Talk:Turangalîla-Symphonie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Turangalîla-Symphonie 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 is supported by the Compositions task force.

Contents

[edit] Futurama character

What is the connection between Messiaen' work and the FUTURAMA character? Is the "little song she hums to herself" an excerpt from it? Is her name directly derived from the work's title? What is the origin of the word, "Turangalila"? Did Messiaen make it up?

I'll add a note to the article about the derivation of the title. It's unlikely the name "Turanga Leela" was arrived at independently of the symphony (I mean, it's not exactly "Rachel"), but I don't know for sure. I don't know whether the "little song" is related to the piece - ages since I saw Futurama, can't remember. --Camembert
I am pretty sure the futurama girl's name is derived from that, but here is an excert of the symphony
http://www.obsolete.com/120_years/machines/martenot/turungalila2.aiff
felinoel 18:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
I tacked that link onto the article. It's remarkable how much useful encyclopedic content you can find hidden on talk pages! —Turangalila (talk) 03:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
The Futurama trivium came back, and I deleted it again. Reference WP:TRIVIA and the emerging consensus against trivia sections in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. David Brooks 03:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mildly amusing

I find it funny that "î" turns into "%EE" in the URL, so the name in the URL is "Turangal%EEla_Symphony". Nyuck nyuck. – flamuraiTM 08:20, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Uncited claims

I restored the {{unreferenced}} tag, because although I have provided citations for a few facts, there remain other unsourced statements: that Loriod played OM in many performances, the "amoresong" quote, and the movement analyses. Or should I just put a few {{fact}} tags in? David Brooks 02:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, didn't notice those. Personally I think specific {{fact}} or {{citequote}} tags are a little more useful for future editors. I added one but I may have missed spots. —Turangalila (talk) 03:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes made by 86.141.195.137

At the risk of invoking 3RR, I reverted most of these changes. First, it is normal in Wikipedia to leave redlinks if there is a reasonable presumption that the article will exist (under that title) some day. Second, there is only one celesta listed in the full score instrumentation list - I'm looking at it now. Don't be confused by the recommendation to use two glockenspiels; that is Perotin's solution if the orchestra doesn't have a keyed glockenspiel. Third, the flower theme ends with a pizzicato chord and string trill, according to these old ears, but they're not part of the theme itself. Finally, if Messiaen did say "it's a love song", it still needs a cite. Sorry to sound so harsh though. David Brooks 01:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, there's a sting of some sort at the end of the flower theme, but it's not just cymbal, and I still don't think it's important to the theme. David Brooks 01:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually I thought I heard a muted horn at the end of the flower theme, but I'm just going by ear. I don't believe it's invariable through the whole work, though. Perhaps some qualifier, like "first introduced" or some such, is in order?
Also the statued theme as presented seems at least partially transposed from the first appearance in the intro, unless I'm mistaken (I think the 1st tbn starts on B-flat). I assume though, that you just transcribed Messiaen's own examples to create the image on Sibelius?
I thought 3rr meant re-reverting 3 times, not reverting a family of 3 edits... —Turangalila talk 10:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the examples are from Messiaen's own handwritten examples in his notes on the Chung CD (1991 recording of the 1990 revision). And I had already re-linked the redlinks that were unlinked by the same anon user last week, so that's two and counting. David Brooks 16:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I got the 1990 score on rental. The first few times, it's two clarinets in the 1st 2 bars, flute and bassoon in the 3rd (this is quite clear on recordings anyway), with stopped horns on the sting. Pitches are as shown. In later movements, the three held chords are doubled by a tremolo on the ondes, and (our friend is here correct), a cymbal joins the sting. You're right about the statue theme B-flat but I'll still go with M's handwritten notes. David Brooks 05:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I just realized what's wrong. I simply mistranscribed the first chord (I should have noticed the interval was wrong). Yes, it's G-flat/B-flat. David Brooks 05:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Ha! Vindication!  :-)...seriously though, that's some intense orchestration. The man studied his Debussy (you'll say, "hey, T, you mean Ravel", but I'm thinking of Faune -- bars 51-54, check it out...). Nice job on the Sibelius examples...gotta see if my old version can do that...—Turangalila talk 06:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unreferenced tag removed

I think there are only two unreferenced claims: Koussevitsky's illness, which I can't find mentioned anywhere else, and the "It's a love song" quote. However, there remain the subjective descriptions of some of the movements which I have also not seen elsewhere; perhaps someone can get around to those later. David Brooks 18:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I got around to them, in line with Wikiproject guidelines. The subjective elements that remain all quote (or slightly paraphrase) Messiaen's notes for the 1991 recording noted in the references. Of course, the guidelines allow for other commentators' subjective descriptions so long as they are sourced and contain "according to" language. Our performance is just two days away! David Brooks 19:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)