Talk:Death of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky

Too much, unsubstantiated?
Some of these theories sound absolutely ridiculous, and I've never heard them anywhere else. Suicide ordered by the Tsar?? Come on. I understand the purpose of mentioning such fringe theories, but to we need to use up so much space on them? WP:UNDUE and all that--personally, my own impression is that this entire article (by virtue of its very concept, not the quality of its writing) is more akin to a gossip column or scandal sheet. Am I alone in this opinion? K. Lásztocska 03:09, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Given that the facts of T's death can no longer be determined with certainty, the speculative nature of the article is surely inevitable; the virtue of having a separate article is that all the speculation is at least kept in one place, and doesn't detract from the main one which is focused on his life and achievements.
 * I agree that there is no place for unsubstantiated gossip, but it seems to me that a theory resting on a conversation with someone like Glazunov, for instance, which has been properly sourced from a reference of reasonable authority, deserves to be presented along with a balanced view of the evidence. --Stephen Burnett 08:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I am very glad to see this separate article since I last visited T's page. The circumstances of T's death are of particular interest, precisely because of this controversy. Around here (NZ), there can't seem to be a performance of the 6th, but the programme note or broadcast commentary presents the Orlova suicide theory as undisputed fact, and it is good to have a concentrated rebuttal/summary in one place. --Hugh7 (talk) 05:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

This article gives way too much credence to the suicide possibility. The book "On Russian Music" by Richard Taruskin debunks Orlova's research, and also argues pretty conclusively that Tchaikovsky's biographer David Brown (used as a source here) wasn't adhering to the best methods of historiography. Taruskin insists repeatedly, with good evidence, that Tchaikovsky died of cholera. --75.34.209.17 (talk) 05:46, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

This article definitely needs editing. The controversies over his death aren't so important that the article should be as long as the general article about Tchaikovsky. Also, is there a reference for his attempted suicide in 1877? I remember reading about this in a book at one point, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's true; it isn't mentioned in the main article. The style/grammar of the whole thing needs to be fixed up too: there are changes in tenses and it's common practice to refer to someone by their last name. I can do stylistic editing, but we need someone who knows more about him to do the content editing.--World&#39;s Vortex (talk) 10:42, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

use of first name
I am not going to make any changes myself, but "Final Days" needs editing. T. should not be referred to by his first name; the paragraph sounds like an eye-witness report of one of T.'s contemporaries. According journalistic standards and as a form of due respect, T. should always be mentioned by use of his last name or full name, respectively. Experience maker (talk) 14:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Controversy over whether it was suicide or not
Surely, the main reason for having this as a separate article on that on Tchaikovsky is that there has been so much controversy over whether it was death through suicide? I have read that entire doctoral theses have been devoted to this subject. I heard on the BBC Radio 4 arts programme Front Row tonight (July 17 2009) a man argue that Tchaikovsky did not commit suicide. I am sure the same man was on theProms, stating that a jovial piece he composed at about the same time as the Pathetitque goes against the suicide theory. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Short name fix
Just repairing the fact that someone changed his nephew's name to Bob - amusing but innacurate.--ayyem (talk) 20:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, "Bob" is highly accurate, according to Brown, Holden, Poznansky and Warrack, to name four biographers of Tchaikovsky. Vladimir Davydov was referred to as "Bob" by the Davydov family and by the composer&mdash; see p. 333 of Poznansky's Tchaikovsky: The Quest for the Innner Man, for one source, which has now been cited in the section called to question. Jonyungk (talk) 20:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Pathetique as a Requiem - Musical Evidence
The last paragraph of the section notes that the Trombone plays a quotation from the "Russian Orthodox Mass for the Dead." This is critical evidence that should be referenced / better cited.

Upon listening and viewing the score, I can state that there is definitely a brief chorale setting here, but, not knowing the Russian Orthodox Mass for the Dead, I cannot confirm its musical or textual source. Can anyone else? Since the rest of the article is well-cited, I'm guessing the information comes from some of the previous sources, but which of those are unclear.

I created an "External Links" section and added a link to the IMSLP page for both the score and recording. This is not intended to suffice as a citation, but will enable others to easily find the passage discussed. This would probably be better suited as a "Note" within that particular paragraph instead, but I do not know the proper criteria or syntax for creating notes. Please feel free to adjust.

108.222.223.224 (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello. First, please sign your comments so that we know who you are. Second, yes: Tchaikovsky did indeed include a quotation of the Russian Orthodox chant “With thy saints, O Christ, give peace to the soul of thy servant,” a traditional prayer for the dead, for the brass within the Symphony. It is not necessary to cite something as "in-passing" as this, since there are literally thousands of musical analysis here at WP without any citations, and if each little detail required a citation, it would indeed be overkill for the section or even article. The next time you have doubts, rather than removing / deleting; try a simple google search with the wording or phrases in question to render a source sufficient to your liking and insert it yourself. You should not edit based on what you personally do or do not know. Creating an external link as a possible citation or "note" even invites WP:OR. Last, it would seem that you have a very strong personal opinion regarding how Tchaikovsky died: Cholera. By placing POV tag and also removing "List of Unsolved Deaths" is incredibly non-NPOV. The "official cause of death" in Russia at that time is what has made Tchaikovsky's death not only suspicious but controversial even today. Articles are still being written as to whether it was indeed cholera or suicide. As long as there is still discussion, conversation, coverage, debate - personal opinion cannot enter this article. Even present day biographers of Tchaikovsky realize that there are classified documents that Russia will never release. (Please see: Without strong evidence for any of these cases, it is possible that no definite conclusion may be drawn and that the true nature of the composer's end may never be known within the article). I am sorry, but the ONUS heavily falls on you to prove that this page deserves a POV tag, removal of "Unsolved Deaths". Especially since both Cholera and Suicide is listed under "Theories". You have only stated what you "think" and "feel"; you have not backed it up with any substantial, undisputed, final evidence. My VOTE is to remove the POV tag, reinstate the SEE ALSO "List of Unsolved Deaths". I will be fixing the musical quote myself. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 00:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)