Talk:Georges Bizet/Archive 1

Pronunciation
How do you pronounce the name 'Georges Bizet'? 212.76.37.162 10:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

"Jhorjhez Bee-zay", long o. 24.255.11.232 04:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

First name should just be "Jhorjh," only one syllable. The rest is silent.

Copyright Check
The entire main body of the article seems to have been copied and pasted from this site. Ross Uber -  Talk  -  Contributions  - 06:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Large sections do seem to have been lifted either from the page cited or from a common source. But it's a short standard biography - hardly a scholarly work. I would recommend rewriting/paraphrasing the article so there is no longer any problem.


 * Kleinzach 16:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Grammatical error
I believe that the very first sentence has a small grammatical error. Where it says: "He was born at Paris,", it should read: "He was born in Paris." The "at" needs to be replaced by "in", and the coma by a period.

I only bother you with this suggestion, because I find your encyclopedia to be excellent, and just wanted to help, a little.

Regards, Ovidio--Operera 04:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Jewish Origin
With no concern for racism (I'm Jewish myself), I am just curious: Is there any evidence concerning Bizet’s religion? (He did marry Halevy's daughter...)

I also am a Jew and find no evidence that Bizet was Jewish. In fact, Grove states that his "baptismal name" was Alexandre-César-Léopold. This article contends that his baptismal name was "Georges". Reconciling those statements aside, Jews don't "baptise", QED.

Alleged copyvio
This article was cited as containing possible copyvio from The Virginia Opera. That article was copied from us, not the other way around. The page cited as a 'source' is for an production of Carmen that's running right now, while most of the text in question has been in the article for ages, and the text appeared in dribs and drabs early in the article's history. this diff, where an existing sentance is rephrased into the wording cited as 'copyvio', is a good illustration. So I think we're okay here. -- Vary | Talk 04:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Numa (opera)
Has anyone got any proof of the existence of any such opera? In the Viking Guide it's not even listed among Bizet's uncompleted fragments. Either it's a hoax or someone has misinterpreted a Portuguese word as being a title or it's a garbled version of "Namouna", the poem by Musset that Bizet used for Djamileh. --GuillaumeTell 16:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Never heard of it. I agree with your theory. -- JackofOz 11:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

A "student assignment"?
I suggest removing:

" . . . evidently as a student assignment."

The statement cannot be documented and is certainly not evident.

The possibility that it was a "student exercise" appears to have originated with Howard Shanet in his 1958 article, "Bizet's Suppressed Symphony" (Musical Quarterly, 44:4, page 473): "Finally, the possibility must not be neglected that Gounod may actually have required Bizet to write the symphony after his pattern, as a student's assignment or exercise." Shanet's wording makes it clear that he is speculating.

There are problems, too, with:

"It seems that Bizet completely forgot about it himself, and it was not discovered again until 1935, in the archives of the Conservatory library."

This statement is simultaneously speculative and incorrect. Shanet deals with (and documents) the reason the symphony was "missing" for so many years, and the circumstances of its "rediscovery".

RussMartin4154 03:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * What in fact were the reasons for it being "missing", and the circumstances of its "rediscovery", RussMartin4154? --  JackofOz 04:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

JackofOz, if you E-mail me, I will send you a copy of Shanet's article. That will answer in considerable detail the likely "reasons for it being 'missing'" part of your question. With respect to the "rediscovery", some sources state that Bizet's widow donated it (along with other manuscripts) to the Paris Conservatory. Others suggest, more likely, that from her it went to the hands of a third party, very possibly Reynaldo Hahn, who gave it to the conservatory. RussMartin4154 23:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Bizet's death from "angina"
However Bizet did not live to see its success, as he died from angina at the age of 36, a few months after its first few performances, on his third wedding anniversary.

Being that angina is not a fatal condition in itself (people die from heart attacks, angina is a condition resulting from the repeated symptoms leading up to a heart attack, the symptoms themselves not being fatal), I felt tempted to change this to "Heart Attack". After studying both the wiki articles for Angina AND Myocardial Infarction for clarification, I have concluded that I am doing the right thing by "being bold" and changing it. Feel free to counter my claim and correct any mistakes if you feel I am out of line.

Cheers!

Seary6579 (talk) 17:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I also fixed a few comma splices.

Seary6579 (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Age discrepancy
In the second paragraph, one sentence says he was sixteen when he wrote the Symphony in C and another that he was seventeen. I don't know which is correct, but the contradiction is embarrassing and should be resolved. Languagehat (talk) 19:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed. He started it in early November, having just turned 17.  --  JackofOz (talk) 01:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Grove Info
Salut ! I will a list of stage compositions, first performance dates, etc. from the New Grove Dictionary of Opera now, and will footnote it. (If I add other info in the article at a later date from the Grove, I will footnote it, too, of course.) Tchao ! Charvex (talk) 05:34, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Putative piano concerto
I've read that after the premiere of Carmen, Bizet was considering writing a piano concerto. This obviously never came to anything, but I'm wondering whether he ever put any ideas on paper or whether this was just an idle thought. Google hasn't helped me. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I have just skimmed through Dean and Curtiss but it seems the only project Bizet looked at in those three months was a projected opera Genevieve de Paris, although both sources say he didn't compose anything (not surprising given the severity of his illness). So unless something has come to light since those books were published this sounds unlikely, whether just thoughts or something on paper. Cg2p0B0u8m (talk) 10:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * What a shame. Given his superb pianistic skills, it's always surprised me he didn't write more for the piano, although what I have heard of his piano music suggests it really wasn't his thing.  Glenn Gould claimed the Chromatic Variations is one of the finest piano pieces written in the 19th century, but I must say I've never been convinced.  I suppose we can only wonder what a concerto from his pen would have sounded like, or even a sonata or some substantial smaller pieces for piano.  Thanks.  --  JackofOz (talk) 13:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The sample recording (Toreador)
The recording is too old, noisy and, in my opinion, does not represent a fine performance. It would be perhaps be better if we didn't have it on the page rather than having a bad one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.78.36 (talk) 05:07, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Half a loaf is better than none. — Robert Greer (talk) 18:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * It might of course be argued that no loaf is better than a mouldy one Red Slash - Smily.png (sorry, could not resist) --Francesco Malipiero (talk) 21:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Clovis et Clotilde
Hello - I couldn't find any reference in the List of Compositions to Bizet's prize-winning Clovis et Clotilde... Perhaps because it was unpublished? Or maybe because, as a cantata, it didn't really fit into any of the current category groupings? I note that the present List of works doesn't specify whether the works listed are 'selected' or 'collected'. I also just wondered whether Clovis et Clotilde might perhaps be notable enough to merit some sort of a brief mention in the 'Music' section of the main article. Hope this helps--(talk) 20:24, 15 October 2011 (UTC) [note: comment moved from 'list' page--MistyMorn (talk) 10:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)]
 * Clovis et Clotilde has not been published and as far as I know, it has never been publicly performed. I don't think it merits mention in the "Music" section, though it should be listed in the list of works. I've not had much to do with that article, but I'll check it out and see what other items could usefully be added. Brianboulton (talk) 19:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm not at all sure whether it's notable enough for mention in the Music section. However, it has been championed on record twice by Jean-Claude Casadeus, once with Montserrat Caballé in one of the title roles (as described in the link above, which perhaps wasn't especially easy to spot - sorry), so it may have been performed also in public concerts I'd guess.--MistyMorn (talk) 19:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Formally Alexandre César Léopold Bizet
I see that there has already been a discussion of Bizet's given names. I must say, though, I find the term "formally" very strange in this context. I even wondered if it could be an error for "formerly" given the lapse of time between his registration at birth and his christening. Could we not be more explicit: "registered at birth as A C L B" or simply "registered as A C L B"? This is a very small point on an otherwise excellent article but I think it deserves attention.--Ipigott (talk) 08:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The first line of the "Family background and childhood" explains all: registered as ACLB, baptised as "Georges". However, to avoid any confusion around the word "formally", I have made the slight prose adjustment you suggest. I'm glad that you otherwise enjoyed the article. Brianboulton (talk) 15:33, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Question to the Consensus
What about an infobox?--Mishae (talk) 05:59, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 08:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * They don't bother me, but if we do it for him, we do it for all classical composers, and there's a clear consensus NOT to do so. So, no.  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  08:49, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * So, take it off Alexander Borodin then? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk)
 * Bizet was not a chemist. Borodin is quite counterintuitively lumbered with Infobox scientist. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:36, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Every biography article should have an infobox. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Take that general issue to wherever is most appropriate. It will never be resolved on Bizet's page.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  00:30, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Jack, don't you know that there is no appropriate place for this issue? The general issue is unwanted for months. We are on case by case bases. I proudly said that I didn't even place an infobox on the talk page of this composer and two others who will appear on the Main page soon, restricted as I am. (It could be easy: name / image with caption / data of birth and death / period. - There is a navbox at the bottom of the page to cover the details.) I suggested an infobox on Carmen, as soon as infobox opera became available, before the arb case, - please take a look at the "battleground" if you dare ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please, Gerda. You've got yourself into quite enough trouble over infoboxes.  Just let it go, eh.  (Or maybe I can take a leaf out of your book and go round proudly proclaiming that I haven't murdered anyone today.  Yet.  :) --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  01:20, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I let go, I let go, - you won't believe how much I let go, forced to not follow my own quality standards. The comparison of adding an infobox to murder is sweet, thank you! So far I saw the simple process that is quite normal for more than 2 million articles on Wikipedia only termed as "impose" and "attack". I would not have commented here, but felt the request needed an answer: we are not supposed to discuss the issue for months to come. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Carmen's theme indebted to Sebastian Iradier
It appears Bizet "borrowed" from composers besides Gounoud: for text and reference, see Wikipedia article on Sebastian Iradier: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebasti%C3%A1n_Iradier 71DM$1 (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
 * To reference a Wikipedia article, all you need do is enclose the title in double square brackets: Sebastián Iradier. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  08:33, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Flagged sweeping claim.
The first paragraph of this article states that Carmen is one of the most beloved and performed operas. I don't dispute this statement, but an attribution for this sweeping claim is warranted. Sammo (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The introduction (lede, lead) summarizes the body of the article. If you don't find it there, please tag there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Removal of trivia
I was bold and reverted this. I doubt Brian would've added this in during the FAC overhaul. This seems to be trivia and has little to do with Bizet's illness and death, the title of this section.  Cassianto Talk   14:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You did good, Cassianto :). Utter trivia and irrelevant to the subject of that section. The theft is not even mentioned in the Père Lachaise Cemetery article (where it belongs, if at all). It is a particular non-event because the busts were recovered 5 months later and duly placed back on the graves. Voceditenore (talk) 17:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks Voceditenore, I know, ludicrous! Your discussion with Brian about Carmen brought me here and this "theft" immediately leapt out at me for being utter trivia. The Theatre Royal, Drury Lane is indicative of what can happen when an FA is left abandoned for too long.   Cassianto Talk   17:39, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Jewish mother?
The claim that he had a Jewish mother is not substantiated in any other source I can find. In fact, any other source that alludes to his mother being Jewish leads back to that small snippet sourced in the first paragraph on his life. In addition, I've looked up the surname of his mother and it is not a Spanish Jewish name, and appears to only exist in Belgium and north eastern France, which is where his mother supposedly came from.

I'm not going to take it out entirely but I'm going to change it to make it a more nuanced claim because I did not see anything about his mother being Jewish in official biographies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:69C1:2A00:9E6:DEF4:D997:5BE4 (talk) 01:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Carmen Jones
The 1943  Broadway musical Carmen Jones should be mentioned here. Both the music and plot are adapted from Carmen. --Dthomsen8 (talk) 13:24, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Given names
Older refs (such as Grove V) say his registered names were Alexander César Léopold, but his baptismal name was Georges, and the latter stuck.

But now, we're saying "He was named Georges Alexandre César Léopold Bizet, but he was always known thereafter as Georges Bizet." - which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, as why would it be odd for a person named Georges Alexandre César Léopold Bizet to be known as Georges Bizet? It wouldn't have been the slightest bit odd, so the "but" is out of place. It would only have a purpose if he was known as something other than his legally registered name - which is what the older refs have always said. There's something amiss here. --  Jack of Oz   [your turn]  12:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * He was registered at birth as Alexandre César Léopold, but baptised 18 months later as "Georges". That's the name he was called thereafter. According to his biographer Mina Curtiss the formal names appear on his marriage certificate and on his son's birth certificate, but were never otherwise used. Brianboulton (talk) 19:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've never seen any explanation for why he was registered under one set of names but baptised under a completely different name. Is this covered anywhere in the literature?  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  01:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, Jack! I'm one of several friends of BB who keep an eye on his Featured Articles (he would have disclaimed the possessive pronoun, but you know what I mean). Winton Dean, whom Brian used extensively as one of his sources for the article, says this:
 * On 25th October 1838, at 26 Rue de la Tour d'Auvergne, Paris, a son was born to the wife of one Adolphe Amand [sic] Bizet, a worthy but humble musician, and registered under the formidable designation Alexandre César Léopold. It seems that the operative name was intended to be César, for one of his Conservatoire compositions is signed 'Cesar Georges Bizet' … But the imperial praenomen was too much for the child's godfather, who at once called him Georges; as Georges he was baptized on 16th March 1840 at the church of Notre-Dame-de-Lorette; and as Georges he was always known, first to his family and friends and later to the world. His godparents were Philippe Louis Brulley de la Brunière and Hippolyte Sidonie Daspres.
 * I don’t think this is of sufficient importance to put in the text of the article, but I hope it goes some way to answering your question. Best wishes, as always,  Tim riley  talk   13:18, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Rheumatic fever
From the perspective of a modern physician, It is clear in retrospect that Bizet suffered from rheumatic fever (a post-infectious sequel to acute scarlet fever likely in childhood). He died of the accompanying rheumatic heart disease. The quincy noted elsewhere is what we would today call a peri-tonsillar abscess, the result of the infection itself, probably occurring years before his final death from heart failure. Today his scarlet fever would have been quickly treated with penicillin, thus avoiding rheumatic fever altogether; but had he somehow not received treatment and gone on to develop rheumatic heart disease he could have been treated with cardiac valve replacement.Navins 18:03, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Completely useless comment without a RS to discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.11.25 (talk) 13:02, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Église de la Sainte-Trinité location.
"More than 4,000 people were present at the funeral on 5 June, at the Église de la Sainte-Trinité in Montmartre." The Église de la Sainte-Trinité is placed with no relation to Montmartre historical district.217.107.124.14 (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)


 * True, meseems (though you can spit from the 9th arrondissement, where the Église de la Sainte-Trinité is, into the 18th, where Montmartre is). Shall we reword to say "at the Église de la Sainte-Trinité in the 9th arrondissement" or (better?) "at the Église de la Sainte-Trinité, to the north of the Opéra" or "at the Église de la Sainte-Trinité, near the Opéra"? Thoughts, please, colleagues... –  Tim riley  talk   21:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * "at the Église de la Sainte-Trinité, just to the north of the Opéra" seems most poignant to me. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Good. I suggest we leave it a day or two and then, failing any objections in the interim, I'll change the text as you suggest.  Tim riley  talk   18:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * And now done.  Tim riley  talk   17:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Infobox
I boldly added an infobox (see right), but reverted my edit. (And to clarify to that user: I did read the comment, and I read the 10-year-old discussion, and judged that it was old enough that a new consensus should be established, especially since that discussion didn't really have a consensus. Besides, the comment merely advises to read the discussion before adding an infobox; it isn't an interdiction on an infobox). We may as well get the discussion started here on whether or not to include the proposed infobox. (WP:BRD) Edward-Woodrow  •  talk  14:46, 1 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't see the need for an infobox here. The fairly recent image of Bizet's signature which the infobox introduced can be folded into the article by itself. Binksternet (talk) 16:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem with the draft box here is that it violates Wikipedia's rules. I-boxes must summarise the main points of the article. The link to another article entirely is a breach of our guidelines, as well as treating our poor readers like idiots.  Tim riley  talk   16:28, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Which link are you referring to? Edward-Woodrow  •  talk  17:40, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Works  Tim riley  talk   17:41, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Infobox_classical_composer   Edward-Woodrow  •  talk  17:45, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * And which guideline is this specifically a violation of? How does it treat our readers like idiots? Edward-Woodrow  •  talk  17:46, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * See the MoS info-box guideline: "An infobox is a panel...that summarizes key features of the page's subject". And how is it not treating readers like idiots to say, "If you want to see what this article says, go and look at another one"?  Tim riley  talk   18:30, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see the problem here. It gives a list of Bizet's works, something the article does not fully cover, because the entire list of his works cannot be handled in the article. It is a different article. It does not attempt to cover the same subject as Georges Bizet. The section "works" is best summed up as a link to the longer article of his works. This is, as I showed above, exactly what that line in the infobox is for. Edward-Woodrow  •  talk  18:34, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It breaches mos:FORCELINK. - SchroCat (talk) 22:10, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * And, I may point out, both the infoboxes for Mozart and Tchaikovsky have links to a list of compositions, besides other links to other articles. MOS:FORCELINK? It isn't a sentence, among other things. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * and Felix Mendelssohn, J.S. Bach, Richard Wagner, C. P. E. Bach, Ludwig van Beethoven, Richard Strauss, Mily Balakirev, Johann Joachim Quantz... Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, if it makes sense to you and others to offer readers a summary of an article that tells them to go to an entirely different article, so be it. To my mind, and in WP's policy, an i-box summarises the article of which it is part. I just hate it when Wikipedia looks silly and amateurish.  Tim riley  talk   18:46, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * To me, it makes Wikipedia look silly and amateurish to have such inconsistencies between some articles having a box and some not. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 05:09, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Entirely concur. But the MUSTHAVEANINFOBOX lobby would have a fit if we removed the unhelpful i-boxes already foisted in.  Tim riley  talk   13:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * We could continue with this partisanship all day, or we could discuss the infobox. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The infobox doesn't "tell people to go to an entirely different article", it says "the list of Bizet's compositions is too long to fit in this article, here's a link to a list we have. If you were looking for a list of his compositions, here's a link, right at the top and easy to see, so you don't have to hunt through the article." Besides, one link is a trivial sticking point. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:14, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It doesn’t say that at all. It still breaches FORCELINK, whether it’s ‘only’ used on one page or 10. You don’t like the MOS guidelines on the point? Go start an RFC to change it, but don’t try to claim that those six words somehow translate to what you want it to.Please don’t ping me back to this timesink: I have much better and less stressful things to do with my time. - SchroCat (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)