just kill the boxen. Doesn't contribute to anyone's understanding of Puccini? Occupation - composer? Well, yes. But it's just useless. Not needed. Moreschi ^Talk 12:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Also against the boxes; glad to see it gone. --Myke Cuthbert 21:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

This has been discussed on the Wikipedia:WikiProject composers page in the hope that it would not have to be hashed out on every single article. There is a clear consensus there among editors of composer articles that infoboxes are not helpful. We should not need to convince the whole encyclopedia to have the exact same style - this part of the encyclopedia has chosen not to have infoboxes for now, and I hope that can be ok. Mak (talk) 02:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

In fairness to the infobox side, I think that the wishes of the editors of a particular page tend to trump the wishes of editors of a general group of pages--if otherwise then we, writing about WikiProject Composers, wouldn't have the right to form a consensus against infoboxes since the larger project, biography, has decided for them. So in general, right, it should not be necessary to argue against infoboxes on every single page, but if an editor of a particular page wants to include one, I think we need to engage in conversation at that page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mscuthbert (talk • contribs) 05:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

Sure, I agree with you. I just have a problem when a person's only contribution to a page is to add an infobox. Mak (talk) 21:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Especially when they're an "anonymous" ISP. If you know what I'm saying...--Folantin 21:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed on these points. (Now if only I could get automatic signatures so HagermanBot would stop bugging my Talk page.) --Myke Cuthbert 22:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)