Talk:Parody music

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] “usually very well known”

What's the point of mentioning that? Unless it is “usually little known”, isn't everything about “usually very well known”? - AVRS 10:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Re-read the sentence again and you will probably see how silly the question is. The object of musical parody is USUALLY a very well known piece of music (in its original form) - if only because it makes a better joke that way. On the other hand this is far from always the case - some parody has become much better known than the "original" - in fact most people may not even know it is a parody. Sometimes the original joke was pretty obscure, or wasn't even really meant to be funny. To put it another way - music that is parodied is "usually well known" - but it is "sometimes not so well known". Soundofmusicals 01:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Pedants (NOT saying you are one) VERY often lose the ability to make sense of passages of connected prose altogether, because they can't see anything in context - words and phrases have become more important than sentences, and sentences more important than paragraphs. Most importantly, style is more important than meaning, in fact meaning has lost its importance altogether. Might I suggest it is impossible to constructively criticise the the style of a passage one does not understand? Soundofmusicals 01:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I am not talking about style at all.
An old definition of filk was floating around everywhere until 2006-2007 (and still is, but the Wikipedia article is now closer to the top), which said (in Russian): “Filk is a parody of an existing, and often very well known song, where words are replaced, but the original melody is used.”
A try for an analogy: “most computer programs are running on an operating system (usually very well known)”.
Although, if you think the bit loses its strength (of meaning, not of style; in a short text, I'd rather have it, if I cared about style, but it damages the meaning) in the _long_ context of the article, I agree to drop this question.
Sorry about your last paragraph; good thing I didn't received it at night, or I would… read it as a whole only, without the good meaning in it.
If this is to go on, it would be nice (and necessary) to have other opinions, too.
--AVRS 09:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
In musical parody there are two objects. One is the original, the other the derived work. Usually (but NOT always) the original is well known. The derived work is usually (but NOT always) meant to be amusing. This amusement to a large extent relies on the original being familiar to the listener. If that is clear I don't think there is any more to be said. I think the only issue is that you didn't precisely understand what I was saying. In turn, I think I probably misunderstood your original objection. Soundofmusicals 12:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PDQ Bach?

Wouldn't a mention of P. D. Q. Bach be appropriate? Binksternet 13:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Very funny, but is it parody? Not all musical humour is. Have a look at the definition at the top and see what you think yourself. Soundofmusicals 23:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I think 'yes'. Binksternet 05:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gilbert and Sullivan "operas"?

Not in an encyclopedia, where terms have to have some kind of meaning!! Most French and German 19th century operetta is in fact MUCH more "operatic" than G&S - the works they wrote together are really intermediate between true operetta and the later form of musical comedy - and were were only dignified with the name "Comic Opera" at the time:

1. As a joke!! (Quite a good one too, of course).

2. In order to studiously avoid the "operetta" label and thus avoid the "saucy" implication (German and French operetta was often rather naughty) and so (hopefully) to attract a larger audience. They certainly got a big audience - but lots of staid Victorian critics STILL found them a bit questionable, and the really fastidious continued to stay away. They were considered "unworthy" of a composer of Sullivan's standing exactly because they were classed as "popular" rather than "classical" music.

By any rational definition, they are either English language operettas - or perhaps proto-musicals!

Only Yoemen, (and perhaps Ruddigore) is even close to being a "comic opera" (much less an "opera", since the term on its own implies a serious opera).

None the less - having noted your tenacity over questions like this - I have reworded the offending sentence in an attempt at compromise.Soundofmusicals 09:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Notable emissions

- The Capitol Steps.

- Mark Twain's "Battle Hymn Of The Republic", Brought Down To Date". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.74.1 (talk) 10:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

-I take it you mean "omissions." As it stands the subhead accuses the Capitol Steps and Mark Twain of air pollution. :D Dougie monty (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)