Talk:Pierrot Lunaire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pierrot Lunaire is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, cleanup, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that aren't covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.

	This article falls within the scope of the WikiProject contemporary music, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of contemporary music subjects. If you would like to participate, please 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.

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
	The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents 1 Capitalization of title 2 Two articles merged without edit? 3 Correcting descriptions 4 Instrumentation 5 Possible copyright violation

[edit] Capitalization of title

Is the correct capitalization of this "Pierrot Lunaire" or "Pierrot lunaire"? My French is too bad to even be pardoned, but I usually see the latter.... Mindspillage (spill your mind?) 03:56, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It looks like the correct complete title is Dreimal sieben Gedichte aus Albert Girauds Pierrot lunaire. So lower case 'l'. French rarely uses caps ... perhaps moveth the page we must. Antandrus 04:03, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Two articles merged without edit?

all the information starting in the second last paragraph with "Schoenberg uses Sprechtstimme" until the end is already stated in a less precise way earlier on. it makes it seem like two separate articles pasted together unedited!! -Dinah Shadd

[edit] Correcting descriptions

What is the justification for describing this work as containing Klangfarbenmelodie? Is this a musicological view? The author should take a look at the corresponding Wikipedia article for the more usual understanding of the term.

Incidentally, the poems of Pierrot lunaire are written in rondell form, not rondeau form (!). And Schoenberg's fear of the number thirteen has evidently been ignored by whoever added that information about numerology.

It is not Klangfarbenmelodie (perhaps the author confused this with the pieces for orchestra?); you should remove that point. I don't know poetic forms, so I won't argue the "rondeau" point either, but may I ask, what does Schoenberg's triskaidekaphobia have to do with the numerology section though? Does it have any significant relationship to the piece? - Rainwarrior 00:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Instrumentation

I am very confused as to why it is an "extravagant claim" that many ensembles adopted this set of instruments. There are many many such ensembles around today (eighth blackbird, Da Capo Chamber Players -- which has been around for more than 35 years!, Ensemble Alternance, etc.), and it is considered by many to be the most common grouping for contemporary music outside of the standard classical ensembles. Such groups have existed since at least the time of the Pierrot Players in 1965. I think this should be included as a major legacy of Pierrot. What would be the best way to include this information? Pre10s 05:00, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Look, the claim is only "extravagant" because the cited source does not confirm any of this information. By all means add Eighth Blackbird, and the rest, but please cite sources documenting their existence.--Jerome Kohl 06:23, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I see that you have now done exactly as I suggested, Pre10s. It looks good to me.—Jerome Kohl 17:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your vigilant help! Pre10s 22:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible copyright violation

The section "English translation" seems to be directly lifted from here [1]. Since the source doesn't indicate copyright status, I'm assuming that it doesn't conform to policy to just lift it onto the article. In any case, it was completely unformatted, and I've removed it.Classicalclarinet (talk) 12:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)