Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Comment from May 2001

This needs a lot of work! I'll try and get round to it at some stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmlynch (talk • contribs) 04:30, 8 May 2001 (UTC)

The above comment is from this revision of the Talk:Mozart page. Graham87 09:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I've history merged the edits to the talk page before the page move (see below) to the main "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" talk page. Graham87 10:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Naming

This is a prime example of the 'title'-discussion. I dont really like that this pages´ title is "Mozart" and not 'Wolfang Amadeus Mozart'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandos (talk • contribs) 12:59, 27 July 2001 (UTC)

Agreed. There has been more than one person with the last name "Mozart." I've moved it to an unambiguous title. Koyaanis Qatsi —Preceding undated comment added 10:08, 20 March 2002 (UTC).

Nationality

Father and Son spoke German, were legal Citizens of the independent State of Salzburg, Part of the Holy Roman Empire (of the German Nation). They worked in Vienna, a City in the german Part of the multi-national State of Austria-Hungary, which was also in the Holy Roman Empire. W.A.Mozart identified himself as "Teutscher" (German).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.133.232.140 (talk) 11:59 21 August 2003

Well, I'm no expert, but I really think that to call somebody German just because they lived in lands of the Holy Roman Empire is somewhat misleading to present day readers, since much of it wasn't where Germany is today. Of course, to call them "Austrian" probably isn't perfect either, which is why I removed the nationalities altogether at first, but if we do have to have nationalities in there I'd only really be comfortable with W.A. as Austrian, since that's what all the reference works say. --Camembert 12:17 21 August 2003

Because an error is repeated again and again does not change the facts.

Mozart never was Austrian citizen, he was even considered a legal alien, but the German Part of Austria was always part of the German Nation.

After WW1, the state German-Austria was forced not to unite with the German Reich (what the Majority wished) and even to delete the Word "German" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.133.232.140 (talk) 22:23 21 August 2003

I really don't see what WWI has to do with any of this. Look: did Mozart live in the Holy Roman Empire? Yes. So is he German? Maybe. Did he live in Austria? Yes. So is he Austrian? Maybe. In any case, exactly what constitutes being German or Austrian has changed a good deal over the past couple of hundred years, so it's somewhat misleading to modern readers to say he was one or the other. You can make a case for both. It's clearly a somewhat controversial point (more controversial than I previously realised), and Austrians claim him as Austrian just as some Germans claim him as German, which is why I've taken the nationalities out altogether. Please lets leave it at that. --Camembert 22:31 21 August 2003

I just wanted to tell you, that after WW1 the Austrians began to define as not-German. But up to day many citizens of the Republic of Austria consider themselves as members of the German people. In Mozarts lifetime, "Germany" didn't exist as a Nation-State, but nevertheless Mozart described himself as "German Musician". Today, "Germany" is the short form for the Federal Republic of Germany, but in the historical context, it is different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.133.232.140 (talk) 22:44 21 August 2003

Thanks for making me more aware of the complexities of this. --Camembert 23:08 21 August 2003

---

OK, W.A.'s "Austrian" was changed to "German" again. The issue is clearly too complex to sum up in one word, so I've removed the nationalities again. We can give the details of their background on their individual article pages and let readers decide whether they want to think of them as German, Austrian, Hungarian, Japanese, Martian or whatever. --Camembert 22:14 21 August 2003

Other Mozarts???

I don't understand why this is an ambiguation page rather than a redirect towards WAM. The other two Mozarts listed are in of no way remotely comparable importance. -- Viajero 19:53, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I agree. Tannin 22:35, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, it's been a disambig page for a long time (more than a year), and I always thought it was funny for it to not redirect to W.A. but was just too lazy to do it. Seems a good idea to me. --Camembert 23:21 22 August 2003

POV material

Deleted:

• The two coloratura arias in that opera, sung by the Queen of the Night, are intensely thrilling.

• In many of his works, Mozart wrote as beautifully for the human voice as for the violin or pianoforte.

POV.

• Mozart is the bridge to the Romantic period. His later symphonies pushed the envelope of his period's style of composition.

ITYM Beethoven?

-- Merphant

Agreed. And .. er ... ITYM? Tannin

(ITYM=I think you mean, or at least I think so...)

---

About this list of operas... It was done as a table, which I've changed, because a table adds a lot of unnecessary code to the source, is difficult to edit for those that don't know the syntax, and doesn't really offer any benefits. But I've got another problem with it as well - the table said, for example: "Die Schuldigkeit des erstes Gebotes (completed 1767)". But this wasn't completed at all, was it? At least, I always thought that Bastien et Bastienne was the first one he completed. So this could do with some fiddling and tidying up, I think - perhaps by putting the completed operas in one section and the fragments in another (of course I might just be wrong about this, maybe Die Schuldigkeit des erstes Gebotes was completed after all, I'm far from a Mozart expert). (By the way, I removed an odd comment that The Magic Flute had been translated into English - I should think they all have.) --Camembert

Little update on this (showing I really don't know my Mozart): It seems that Die Schuldigkeit des ersten Gebots (note, not erstes) was completed, but it was in three parts, and the last two parts weren't by Mozart at all (the second was by Michael Haydn, the first was by somebody I can't remember), which is perhaps what confused me (I probably saw "Part I only" in a list somewhere, and assumed that meant he'd not completed the rest). --Camembert

---

Exploding the Myth of Mozart

The linked article "Exploding The Myth Of Mozart" is really a clever musicological joke, isn't it? If not, then it confirms what some people have been saying about academia. Orwell would have enjoyed the author's writing style as well. --Italo Svevo

I've removed it. Although, at first glance, it bears a scholarly look, a dissected reading of the argument shows it to be a rant with the author having an agenda of his own. Some choice arguments from that page: "Given that in the intervening years he wrote no other operas, the jump in quality from La finta to Idomeneo is not only curious but inexplicable, unless one considers that he had help with the latter's composition". I'm not sure how the author is competent to judge (especially 200 years hence), whether Mozart could have genuinely improved his skills. Another one: "What we are faced with is a man who was lewd and behaved like an imbecile, who frequently lied, who lacked any sense of morality or moral responsibility, who practiced deceit, and who was ambitious, but lacked any real or exceptional talent. It is inexplicable that such a person could be capable of writing spiritual or uplifting music, or of eloquent and deeply felt expression. That Mozart was deliberately underhanded in his musical practices indeed seems certain, and it is patent that what has been called 'indebtedness' and 'influences' were actually symptoms of his creative poaching and thievery. Indeed, his habitual practice of copying the works of other composers can have no other reasonable explanation other than he wished to plagiarize from them and/or pass them off as his own, which is in fact what happened in a number of instances." This argument reflects the author's bias of what constitutes and nurtures creative talent. The rant author, is a composer, who specializes in "uplifting music" Gyan 09:43, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)-

---

Why do we have a list of operas and then a list of operas immediately afterwards? I don't think a nomral encyclopedia would organize it this way. Brequinda

I suppose the idea was that the smaller list was of "notable" operas, while the longer one was a full list of them all. I don't think we're losing a lot by removing that shorter list, though, and as you say, it looks a bit odd us having two lists, so I've taken it out. --Camembert

---

Covering the works

I have added a subsection about a brief critical and historical approach to Mozart's piano works, and am planning to prepare similar paragraphs about other topics (chamber music, instrumental music, symphonies, operas, etc.). I think that this kind of sections should add completeness to the article. Please feel free to correct any imprecision that you should find.

Bergonzc 20:57, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

---

Discography

If I were to want to include a complete or expanded discography of Mozart where would it go? A seperate article entitled Discography of Mozart. Or perhaps Wolfang Amadeus Mozart/Discography? --OldakQuill 03:07, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Leopold, harsh father?

I have the feeling that the following paragraph can hardly be thought of as of a NPOV

Leopold was a harsh father, who took advantage of his children's musical talents by exhibiting them. Mozart took ill during his childhood, and Leopold expressed more concern over the loss of income than over Mozart himself. The cold weather and constant travel may have contributed to Mozart's later illness.

Actually, the relationship between Wolfgang and his father was somehow more complicated than what is reported above, and one should not forget that Leopold was the first music teacher of Wolfgang and kept caring about his son for his whole lifetime (of course, following his ideas and attitudes, that may be obviously criticized). The estimation of Leopold has undergone deep changes in time: he was a myth in the 19th century, and became an ugly monster in the 20th. Shouldn't we try to propose - in an encyclopedia - something that may appear less judgemental? Comments, anyone? Bergonzc 21:26, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Nomenclature

It is time to decide whether to name articles [Type] in [key] for [Instrument] OR [Type] on [Instrument] for [key]. For example... Andante in C for Keyboard or Andante for Keyboard in C? There are natural exceptions - symphonies, opera - but otherwise... --OldakQuill 20:26, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps this is something that would be best discussed at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (pieces of music). --Camembert

Medical history

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was described as having this condition (anasarca) before he died.

According to the June 2000 edition of Discover magazine, out of the most likely causes of swelling like these (liver disease, renal disease and congestive heart failure), it is likely that Mozart died from problems relating to his heart as there was an epidemic of rheumatic fever in Vienna at the time and because the other two are unlikely causes given Mozart's known history. - (unsigned)

• Well then, (though I've not read it) I suspect Discover magazine is being silly. Rheumatic fever is one consequence of streptococcal pharyngitis. But another is renal failure causing nephrotic syndrome (and thus anasarca). So they can't really "rule out" renal disease (nor can they with much legitimacy argue that Mozart "probably" died of rheumatic fever because it was epidemic). Nor have they listed all the possible causes of anasarca. These "retrospective" diagnoses are always rather tenuous, and should rarely be taken as proven. - Nunh-huh 19:27, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation

It's true that the full, official name of the Holy Roman Empire includes the phrase (in German) "of the German Nation". However, the vast majority of readers of our Mozart article will be familiar with this political entity simply as "The Holy Roman Empire." If we put in "of the German Nation", people will be puzzled, and wonder if Mozart was perhaps born in some other empire...

In my opinion, we will serve our readers best if we call the Empire by its ordinary name in English. Those who want to find out its full name will learn it if they follow the Holy Roman Empire link. Opus33 15:22, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Media Files

I'm not sure about the value of the Rondo alla turca Rendering given in the OGG-File. 1) If it obviously is a MIDI-Rendering, why convert it to OGG 2) Many of the more complicated ornaments of the piece are simply left out, so that it sounds, as if it had been written 100 years earlier - the playfullness is what makes this piece and a innaccurate PC-Rendering will not show the artistic values of it. grovel 11:57, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

Note in addition that you can still access this file from Piano Sonata No. 11 (Mozart). So I've deleted the link from here. Opus33 18:49, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Estimation

I'm glad to see this article getting tightened up a bit. Along these lines, would anybody get upset if we cease to include the passages given below?

Yet the focus on Mozart's "genius" rather than on the greatness of his music is aided and abetted by his music itself, which is perhaps the most "mysterious" of all classical music. For it lends itself even less than that of the other major classical composers to being described in words or having its essence reduced to particular aesthetic or technical concepts or principles, in the way that Bach is described as the master of counterpoint and Beethoven as the master of symphonic form and development.

Mozart's distinction as a genius and prodigy has sometimes operated as a cause of confusion and distraction in the estimation of his music, since Mozart's greatness as a composer derives from what many regard as the beauty, profundity, expressive and emotional subtlety, unique imagination, and grandeur of his music. None of these characteristics seem obviously connected with or dependent on the fact that he composed at an early age, had a prodigious musical memory, was a performing virtuoso as a child, could compose entire compositions in his head, could write an entire work on the day of its first performance, could write out the entirety of Gregorio Allegri's Miserere after hearing it one time (he returned a second time to correct minor errors), and so on.

I moved the Allegri tale to the Life section, so it's not disappearing. Otherwise, I feel this stuff is not in conformity to the NPOV principle, and also is not very factual or informative.

I also left in the paragraph on what well-known people (as opposed to Wikipedia editors) think about Mozart. Opus33 18:42, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Problem with Concerto example

"For example, Mozart wrote two Piano Concertos in Minor. We can distinguish between the two, as one is K466, and one is K491."

umm.. the key isn't mentioned, which is a typo, and anyway according to K491 is in C minor and K466 is in D minor! [User:Cogent, 05:49 29 Nov 2004]

I fixed it up a bit. See if it reads better now--I wasn't sure exactly what it meant before. Also I added the Alfred Einstein revision in 1937. Antandrus 06:22, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Pseudoscience

The experiment where people who listened to Mozart before taking an IQ test was reproduced, as any scientific experiment should be, several times. The conclusion - the higher scores were due to encouragement, the people who listened to Mozart before taking the test were told they are expected to score higher for that reason. In one experiment, one group of Asian women were told they are expected to score higher on math tests because of their genetics, while another group was calmed by other means, and another was simply left alone. You can guess the results. Also, people who have listened to Mozart at the waiting room, not knowing it to be planned... you see where I'm going.

[ Above unsigned comment was by User: Dorfl ] Yeah, I forgot to sign. I struggled to recall my password (changed my e-mail since registering, updated now), that's also why I edit anonymously.

Hi Dorfl, I don't know about others on the page, but I m welcome to discussion considering how best to handle this point. First up, do you have a source for the above statements? I don't really doubt you, but I like to know where evidence being offered comes from so I can read it myself. Second, the concept that Mozart music helps IQ, development, is soothing, etc. is fairly widespread and probably deserves added comments instead of outright deletion so both sides are mentioned. I don't expect much necessarily needs to be said to cover it adequately for here, but then if lots of info comes up we could make a separate article about the controversy and link this page to it. By the way, to sign your comments, just add four tildes (use shift with key to left of 1 on keyboard) and it automatically adds name and timd/datestamp, like this: DreamGuy 14:23, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

I too would appreciate a source on this, preferably a good source on both sides. Dorfl, you have to recognize that if you log in anonymously and then delete an entire paragraph without explanation, you will be reverted, since that is a very common form of vandalism on Wikipedia. Thanks for clarifying that your deletion wasn't casual vandalism though. Regarding the Mozart and development issue, I'm neutral--it smells a little funny to me, so I don't care if it is in the article or not, but I'd really like to see a source debunking it as pseudoscience if that is indeed the case. Thanks! Antandrus 16:29, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Understood. I'll look this up. Dorfl 03:57, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

---

Cause of Death

Does anyone have even a rough translation of "hitziges Frieselfieber" which was listed as Mozart's cause of death?

"Severe miliary fever" (where "miliary" refers to a rash resembling millet seeds). (From the New Grove article.) Antandrus 01:39, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

I tried to get the wikisource template in the article, but it won't work right, so I just restored it to the old format. Hopefully somebody knows how to do it properly. Everyking 07:24, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations...

...to those responsible for this fine article, which I found very clear and balanced, with many appropriate links to avoid clutter. I have given it a careful and pedantic editing to fix some punctuation, some stylistic inconsistencies, and some grammatical errors that had crept in. I have trodden lightly and circumspectly, and my only request is that you do the same! --Noetica 04:04, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I was sure I had corrected "attendent", Antandrus. Thanks for actually doing it. I too am not convinced that the anecdote belongs, but I'm not upset by it.--Noetica 20:58, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

melancholy

Not that I disagree with the recent addition to the introduction entry, but I think it is an unnecessary simplified description of Mozart's music and an unneeded categorization (some would argue Mozart's most defining trait was being able to mix all what the author mentioned in the same musical phrase). I would prefer to return it to its original form and delete the additional part.

--User:Karmish

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

Composers Project Assessment of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: 2008-11-13 This is an assessment of article Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart by a member of the Composers project, according to its assessment criteria. This review was done by Magicpiano. If an article is well-cited, the reviewer is assuming that the article reflects reasonably current scholarship, and deficiencies in the historical record that are documented in a particular area will be appropriately scored. If insufficient inline citations are present, the reviewer will assume that deficiencies in that area may be cured, and that area may be scored down. Adherence to overall Wikipedia standards (WP:MOS, WP:WIAGA, WP:WIAFA) are the reviewer's opinion, and are not a substitute for the Wikipedia's processes for awarding Good Article or Featured Article status. Origins/family background/studies Does the article reflect what is known about the composer's background and childhood? If s/he received musical training as a child, who from, is the experience and nature of the early teachers' influences described? good Early career Does the article indicate when s/he started composing, discuss early style, success/failure? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? good Mature career Does the article discuss his/her adult life and composition history? Are other pedagogic and personal influences from this time on his/her music discussed? good List(s) of works Are lists of the composer's works in WP, linked from this article? If there are special catalogs (e.g. Köchel for Mozart, Hoboken for Haydn), are they used? If the composer has written more than 20-30 works, any exhaustive listing should be placed in a separate article. good Critical appreciation Does the article discuss his/her style, reception by critics and the public (both during his/her life, and over time)? good Illustrations and sound clips Does the article contain images of its subject, birthplace, gravesite or other memorials, important residences, manuscript pages, museums, etc? Does it contain samples of the composer's work (as composer and/or performer, if appropriate)? (Note that since many 20th-century works are copyrighted, it may not be possible to acquire more than brief fair use samples of those works, but efforts should be made to do so.) If an article is of high enough quality, do its images and media comply with image use policy and non-free content policy? (Adherence to these is needed for Good Article or Featured Article consideration, and is apparently a common reason for nominations being quick-failed.) OK, but there are no sound samples. I have not checked the fair-use status of the images. References, sources and bibliography Does the article contain a suitable number of references? Does it contain sufficient inline citations? (For an article to pass Good Article nomination, every paragraph possibly excepting those in the lead, and every direct quotation, should have at least one footnote.) If appropriate, does it include Further Reading or Bibliography beyond the cited references? insufficient footnotes for GA/FA Structure and compliance with WP MOS Does the article comply with Wikipedia style and layout guidelines, especially WP:MOS, WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT, and possibly WP:SIZE? (Article length is not generally significant, although Featured Articles Candidates may be questioned for excessive length.) good Things that may be necessary to pass a Good Article review Article requires more inline citations (WP:CITE) Summary The above is mostly a formality; since this article is former FA/GA, the problems it has largely stem from changes to those standards, and drift in the article (already noted on the Talk page). GA and FA reviewers can be picky about footnotes; prepare to argue any paragraph not ending in one. (I doubt it will pass GA or FA in its present state because of this, as a few sections have no or few footnotes.) While the article references audio available in the Commons, adding some audio (in side boxes like images), especially to accompany reference to one or two works in the article, would be good. Content is definitely A class, format/logistics is borderline A-B class. If you have questions or comments, contact me on my talk page. -- Magic♪piano 16:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 10:38, 30 March 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 21:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)