Talk:Utopia, Limited

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.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-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] Earlier comments

There is a need for some catagories here...

There you go, I added categories while I was also adding Song and Character listings. Only 'Grand Duke' to go, now! And Thespis, if I can...D-Chan 20:59, 12th February 2006 (GMT)

I have added major sub-divisions of the Act I Finale not given individual letters in the score. Whether I have chosen the best way to display this is a different question. Adam Cuerden 20:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Changed to a different, more pleasing way of displaying them. Adam Cuerden 22:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Ta, I was simply following the libretto. Although, I suppose it may differ from version to version...D-Chan 14:52, 14th April 2006 (GMT)

Presumably limited liability companies had been around at least since the "Joint Stock Companies Act of Sixty-Two" so they could hardly be called a recent innovation in 1893.

Good catch; now fixed. Marc Shepherd 22:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Imperial March vs. Introduction

An earlier version claimed that:

The D'Oyly Carte Opera Company suggested in its later years the use of Sullivan's Imperial March instead of the original opening (which is more-or-less a repeat of the Drawing Room Music (No. 17) heard later). This has not been widely accepted.

The D'Oyly Carte never made any such suggestion. They included the Imperial March on their recording – not instead of, but in addition to the original opening. They did not perform it this way in the theatre. They did suggest that, for the purposes of a recording, the Imperial March is an appropriate companion piece. The Imperial March is written for a much larger orchestra than Sullivan employed in the Savoy pit. That overture could not be performed in the theatre without being re-orchestrated. Marc Shepherd 16:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Right. Was going by their liner notes, which come out a bit more strongly in favour than it seems they were. Adam Cuerden 12:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't know about any of that. Sorry, when I added the song list, I wasn't sure, so I just assumed that since both songs were on the recording, both were used! I prefer the Imperial March, myself... D-Chan 14:52, 14th April 2006 (GMT)

[edit] Gilbert's Favorite?

An earlier edit stated that Utopia was one of Gilbert's favorites. I know of no basis for this statement. Marc Shepherd 13:46, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

There is a book included in the G&S Archive that says this in the Ruddigore chapter. --Ssilvers 00:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it's here. Ou tis 13:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Patter songs in Utopia

Hi, Ou Tis. I disagree with you about patter songs in Utopia. I think that the following songs could be considered patter songs, and that their lack of tunefulness is one of the weaknesses of Utopia:

2a. "In every mental lore" (Scaphio and Phantis); 3. "Let all your doubts take wing" (Scaphio and Phantis); 9. "It's understood, I think" (Zara, Fitz., Scaphio, and Phantis); 12c. "Henceforward with a verity" (King Paramount and Ensemble); 15. "Society has quite forsaken" (King with Chorus of Six Flowers of Progress); 19. "With fury deep we burn" (Scaphio and Phantis); 20. "If you think that when banded" (King, Scaphio and Phantis); 21. "With wily brain" (Scaphio, Phantis, and Tarara).

Let me know if you still disagree. If not, I'd like to put back the statement. If you do still disagree, can you think of a way to explain what the problem with Utopia's score is, or do you think it's adequate to say what is there? --Ssilvers 16:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Of the songs you list, only "Society has..." and "If you think..." have substantial sections of what I would call patter (though I suppose the difficulty lies in that the latter is not a technical term), and there they take up no more than half the song. "Henceofrard with a verity" might just be described as patter, but it is harder to describe as a song (it does not stand out from within the finale in the way that, for instance, "Come walk up and purchase with avidity" does from within that of Patience. I think the paragraph is all right as it is (except that it has just occured to me to change "is expensive" to "can be expensive", since a company, society, group or what have you is at liberty to spend as little as it can manage on a production). Ou tis 19:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The edit that Ou Tis removed stated that Utopia "has more than its share of patter songs." Ou Tis is at least arguably correct that there are no patter songs in Utopia. Traditionally, a patter song is a "catalog" number, or very rapid-rhyme/rapid-fire delivery song. Most of those mentioned above don't even come close, and a few of them have only patter fragments in an overall non-patter number. I don't understand where "more than its share" came from. I would suggest quoting citeable sources on Utopia's score. Marc Shepherd 17:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, guys, you're right. But anyone who has ever sung the second half of 9. "It's understood, I think"; and 12c. "Henceforward with a verity" (a much longer patter segment than "come walk up" from Patience, and it even has it's own designation 12(c) in the score) knows that they are patter. I also think that the definition of patter songs that Marc gives above is too narrow, but that's just my opinion. However, I think you are both clearly right that Utopia has no more patter than most G&S shows, and indeed probably less, so I withdraw my objection and apologize for wasting your time. However, Marc, if you insisted on taking out everything that had no citable source, I'd have to take out most of the qualitative descriptions in the G&S entries. --Ssilvers 04:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sam, I don't insist on taking out everything that has no citable source. While cited sources are better than unsubstantiated personal opinions, it can be awfully tedious to "prove" every statement. People don't necessarily have the time to turn every edit into a full-blown research project. However, when a statement proves to be controversial, often the best resolution is to find a citable source. I also think that the stronger articles, in general, are those that cite sources, but that's something that happens over time, as editors take the time to improve each article. Marc Shepherd 14:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images; too many?

I found a bunch of public-domain clipart and added it to the article - I hope that's acceptable. --AlbertHerring 00:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. The images are nice, but there are an awful lot of them! In most cases, I think they look better on the right side. If you're good with formatting, see if you can try to make it look a little less cluttered.... -- Ssilvers 00:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Maybe put a few more of them part-way through the list of songs, references, and so on: It would undo the clutter of the opening section. That said, it might look better with a bit more selection. Adam Cuerden talk 01:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it's pretty good the way it is - perhaps I might remove the dancing judges, or at the very least move one of them. I thought the parallel figures would be nice, but they don't really work...
Incidentally, the same source has some very good clip art which might be good to illustrate the other Savoy Operas - he doesn't have it for all of them, but I know that there's a good page for Trial by Jury, at least. It's all public domain, too, as far as I can tell. --AlbertHerring 04:42, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Cut out a few - was a little too "busy" - and added a big colour print. Probably room for one more next to the introduction, if desired. Adam Cuerden talk 20:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

One thing: Is the caption to the poster OR, or does it pass as obvious? I mean, that's the only scene it could portray, unless I'm missing something terribly obvious. Adam Cuerden talk 21:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the caption's fine. What I'd like to know is where the other images went? They were public domain - the site I got them from said as much. --AlbertHerring 04:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Five of the images have disappeared and been replaced by some red lettering. Is there a technical problem with them? Adam and I did cut out the image of Scaphio and the Image of Phantis, figuring that the other 8 or 9 images were enough. -- Ssilvers 05:37, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Class

Upped this to B, but it DOES need much more background and history. I have a copy of Wolfson, but as you may know, I'm doing extra University classes, so my time's limited. Adam Cuerden talk 20:09, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it's very naughty of you to say, "I have a source and could do this work, but I don't have time to right now."  ;-) I'm tempted to put it back to "start", but I suppose it just squeaks over the B line. Regards, -- Ssilvers 23:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Bah. Fine. Did a bit of work. Adam Cuerden talk 00:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Utopia, Limited - punctuating the name

Look at the poster advertising the opera shown in the article (Image:Utopia Limited Poster.jpg). Clearly Richard D'Oyly Carte and the authors thought that it should be advertised under this name, so this name is certainly authentic. It certainly does not have parentheses. -- Ssilvers 20:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, Original Plays, Fourth Series, gives the punctuation as Utopia, Limited; or, The Flowers of Progress - actually, this is the standard pattern used on all the subtitled works - should we fix them all to this convention? Adam Cuerden talk 10:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't think we should be trying to create a convention. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, and if it is broke, I suggest that you bring it up at the project talk page, rather than here. I think the names are OK. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI, the opera opened as Utopia (Limited). When the parentheses were dropped, the Chappell libretto title was revised to Utopia Limited (without a comma). As Adam notes, Original Plays puts a comma between "Utopia" and "Limited". Marc Shepherd (talk) 20:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you think we should use the Original plays format (Title; or, Subtitle) pattern in giving titles? I, for one, like it, but it is rather old-fashioned punctuation. If we did it, we'd have to apply it to all thirteen operas. (I don't think that Sorcerer, properly speaking, has a subtitle, though it's sometimes given one) Adam Cuerden talk 20:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I believe the punctuation in Chatto & Windus was simply a house style, and there is no reason to revise all of the articles to match it. Marc Shepherd (talk) 20:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

You know, I think we might have overdone it. Oh, well. We hopefully will expand this, and though there's a couple images in Final Curtain that we MUST include, it'll probably work out more balanced in the end. Adam Cuerden talk 10:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I think we could safely get rid of the drawing that says "Zara dances with Fitz" (or something like that). Also, the new image could be stacked right under your storybox.... -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)