Talk:The Mikado

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan, organized to complete and improve the Gilbert and Sullivan related articles on Wikipedia. You can participate by editing the article attached to this page or by visiting the project page, to join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale for the G&S Project.

You may comment here on the rating or to explain the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents

[edit] Original comment

FYI, Gilbert and Sullivan themselves referred to their works as "comic operas" or "operas," never as "operettas." I have therefore restored that phrase. Marc Shepherd 04:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Anime version?

I have often toyed with the notion of an anime version of the Mikado.Who else feels this way? R.G. 04:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)R.G.

That is like the funniest shit I have ever heard.. :P - UnlimitedAccess 09:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I would watch that. The Wednesday Island 13:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
I've always thought it would be a great addition to the Project A-ko series. Not R 13:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious

The old story that Gilbert was inspired by a falling sword has long since been proved false. (I just don't have time at the moment to put in a correction.) I don't know any source for the claim that the Japanese were ambivalent about the opera, or that the town of Chichibu performs the opera frequently. Marc Shepherd 17:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree that Gilbert probably made up the falling-sword story, but the article doesn't claim Gilbert's story was true, just that he said it was, and that it was dramatized in Topsy-Turvy (both verifiably true statements). Also, Gilbert certainly visited Knightsbridge; he even refers to the ongoing exhibition in one line of The Mikado. So I've removed that {{disputed}} tag, but as I've never heard of Chichibu outside this article, I can't comment on the other one. --Quuxplusone 03:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
In fact, Gilbert never even said that the sword fell, only that the story was inspired by a sword. Marc Shepherd 04:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
I've now had time to look up the reference debunking the falling sword story, and updated the article accordingly. Marc Shepherd 23:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure it was Bulldog in the fraiser episode (down the bottom of the page under trivia) that instigated the prank in that show but instead 2 recently hired shock jocks.

I think you are right, it was recently aired on repeat in the UK and it was two shock jocks who start laughing at the end. If I get time today I'll google for the episode guide and look at the cast list and summary to see if I can confirm it.

[edit] Chichibu Discussion

I've moved this to the "Controversy" section, where it more logically belongs. I could find no evidence that the town of Chichibu "regularly" performs the opera, only that they have performed it. I also found no reference connecting Chichibu to anything that occurs in the 1938 film, and therefore removed that from the discussion. Marc Shepherd 16:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Do we want to say anything about the professional Chichubu Mikado that was presented in Buxton? --Ssilvers 00:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chinese manners?

I have never read this. Where did you get it? --Ssilvers 15:40, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I am Japanese, and I'm afraid the play does confuse Japanese styles with Chinese ways. For example, some female dancers are wearing ancient Chinese costumes. And another thing to point out is that Nanki-Poo holds the shamisen like the guitar and plays it with his bare hand.Tmesipteris 12:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
It appears that you are confusing some particular production with the show itself. I am not aware of anything in the libretto suggests confusion of Asian cultures. Gilbert and Sullivan based the Japanese stylings in the play on what they saw at the Knightsbridge exhibit of 1884. Their perception of Japananese styles was, doubtless imprecise, and of course, the play is not about Japan at all, but about Britain, disguised in Japanese clothing, but I do not believe that there is any intentional reference to China or Chinese styles in the libretto or stage directions. --Ssilvers 19:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I see. I watched the play in DVD, which was the version performed in Stratford, Canada. And whether it is intentional or not, it can be the case that some things the people there believe are Japanese do not sound Japanese to us. But yes, as you say, I think it depends on which production it is. Tmesipteris 13:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The Stratford productions are notorious for varying from the intentions of G&S. If you read the libretto and listen to a D'Oyly Carte recording, I think you will see that any suggestion of Chinese customs was entirely the creation of the Stratford directors. --Ssilvers 15:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Tmesipteris 13:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
That said, the whole burying the wife alive with her husband mention always gave me the vague feeling that it was referencing something other than Japan. Dido and Aeneas? Something Indian, Arabic, or Egyptian involving emprorers taking their slaves and wives with them? But I've never worked it into a definate thought. Adam Cuerden 20:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Song list

Revised it. Alter as you wish. Adam Cuerden 15:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pish-Tush

In the original production, Frederick Bovill, who played Pish-Tush, proved unable satisfactorily to sing the low notes in the Act Two quartet, "Brightly dawns our wedding day". Pish-Tush's line ends on a bottom F, and the piece lies lower than the rest of the role. An extra character, Go-To, was introduced for this scene. The D'Oyly Carte Opera Company continued this practice. The role of Go-To is sometimes removed, and Pish-Tush reinstated into the quartet, when played by someone with a sufficient range.

...This is pretty awkward indeed. Perhaps it's time to lose this footnote and start a new section so that we can tease out all the thoughts being lumped together in that one overworked footnote? Adam Cuerden 23:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's so bad. I think we have other things that are higher priority. Why don't you leave this alone for a week and come back to it with a fresh mind. --Ssilvers 00:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
It's not mine. Just things like the second sentence interrupting the natural flow between the first and third seems awkward to me, and the "The D'Oyly Carte Company continued the practice" seems awkward. Of course, you may have notived that I prefer sentences with several clauses, to allow conjugations and prepositions to draw out the connections between the thoughts, more than most... Adam Cuerden 07:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I took a crack at fixing it. I also removed the name of the original Pish, since it will be listed in Marc's chart of DOC performers. However, it is a long footnote, so feel free to move it to text somewhere, if there is an appropriate section. --Ssilvers 13:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the solution is to add a "Versions" section (like Ruddigore) where the situation can be explained more expansively. Pish-Tush's role was curtailed in at least three places — he was eliminated from the Madrigal, he was eliminated from "So please you sir," and he lost the line "Why, who are you who ask this question?" I think it's a fair inference that Mr. Bovill was not considered up-to-snuff for a good deal of his part, and it's worth noting that he was not accommodated in the cast of the next opera.
There are other things to mention, like the re-ordering of "The sun whose rays" and the List song, the shortening of "Were you not to Ko-Ko plighted," and so forth. But I don't think it's urgent, and I'd rather work on it when I'm at home and have my references in front of me. I'd probably get it 90% right from memory, but I'd rather work from sources and make it 99%. Marc Shepherd 13:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, adding a Versions section seems like a good idea, and we probably need it in other shows too, even if it may be brief. But, the evidence is that Bovill was good in the role. It appears that he could not handle the lower parts of the role that were assigned to others, but he seems to have handled the higer parts of the role well. According to "The Entr'acte", Saturday, 28 March 1885, Bovill "proves himself to be possessed of a very useful voice, and so also does another gentleman, who sings the basso music in the madrigal." Bovill played the role throughout its run, and Carte engaged him again in 1891 for the Royal English Opera House to play the Squire in the first production of Ivanhoe and later as the Chancellor in La Basoche. He was also in the cast of the 1898 Zonophoney Thespis. --Ssilvers 21:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Reference Query

The reference for the Mikado being one of the most frequently performed pieces of theatre of all time seems somewhat suspect to me. It trots out the same old "Gilbert snubbed for knighthood", etc fallacies. I believe the information about the number of performances, but surely we can find a more generally accurate cite. Adam Cuerden 12:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Sam has now done so. Marc Shepherd 13:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vocal ranges in roles

Pooh bah has lots of high singing. In See How the Fates, he sings the tenor line. I don't see how we can call Pooh Bah a bass-baritone and Hildebrand, which is very low, a baritone. --Ssilvers 13:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

In general, people have been putting in vocal ranges based on their personal impressions. I suggest we take a time-out, review what has been done for the thirteen extant G&S operas, and agree on a standard which we'll memorialize at WP:G&S. Then we won't have to deal with the problem every time someone goes in and changes the characters' vocal ranges, which seems to be happening all the time.
I have no problem with saying that Pooh-Bah is a baritone, rather than bass-baritone. I wouldn't say, however, that he has the tenor line in "See how the fates." There is no tenor in that number. He has the higher of the baritone lines. Marc Shepherd 13:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't see how we're really going to arrive at any satisfactory "standard". It's very subjective and depends not only on the range of the role but the tessitura and general "weight" of the role. There are times, particularly in the first act, where Pooh appears to be a bass-baritone, and times, mostly in the act II, where he is definitely not a bass-baritone. So, I think it is safer to call him a baritone. As I said before, Hildebrand sits very low for a baritone, despite the one high "F" that he sings in "That's the long and the short of it", and I really think the better description for him is bass-baritone. Other than that, I don't think there have been many changes in the vocal range, and these two have been discussed mostly between the two of us. --Ssilvers 13:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Addendum. I saw that you reverted Luiz to "baritone", an assessment with which I agree. This may have prompted you to say that "people have been putting in vocal ranges....", but again, I really think that it is not a big problem -- there are a very few major roles that people like to argue about, and unless you are suggesting putting a list of roles that we ought to have a consensus on, I don't see what else there is to say about these on the project page. --Ssilvers 15:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I apologise: I came to the page and found him listed as "baritone or bass-baritone (See below)" or something like that, looked below, did a text search by his name, concluded he must have gotten mixed up with Pish-Tush, and so, thinking of "I am so proud", chose one. Obviously, I chose wrongly. Adam Cuerden 20:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
No prob! Marc Shepherd 20:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

In any case, you were not really wrong. Indeed, my opinion expressed above bucks the commonly-held conception that P-B is a bass-baritone. But, as I note above, I think that it's better played by a baritone who can handle the higher parts of the role as well as the lower, so a versatile voice is called for with, preferably, a fairly dark sound. So, it's a close call. --Ssilvers 20:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if any milage could be made out of swapping Pooh-Bah and Pish-Tush's lines around for amateur use? The plot rarely hinges on which of the two is there at any one time.
Obviously, I don't support this as a general practice! But it might solve casting difficulties here and there Adam Cuerden 23:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
There are a few brief sections where Pooh-Bah has the highest baritone lines and Ko-Ko the lowest. It's common practice to swap these. Not R 13:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The 1939 Motion Picture Version

I'm surprised there's no real mention of the movie adaptation in full color, back when color films were still in the clear minority. I think it may have even been the first color movie by Universal. Any film buffs willing to tackle this one? --71.207.226.188 02:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I added a heading for Film versions and got the ball rolling. If you follow the links, there is a lot of info that could be extracted. Happy editing! --Ssilvers 03:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I've made some updates to that section. Note that the 1939 film was not a D'Oyly Carte undertaking. Marc Shepherd 16:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The film section still lacks considerably. At least three notable versions have been made in teh second half of the century (including the the film of the Stratford production, and the Eric Idle production), none of which are mentioned. 69.178.122.114 (talk) 20:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The Stratford and English National Opera versions are not films. Unlike those mentioned in the article, they never had a theatrical release. They are stage productions that were issued on home video. Whether they are particularly notable is a whole other question — there are other Mikados on video too — but these are not films. Marc Shepherd (talk) 21:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

A more interesting question might be whether or not to mention the Stratford and ENO productions themselves (or whether any other productions are notable enough to mention) under the productions section. There have been so many non-DOC productions of The Mikado, that one could argue that none of them are "notable".... -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

Isn't that last one a bit obscure? Adam Cuerden talk 15:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Right, here's a whole list of links I have cut:

  • Allan Sherman did a parody of the "Tit-willow" song ("On a tree by a river"), in which the bird in question talks and sings with a stereotypical Jewish accent. Sherman is so impressed by the bird's singing that he takes him down from his branch, and home "to mein split-level ranch". His wife misinterprets the gift and fricassees the bird, whose last words are, "Oy! Willow! Tit-willow! Willow!"
  • Sherman also did a variant on "I've Got a Little List", presenting reasons why one might want to seek psychiatric help, and titled "You Need an Analyst".
  • Eureeka's Castle, a children's television show, did a parody of "I've Got a Little List" in a Christmas special, called "Just Put it on the List," wherein the twins, Bogg and Quagmire, describe what they'd like for Christmas.
  • Other well-known actors who have played the role of Ko-Ko are Eric Idle and Bill Oddie, with both appearing in the same English National Opera production of "The Mikado" (Bill Oddie took over the role of Ko-Ko after Eric Idle left the production). Dudley Moore played the role when the production toured the United States.
  • The climax of the 1978 film Foul Play takes place during a performance of The Mikado. In this film, Dudley Moore appears as the orchestra conductor of the opera.
  • In the 1981 film Chariots of Fire, Harold Abrahams first sees his future wife as one of the "Three Little Maids from School".
  • Rian Johnson's 2005 film Brick features a scene where Laura (Nora Zehetner), the femme fatale, performs a section from "The Sun Whose Rays" while playing the piano at a party. Originally, she performed the entire piece, but the second half was edited for time. The entire performance is contained on track 3 of the soundtrack.
  • In the CSI episode "Suckers", a case is solved thanks to Grissom's remembering the song "Three little maids from school are we", and there are many references to The Mikado.
  • In Frasier episode "Leapin' Lizards", workplace prankster Bulldog impersonates the voice of an esteemed friend of Niles Crane in a phone call to Frasier. After Frasier boasts that many have asked to see his "Yum-Yum", he is coaxed into going into his best falsetto voice to perform 'Three Little Maids' from The Mikado live over the air.
  • In the Angel episode "Hole in the World", Charles Gunn sings "Three Little Maids from School are We," and when he is caught by Wesley, tries to cover by rapping, badly.
  • The Chipmunks perform "Three Little Maids" in the episode "Maids in Japan" on Alvin and the Chipmunks. Alvin signs up himself and his brothers in a kabuki theater to gain publicity in Japan, but it goes terribly awry after they are to perform female roles (onnagata). After the show, Dave sees them in full costume and make-up and thinks they are some local girls.

I'm worried some of these may be repetative. I mean, there's an awful lot of straight-forward singing of Three little maids. Does this list need curtailed? Certainly, some of it should probably be in the article, but all of it? Don't know. Adam Cuerden talk 13:55, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Adam, I don't think you should cut these out of the article. To the extent that they are repetitive, you could organize them around the songs they refer to, but I think you should put this section back in asap. Although you box idea looks nice, there is too much info, and it will be too long. So, sorry, I'd essentially go back to how it was, with just better organization of the references. Please don't leave it like this. -- Ssilvers 14:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Fixed, but better organised (Left a hidden note detailing orginisation). Deleted the Muppet Show one (only because of lack of detail.) Adam Cuerden talk 14:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I tried to give it some clearer organizing principles. Put Muppet show back in with a cite tag, but what I really want is DATES for each reference.... Is there a "date needed" tag?

[edit] Image

An editor put in an image from an amateur production of Mikado. The G&S Project WP:G&S has not been referring to amateur productions in the G&S-related articles, since there are plenty of notable historical and professional productions. There are many public-domain images from early productions of Mikado that would be acceptable, or a more recent photo from, say, English National Opera's production or a Carl Rosa or NYGASP production would be OK if you can use it under "Fair Use". -- Ssilvers 02:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spam filter

I tried to edit this page for some minor details, but when I tried to save the update I got blocked by a SPAM filter. What gives?

  • me too! Tim riley 20:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] comic opera vs. operetta

The G&S Project (WP:G&S) uses the term "comic opera" instead of "operetta" to describe the G&S operas. Gilbert and Sullivan (and the other English authors and composers of the period) *always* referred to their works as comic operas, never as operettas, so as to distinguish them from Offenbach and other continental operettas. This is very consistent throughout all the articles in the project. Thanks. -- Ssilvers 15:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Synopsis

Great changes. I think you have improved the synopsis a good deal. A couple minor points: i) It is not stated that the "ruin" would affect only the officials. I think Gilbert means that *everyone* would be ruined, but I made the statement neutral; ii) Ko-Ko makes no attempt to change Nanki's mind. He just asks him if his mind could be changed by anything, but Nanki is "adamant"; iii) When the Mikado says "he goes by the name of Nanki Poo", only Ko-Ko responds at first. -- Ssilvers 18:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think whether the city was a village or not would affect the average person, but rather the people of status. Ko-Ko does ask him three questions to test his resolve, but obviously he is not trying to talk Nanki-Poo out of it. Pitti-Sing DEFINITELY knows Nanki-Poo's name, she uses it when the girls are chattering at Ko-Ko. But small points. The synopsis is much better than it used to be.--Wehwalt 20:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your change, but I just made it even clearer, OK? -- Ssilvers 20:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Nanki-Poo is not his real name. The Mikado is stating the alias. Nanki-Poo would be ill advised to keep his real name, granted that he is "in hiding".--Wehwalt 23:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Mikado "In Popular Culture"

An editor who should review WP:CIVIL keeps deleting the popular culture section, which contains lots of information about notable performances, like Allen Sherman's G&S parodies and illustrations of why "The Mikado" is one of the most important pieces of musical theatre in history. Perhaps a good compromise would be to split off the information into a separate article, per Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles. Also, perhaps all the G&S in popular culture stuff could be combined in one article, with the big three each having a subheading and then an "other" heading for the other operas? -- Ssilvers 15:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Why not instead integrate the small amount of material that was in that section that was actually notable into the main article text, avoiding the 'bullet point' format that just encourages pointless listcruft? Do we really need an entire article made up of factoids like this:
* Rian Johnson's 2005 film Brick features a scene where Laura (Nora Zehetner), the femme fatale, 
performs a section from "The Sun Whose Rays" while playing the piano at a party. The performance is contained on track 3 of the soundtrack.
While this list of factoids might be true, they are only of tangential relevance to The Mikado. By listing every possible reference to a song from the opera in the article, we are doing our readers a grave disservice. Our job is to edit. Editing is just as much about excluding what doesn't belong as it is about including what does. Regards, Nandesuka 15:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

These "popular culture" lists exist for many articles. They demonstrate the extent of the article topic's influence on and relevance to modern culture. While each individual fact may well be trivial, the aggregate is not, since the total number of facts is related to the importance of the topic in the modern world. Hence it is worthwhile to keep even relatively trivial facts. We don't expect our readers to read every one. We do expect our readers to note that an article has a long (or short) list of them. -- Derek Ross | Talk 18:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baby talk?

Look, probably a couple of the names (Nanki-Poo and maybe Yum-Yum) are taken from baby talk. But Pish-Tush is a combination of two mild English imprecations, Peep-Bo is drawn from Little Bo Peep. I believe (I'll have to look for the quote) that Pooh-Bah is drawn from the practice of company directors sit on each others' boards, to which your only reaction can be "bah" or some such. As for Katisha, I gather that is supposed to be baby talk for cat, but she is described as long nailed (i.e. claws)? I'm not sure where that is coming from, her hands are one of the few body parts she has which are NOT described in the second act! But we are making sweeping statements here that really aren't been borne out by the sources or common sense.--Wehwalt 17:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I think Pooh-Bah, like Pish-Tush, are both combinations of dismissive exclamations. Pooh! Bah! Pish! Tush! Still, they can be childish exclamations. I've tried to refine it. But in any case, lots of editors have contributed to this section, and I wouldn't just cut it. It makes a very important point, that the names are not Japanese. -- Ssilvers 17:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Wasn't proposing to cut it. Your improvements are a great help. I will look for that quote by Gilbert, it might be worth including. I think that the Katisha reference may escape the reader, I tried to make it a little more clear. I'm not even sure that to be catty meant to Gilbert what it means to us.--Wehwalt 01:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

What about Bellini's "cat" duet? Women competing for a man, I think, had been compared to cats for some time before G&S. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 01:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. And, "go to" is another dismissive exclamation. I guess all the high officials and lords of Titipu have names which are English dismissive exclamations. I'll check my references on the Gilbert quote on Pooh-Bah.--Wehwalt 02:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Asimov pointed out in his annotations that "Katisha" is the sound of a sneeze, which would link her nicely to Nanki-Poo. I'm not saying he's divined the one true interpretation Gilbert had in mind; but linking "Katisha" to "catty" seems like even more of a stretch to me. "Pooh-Bah" and "Pish-Tush" are obviously dismissive exclamations, as Ssilvers writes. "Peep-Bo" is indeed baby-talk. --Quuxplusone 05:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Asimov's conclusion is pure speculation, like many of his interpretations in his beautifully bound paperweight (and he was a friend of mine). I can't find any articles discussing the meaning of Katisha, so I'll remove it from the article, even though I think it must have something to do with a cat. If anyone finds a reference.... -- Ssilvers 06:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Mikado Project

An editor has included, in the popular culture section, an entry about a new play (neither the play nor the authors have articles about them, and there is no source given) called "The Mikado Project" about a revisionist version of the play being performed to overcome what they see as "racism" in the original. I don't take any position on their attitude on racism; everyone's entitled to their opinion. I assume that this can be verified; there must be reviews of the play. I'm more worried about whether this is notable enough to keep. --Wehwalt 00:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it is probably not notable, but a lot of the cultural reference trivia is probably non-notable. At some point, I'll go through it and weed out a lot of fluff, but I don't think it's an emergency. In the meantime, I de-redlinked it and slimmed it down a bit. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 06:25, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] City to village

Concerning the above sentence "I don't think whether the city was a village or not would affect the average person, but rather the people of status." It seems to me that turning the city into a village is a euphemism for killing most of the population so that a city with, say, 100,000 people is reduced to a village of 100 people by killing the other 99,900. That would certainly fit in with all the other death-euphemisms in the script. The average person would definitely be affected; he'd be dead. CharlesTheBold 05:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Respectfully, I disagree (though this really should all be about discussing improvements to the page). Your theory would not fit with the genial tone of the play. In England, cities have privileges, and officials, which smaller entities lack. None of Pooh-Bah's capacities would be needed in a village, for example, and ordinances and bylaws would be imposed from some greater regional authority. I think this is how the Mikado's threat would be understood by Savoy audiences: the officials and high ranking persons would lose great status to outsiders.--Wehwalt 11:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Wehwalt. Gilbert was rarely coy about his meanings. If he wanted to say that people would be killed, he would have said so. Gilbert was interested in the follies of laws and bureaucracy. He is making fun of the fact that a bureaucratic classification of the city as a village could be considered a serious problem by these town officials. -- Ssilvers 13:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Never named characters

Is it worth adding a mention that Peep-Bo and Pish-Tush's names are never spoken or sung? (This is what actually brought me to this article today--I was struggling to remember Peep-Bo's name!) Not R 13:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Consistent with the note about Go-To, I added notes to this effect. Not R 19:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this is the right thing to do. There are many G&S characters whose given names are never specifically mentioned (or mentioned only in stage directions). I would say that this is not helpful information. -- Ssilvers 21:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Eh? Principal characters with solo numbers and extensive dialogue, as opposed to named chorus roles with brief solo parts? Even Ruth and Zorah in Ruddigore are mentioned by name (well, Zorah was before the original finale was cut). I think it's pretty important to be aware that your audience won't know the names of two of your main characters because they've never heard them. Not R 23:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ruth's name is *not* mentioned in Ruddigore. Do we even know Pitti-sing's name from the libretto? The Pirate King's name (Richard) is not mentioned; nor are Samuel, Edith, Kate and Isabel's. Mrs. Cripps is referred to only as Little Buttercup. Cousin Hebe, Boatswain, and Carpenters' names are not mentioned in Pinafore. But the question is, why would an encyclopedia reader care whether the audience knows Pish-Tush's name? It will be obvious whe he is from the program, if they care. I'm not convinced yet.

I would say that Pish-Tush is probably the most prominent character in the canon to never be identified in any way. That being said, I don't think that fact is encyclopedic. It seems trivial to me. Go-To is a special case, because of his addition to the opera to basically sing one line.--Wehwalt 02:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, right, a Ruth is mentioned, but there's nothing to suggest it is or is not the same Ruth (we just joked about her false teeth). But yes, Pitti-Sing is named prominently at the end of the opera when Katisha cries, "Mercy!" The Pirate King, Buttercup, and the Boatswain are red herrings--the characters are identified that way both in the dramatis personae and on stage. Samuel is the only one of the rest nearly as prominent as Peep-Bo.

Why does the general reader care? So he doesn't think he's been fed bogus information or misremembered important characters' names when he talks to someone who's seen the show and doesn't recognize them. I think it's particularly notable in Mikado where there are no minor named roles that come out of the chorus, just the one line of recitative from "a noble." Not R 04:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I can't get very excited about this, so I'll leave it; but if Wehwalt or anyone else decides to delete the refs, I'd support that. -- Ssilvers 05:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I've added a picture of the Mikado and put it at the top, supplanting the three little maids who were in possession (and who pop up elsewhere in Wikipedia). Hope this is all right. Tim Riley 12:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we can use both iconic photos and put TLM lower down. -- Ssilvers 17:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Partial censorship in article.

Hey all, just got a message from Snowolf regarding my edits to the Mikado page, specifically, my un-censoring of "n....." as it appeared in the article.

First of all, he suggested that the edit was "unconstructive", and implied that I hadn't read "introduction to editing".

I believe that it is constructive, and the "introduction to editing" section contains the statement "Find something that can be improved, whether content, grammar or formatting," .. and I believe I did just that, by improving the formatting.

I don't think any "word censorship" is appropriate at all in an encyclopedic article, so I considered the elimination of said censorship an improvement in content. Censoring it would be bad enough, but not censoring it in the first half of the paragraph and censoring it in the second half of the paragraph makes it look even worse, so I considered the elimination of said censorship to also be an improvement in formatting.

In other words, I think it is the partial censorship that is "unconstructive".

So, is there any reason why we are half-censoring that paragraph? I mean, we're talking about something as fundamental as honestly quoting an author, not "some troublemaker exploiting a loophole letting him type the 'N-Word' over and over." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.66.165 (talk) 23:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I've just re-read the n-word reference that I remember. I don't know at what level of "censorship" it is, but it seems okay to me. The use of the word is objectively explained and the reasons for its use and sometimes change in performances. We aren't using the word here. Is it okay to discuss outright if we don't use the actual word? Student7 (talk) 02:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
The word in question is used twice in the lead section of the paragraph so it should be used in the entire paragraph. Below is what wikipedia policy has to say on the matter. Going by that the word in question should be used in full in the entire article.

Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive. Anyone reading Wikipedia can edit an article and the changes are displayed instantaneously without any checking to ensure appropriateness, so Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images are tasteful to all users or adhere to specific social or religious norms or requirements. While obviously inappropriate content (such as an irrelevant link to a shock site) is usually removed immediately, or content that is judged to violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy can be removed, some articles may include objectionable text, images, or links if they are relevant to the content (such as the articles about the penis and pornography) and do not violate any of our existing policies (especially neutral point of view), nor the law of the U.S. state of Florida, where Wikipedia's servers are hosted.

Leaderofearth (talk) 03:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

On closer inspection 24.77.66.165's edit was reverted becaused it appeared to be vandalism to the user who reverted it. They did not look at the context of the article before reverting. Leaderofearth (talk) 03:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you; I shall happily consider myself vindicated, even though a user who accused me of not boning up on Wikipedia's policies is apparently the one who didn't do his/her homework.24.77.66.165 (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that the use of the N-word over and over again is unnecessary. Once we establish what the word is, why not reduce the number of instances of the offensive word? -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Because the use of the word twice and the use of "n....." twice makes Wikipedia look sloppy, and more concerned about cowtowing to political correctness than being an accurate encyclopedia? There is no extraneous use of the offensive word in the paragraph. Paraphrasing Freud, sometimes a word is just a word.24.77.66.165 (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
It is only used 3 times (maybe four) all as they are used in the operetta. I do not think that the use is over the top and is appropriate in the context of the article. Leaderofearth (talk) 07:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Sure. If you can reconstruct the article without sounding funny. I suspect it's sequential and logical. We can't say "the offensive word was replaced by" - too long and awkward, I think. And some non-English readers may lose the sense of what we are referring to, however obvious it is to us.Student7 (talk) 19:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I absolutely agree that using "n..." in place of the word "nigger" is idiotic. We have already used the word once (in accordance with Wikipedia policy, as quoted above), so clearly we have established that the word can be used. Since we are quoting the actual original lyrics, I don't see the problem -- yeah, some people are undoubtedly going to get offended, but it's blindingly obvious that this section of the article is a discussion of the racism in the opera, not an expression of racism in the article. We are tasked with disseminating information and educating people, not short-changing them just because some of them can't tell the difference between discussing things and doing things. Abbreviating it certainly doesn't lend any clarity to the article. Accordingly, I'm making the change.
(Furthermore, I have to say that attempts to mask words like this smacks of intellectual dishonesty. Everyone who's going to be offended knows what the word in question is. Why is that supposed to be less offensive than actually typing it out? It's not uncommon to see people on the internet say things like "f*** you", and apparently there's a deeply rooted belief that this somehow makes it more acceptable -- as if the underlying message was any different. It's like being told to go fuck yourself by a guy who mumbles his words, so you can't quite make out the actual syllables. Are you really going to take a kinder view towards him just because his enunciation leaves something to be desired?) -- Captain Disdain (talk) 14:03, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Are we insane? WP does not censor. This article is about a literary work. The author used the word in good faith, without intent to offend. Mentioning the change to the libretto is relevant to the article. We should put the word, in full, as necessary. Period. Those who are offended should stick to carefully screened materials, and avoid the internet entirely!--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
We have a duty to explain the controversy in full, and that requires using the word. That said, the suggestion that we avoid using the word subsequently when it can be avoided is a fine one. That's not "censorship" -- that's editing. Nandesuka (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
As the section requires an explanation of what became of each of the uses of the word in The Mikado, we can hardly do that without quoting or referring to the libretto, requiring the use of the word.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)